Mastodawn

Mar Hicks Dec 21, 2023

I’m old enough to remember when smoking (and smoke) was everywhere, and the idea that smokers might ever be asked or made to stop was seen as absurd. Many kids (including me) got horrible bronchitis every single year and had other sorts of breathing problems all the time. Many parents (and other adults) died early.

Doctor Memory Dec 22, 2023

@histoftech @jwz I can vividly remember the screaming when Bloomberg pushed the smoking ban through in NYC. It was going to kill the restaurant and nightclub industries! Every bar in the city was going to close!

None of which happened. Now people — including smokers! — would call you a crazy person if you suggested bringing it back.

There’s a moral or two about letting change-averse weirdos shout down obviously good policies that I wish we’d learned.

mhoye Dec 22, 2023

@memory @histoftech @jwz People picketed government offices in Ontario to protest drinking and driving laws. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xcQIoh3FQQ

Mandatory seatbelts were communism. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/june-22-1987-albertans-prepare-for-seatbelt-law-1.3649730

People React To DUI Laws(1980s News Report)

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

YouTube

groxx Dec 22, 2023

@mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz people *still* label seatbelt laws as communism, sadly. Bicycle helmets too.

Andres Dec 22, 2023

@groxx @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz Okay, but one of these is not like the other.. 🤔

https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/news/counterintuitive-argument-against-bicycle-helmet-laws

A Counterintuitive Argument Against Bicycle Helmet Laws

New York City mayor Bill DeBlasio recently faced a backlash from bike safety advocates for supporting mandatory helmet laws for the city’s bike-share riders. Advocates arguing with a mayor is nothing new. What’s surprising is their counterintuitive argument: biking advocates, who believe safety is paramount and who typically wear helmets themselves, argue that the helmet requirement actually makes cyclists less safe.

Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health

groxx Dec 22, 2023

@Andres4NY @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz less different than you'd hope.

> Studies have shown that wearing helmets while cycling reduces the risk of head and brain injuries by about 70 percent, and regular bike commuters should make the decision to wear a helmet, no question.

That's roughly how effective car seat belts are too, for "major" and fatality rates. i.e. significant and probably worth legislation.

Andres Dec 22, 2023

@groxx @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz Read the rest of it. This isn't about helmet safety, it's about helmet *laws*.

Seatbelt laws are unabashedly positive, public-health wise. Bicycle helmet laws, not so much.

@Andres4NY @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz I did.
A cursory skim of their links doesn't even back up their summary on those links. E.g. the first study they link as showing a decrease shows the opposite:

> Results. In PBSP cities, the proportion of head injuries among bicycle-related injuries increased from 42.3% before PBSP implementation to 50.1% after (P < .01)

There are a number of ways that I think the argument is valid, but study details matter and results don't always generalize.

groxx Dec 22, 2023

@Andres4NY @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz e.g. more bikes on the road decreases accidents per mile because people are more used to seeing them. More bike shares is more good. That seems pretty likely to be true.

Bike share riders ride more slowly. Slower biking has fewer and less severe injuries.

Both of those can easily make more bike share use imply lower accident rates per person/mile/whatever, but that's not the same as implying that helmets are not worth requiring.

Garrett Wollman Dec 22, 2023

@groxx @Andres4NY Helmet laws discourage cycling. That is reason in itself not to have them: the benefit from avoiding one specific kind of injury is more than outweighed by the harm from discouraging marginal cycle trips.

Andres Dec 22, 2023

@wollman @groxx Yeah, and Smith's piece was mostly focused on bike share because that was the topic of the day. But there's plenty more out there showing that helmet laws don't actually improve safety in general. Eg, from that same Smith piece, the following link breaks it down: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-05/why-bike-helmet-laws-don-t-work

Again, this is about one type of public health law not being like the rest. Smoking bans? Seatbelt laws? Motorcycle helmet laws? Clearly all very positive. Bicycle helmet laws? A very gray area.

Why Bike Helmet Laws Don't Work

They don’t do much to improve safety, but they’re great at getting people to avoid cycling altogether.

Bloomberg

groxx Dec 22, 2023

@wollman @Andres4NY I'd be willing to bet you'd find lots of arguments that seatbelt laws discouraged driving too. Yet in aggregate we decided it's worth it.

Garrett Wollman Dec 22, 2023

@groxx @Andres4NY If that were true, it would be a good thing!

Andres Dec 22, 2023

@wollman @groxx Yep! Less driving = better public health*.

* (okay, caveats around transit access and poverty and disadvantaged communities where health outcomes are better with access to cars thanks to jobs/medical care/etc, but I'm talking about for the overall population..)

Andres Dec 22, 2023

@groxx @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz Because that was a shit paper by weirdo helmet scolds at Seattle-area hospitals who took the data and massaged it to make their case FOR helmet laws. The reason that Columbia person cited it is because the data is pretty clear despite the paper authors' conclusions.

Here's Salomon, et al (lol) on that specific paper: https://queued.net/~dilinger/AJPH.2014.302180.pdf

groxx Dec 22, 2023

@Andres4NY @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz sure, let's try their second link then:

> In its first year, 2013-14, the CitiBike bike-share generated 8.2 million new bike-share trips, while the city’s overall number of cyclists killed and severely injured dropped by 17 percent.

During which the city had free helmet programs, added many miles of protected bike lanes, and had WAY more than 8 million rides. But they're implying that *the helmetless bike share* helped.

groxx Dec 22, 2023

@Andres4NY @mhoye @memory @histoftech @jwz I really do think there's a chance it's better in aggregate, to be clear. Particularly when including larger ecosystem changes it can drive. But it's far from conclusive and these links do not even support that conclusion.

mhoye Dec 22, 2023

@groxx @Andres4NY @memory @histoftech @jwz Helmet laws are bad _policy_ because they dissuade enough people from cycling that the aggregate health benefits to society from cycling are lost. Driving is 100% net-negative for health so that argument doesn't map to seatbelts. The "but Europeans" argument doesn't matter either, because their cycling infrastructure is mature enough that the city _is_ the helmet. Which, haha. I wish.

So, pretty please, with sugar on top, wear a goddamn brain bucket.

Daigoro Toyama Dec 22, 2023

@mhoye @groxx @Andres4NY @memory @histoftech @jwz Just FWIW, Japan is nearly as bad as North America, or sometimes worse, when it comes to cycling infrastructure. However, the majoriry of people still cycle without helmets. Their rides tend to be short and slow, which may be a reason they don't bother to wear them.

Doctor Memory Dec 22, 2023

@mhoye @groxx @Andres4NY @histoftech @jwz yeah, this is where I’m at more or less. Bicycle helmet laws suck but am I going to venture out into Manhattan traffic without one? Absolutely the fuck not.