A critical examination of arguments against bicycle helmet use and legislation.
In a recent paper published in Accident Analysis & Prevention, Curnow puts forward a number of arguments against legislating bike helmet use [Curnow, W.J., 2005 The Cochrane Collaboration and bicycle helmets. Accid. Anal. Prevent. 37(3), 569-573]. He begins by criticizing the scientific evidence that helmets protect against head and brain injuries. The crux of his argument is that in theory helmets should not protect all mechanisms of brain injury and, therefore, all epidemiological research showing they are beneficial in a variety of circumstances is invalid. This short communication identifies some of the questionable elements in Curnow's assertions.
Hagel
Brent E
BE
Department of Paediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta Children's Hospital, 1820 Richmond Road S.W., Calgary, Alta., Canada T2T 5C7. brent.hagel@calgaryhealthregion.ca
Barry Pless
I
I
D001642:Bicycling / Q000293:injuries*; D001930:Brain Injuries / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D019544:Equipment Failure Analysis / Q000379:methods*; D006260:Head Protective Devices; D006801:Humans