Wednesday, September 28, 2005

No Helmet and No Brains

This has only a passing connection to anything related to politics, but I don't care. It addresses a big pet peeve that I have as a resident of this state, and I'm grateful to Stewart L. Cohen, president of the Brain Injury Association of Pennsylvania, for bringing up this issue again (this appeared in today's issue of The Philadelphia Inquirer).

Helmet law costly in lives, cash

I am a pro football fan, a lifelong Eagles fan, so I fully appreciate that the all-popular sport can bring attention to social issues in a way that few other things can.

On its Sept. 18 Sportscenter program, ESPN televised a report about two football players who also have an interest in riding motorcycles.

One of them, Jamie Henderson, a former defensive back for the New York Jets, was in a motorcycle accident in April 2004. Despite his injuries, he is now conditioning himself to get back into pro football. "I'm alive because I wore a helmet," he told ESPN. State law in Georgia, where he was riding, requires motorcyclists to wear helmets.

Henderson's story was followed by an interview with Ben Roethlisberger, star quarterback of the Pittsburgh Steelers. He said he liked to ride a motorcycle but didn't want to be told to wear a helmet.

Noting that it was all perfectly legal, Roethlisberger said, "Pennsylvania law doesn't make me wear a helmet... ."

Ironic, isn't it, that a person whose profession requires that he wear a helmet to protect himself in an organized contact sport can legally go bare-headed on the road at speeds of 65 miles per hour?

I thank ESPN for putting Pennsylvania's wrong-headed law back in the news. Its proponents will say it's a dead issue, settled by the General Assembly in 2003. I say the issue should never die so long as people are dying or suffering permanent injuries as a result and the rest of us are affected.

Who, for example, pays the medical bills for brain injury when there is an accident, especially when a motorcyclist suffers a catastrophic brain injury? How does Pennsylvania's law affect our overall medical policy?

The fact is that when private insurance runs out - and that happens quickly in catastrophic brain injury hospitalization and rehabilitation - Medicaid picks up the tab. That means taxpayers like you and me.

Medicaid is out of control. In Pennsylvania, the 2006 Medicaid budget is about $4.4 billion. Based on a study issued last month by the National Highway Safety Administration, it is indisputable that allowing motorcyclists to ride without helmets will cost lives and dramatically increase Medicaid costs in Pennsylvania.

The NHTSA study examined Florida's experience after it legalized riding a motorcycle without a helmet five years ago. In the three years after the law's repeal, the state saw an 81 percent increase motorcycle-accident fatalities.

The NHTSA study also found that head injuries have become more expensive to treat.

The average hospital cost to treat such an injury was $45,602, more than four times the $10,000 insurance non-helmeted riders are required to carry. Preusser Research Group, a Connecticut research firm specializing in transportation and highway safety, conducted the study for the federal agency.

In the three years after the repeal, 61 percent of the 933 fatally injured motorcyclists were not wearing helmets.

"The numbers are pretty compelling that Florida has paid a high price," said NHTSA spokesman Rae Tyson. "There is enough here for any state contemplating a helmet repeal to realize there are serious consequences."

Helmet laws are not about singling out boys and their motorcycle toys. They are about common sense. We are told to buckle up, so why can't we be told to wear a helmet?

The Brain Injury Association of Pennsylvania has some questions for our state legislators. Is there any legitimate reason why Pennsylvania does not require motorcycle helmet use? How much is this helmet law costing Pennsylvania taxpayers? If helmet use were required by law and enforced, how many lives - and Medicaid dollars - could be saved for the benefit of others? Is there any reason why Pennsylvania Medicaid dollars are being spent to subsidize reckless behavior?

It's time to require all motorcyclists in Pennsylvania to wear helmets.

Freedom of choice? It has trumped public safety and the public interest.

4 comments:

leanangle said...

As for the public cost argument, who pays for all of the health problems for people who are overweight from overeating, get cancer from smoking, people who get too much sun and get skin cancer? Adults make other choices that are not the target of a nanny government like you seem to have in your state.

Helmet Laws are the product of the car insurance industry, as they don't like paying claims to motorcycle accident victims that are in 80% of cases, injured by a car driver.

Most single operator motorcycle accidents are the result of drinking, the best helmet in the world will not protect you when you run into a tree at 90 mph. Car drivers drink and die too.

I have ridden a motorcycle for over 20 years on road and track. I wear a full face helmet, full leathers, a back protector, boots and gloves in 100 degree heat. I have survived 2 crashes on the track to know better.

I also eat red meat and like to drink too much vodka sometimes. I am an adult and will live with the decisions I make.

I also know better than to let politicians, lobbists and dogooders that do not ride tell me what to wear and when to wear it.

There are more car accidents than motorcycle accidents, why not a law to make car drivers wear helmets? It would reduce head injuries woulden't it? Think of the public health savings.................

doomsy said...

We don't have a nanny government in our state, at least when it comes to motorcycle helmets since the law was repealed (we do in too many other areas, though, I have to admit).

This to me reminds me a bit of the argument over guns in that people who are responsible and do the right thing are penalized for the people who screw things up (which happens generally in life as we know). You obviously know what you're doing and resent anyone telling you what to do. I respect that.

I personally believe the helmets are necessary, and I'm not sure if that makes me a "do gooder" so much as it does an advocate of basic common sense. I know people in health care who have to treat head trauma cases, so I'll admit that I do have that in the back of my mind on this issue, and that colors my perception on this.

I respectfully disagree with you, but thanks for checking in with your opinion.

Anonymous said...

leather motorcycle seat I am keen to work with motorbike dealerships around the world, or provide one off custom suits for any biker, based here in England we can ship worldwide within 4 days from stock motorcycle leathers, clothing, gloves, knee sliders and protective gear.

Anonymous said...

That sounds great, but I've seen very different opinions of progressive motorcycle insurance