>>1437272You're on insane levels of brainwashing to think that bike helmets *aren't* completely useless.
I am capable of doing basic risk assessment and thus know that cycling without a helmet is already so low risk that nobody sane should care.
I've seen the stats that show no change *at best* to injury levels with increased helmet usage, with the more usual effect of increasing the injury rates.
I know highschool physics and thus know hitting your head from tripping while walking is just as dangerous as falling from a bicycle.
I've compared bicycle hire systems around the world and seen how helmets are completely incompatible with them.
I've read numerous pro-helmet news articles that claim to show broken helmets that saved lives and the pictured helmets *never* have any compression in the foam, meaning they didn't do shit to reduce the forces on the head.
I've seen pro-helmet research, and it always fails to account for incredibly obvious confounding factors.
I know what it takes to protect from concussion and other serious head injury, and bicycle helmets don't do shit for such things.
I've seen what an effective safety measure looks like, and bicycle helmets do not measure up in any way.
Your observation that nothing is risk-free is fallacious as fuck. You clearly have an irrational phobia of cycling. Go see a psychologist, you dumb hat worshipper.
