This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Frederick P. Rivara, MD, MPH; Abraham B. Bergman, MD; Clifford Herman, MD
Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center Seattle, Wash

JAMA. 1989;261(8):1149-1150.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply. —

The argument that motorcycle helmets may enhance the risks of disabling injuries is often put forth by opponents of compulsory laws. The fact that Dr Dobson can only cite "some people" as her source underscores the fact that the "theory" has never been supported by reputable scientific studies.

Although Dr Rosansky's repayment scheme may temper our sense of indignation, it is not likely to result in less motorcycle trauma. Motorcyclists who fail to wear helmets are generally aware of the studies demonstrating their benefit. However, like cigarette smokers, they either do not believe the studies or choose to disregard them.

Compulsory laws dramatically increase helmet usage and hence reduce deaths and injuries. Opponents argue that, as long as they do not infringe on the rights of others, adult citizens should have the freedom to make their own decisions about their safety without government interference. Our study showed . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?