Emergency room Dr. slams Bush*

[cmd]

From a letter in a local paper. Names are used, I don't want to give a public link:
(snip)
I was delighted to read “Bikers should reward Bush for his stand on helmets” (July 23), a wonderful endorsement of George Bush. It is refreshing that finally someone has addressed the real issue facing America.
(snip)
Apparently Bush defeated a mandatory motorcycle helmet law in Texas. Bravo! It’s great that the letter writer and friends can have wind in their hair.
(snip)
I am a physician who has spent some time in emergency rooms. I’ve witnessed what happens when an unprotected human skull moving 60 mph hits a stationary object.
(snip)
Thanks to George, self-destruction is in. He has rid us of over 900 members of our own armed forces and countless Iraqi civilians in a contrived war. He has trashed the environment, trashed the economy, and best of all, completely mangled the English language.

He sure has my vote.

XXXX M.D.

XXXX TOWNSHIP

[cthrumatrix]

1. clearly this Dr. is a commie....must be a pinko from long ago.

Asscroft will make sure he's closed down in a few days.

[GainesT1958]

2. A good sign, and it's about time...

That more M.D.s started seeing things the way their colleague Howard Dean, M.D., sees them!:D

B-)

[RebelOne]

3. Defeating a mandatory helmet law is akin to overthrowing

the mandatory seat belt law.

[Bowline]

5. Do you support mandatory seat belt and helmet laws? n/t

[Cats Against Frist]

56. No, I don't

actually. I think "helmet laws" are one of the rallying points for the NRA-Posse Comitatus crowd, and I say -- why give it to them? If they want to crack their skull open, why not?

[Ducks In A Row]

58. Don't forget the donor organ lobby

motorcycle accidents make great organ donors. The guts are ok, it's just the brains that die.

[leesa]

67. I know! I know!! Because we end up having to pay for it?

You and I will pay the cost of it in increased insurance rates and probably for long term care. You think families are equipped to pay for thirty years of nursing home care for a brain injured biker?

[ProfessorGAC]

76. Sorry, Leesa

But, that's an insurance company canard. The insurance rates do NOT drop in states with helmet-mandatory laws! The insurance companies would like you and i to think they do, but they don't. There is not a shred of data to support that we all pay extra because of the lack of helmet laws.

I admit to being ambivalent on these "nanny" laws. If people want to take inordinate risks, and they are not directly injuring others, (and the data DO show that helmetless riders are highly unlikely to hurt anyone but themselves in an accident), i'm for letting them.

At the same time, i'm all for promoting the common good, and your argument is a sound one, assuming that the insurance companies really actualize their rates based upon the percentage of those riding without helmets. That is in their actuarial formulas, but the weighting of the helmet/no helmet ordinal factor is so low as to have no practical value in setting the rates. With the weighting as it is, you and i probably pay an extra 10 cents a year in insurance premiums because of it, and i'm being generous.

Lastly, i'm opposed to limited law enforcement resources being used to police this type of thing. I'd rather have cops stopping speeders and aggressive drivers. Those folks do have a greater impact on insurance premium rates than helmet-less bike riders, but the data is far harder to come by, because it's either anecdotal or it's taken from police citation figures, and those are artificially low. Why? Because cops are stopping motorists for not weating seatbelts and riders for not wearing helmets, rather than rooting out the real risk factors.

Don't buy into the insurance companies' line on this one. If all 50 states passed mandatory helmet laws tomorrow, you and i wouldn't see a dollar improvement in our car premiums. You can book that.
The Professor
The Professor

[Bowline]

4. Helmets are great. Helmet laws suck.

I've been riding a motorcycle since I was 11 years old. Street bikes, dirt bikes, four-wheeled ATVs. For 27 years now I've ridden with a helmet every time I leave the driveway. Wouldn't even think of riding without one.

That said, I believe mandatory helmet laws, like mandatory seatbelt laws, are a serious infringement on personal liberties. As an adult I should be allowed to decide for myself whether I wish to wear a helmet or a seatbelt.

[burythehatchet]

6. Why should my tax dollars go to pay for

the additional medical treatment that is needed when a helmet is not worn?

[Bowline]

7. They shouldn't.

Just like it shouldn't pay for additional medical treatment when seat belts are not worn. If you want to ride a motorcycle then you should accept the consequences of doing so.

[progressivebydesign]

10. My insurance and my taxes pay for 'wind in your hair'

Perhaps anyone who chooses to engage in a behavior that most likely will result in severe injury should have to post a 1 million dollar bond... to pay for their injuries, medical care, etc.

[Bowline]

20. My taxes pay for AIDS research, treatment, and welfare.

Does that mean the government should make condoms mandatory? Of course not. How about outlawing any type of dangerous sport?

Where do we draw the line at government interference in personal choices?

[el_gato]

26. That's exactly the problem with the paternalists types

they want to use the old "my tax dollars pay for your care" crap
meanwhile they completely ignore the fact that injuries from
sports far exceed those from motorcycle accidents.

I guess we could outlaw sports as well.

[Bowline]

32. Especially square-dancing.

All of that spinning and stomping has simply GOT to be dangerous!

[Surf Cowboy]

42. If you smoke and/or drink and/or eat fatty/high cholesterol food, then

You don't have a leg to stand on. Cigarettes cause far more injury to the populace and create far higher medical/insurance bills, which you are so loathe to pay. I smoke and drink and eat food that is not so good for me, but then again, I don't give a hard time to the small percentage of bikers who would rather ride without a bone-dome and get their brains scrambled like a three-egg omelet.

I would be willing to bet that there is more expense from public pools--kids drowning, falling, or otherwise sustaining injury.

This is one of those cases where you have to apply the "is my freedom infringing upon anyone else's?" calculus. Nobody is going to get hurt but the rider, so you let him take the risk.

[BiggJawn]

63. And the same for homeowners who "Do it Yourself"

I live in an apartment. Why should MY tax money go to pay for you Norm Abrahms wanna-bes who are out their falling off of ladders, cutting off hands in power saws, and deafening yourselves with powered yard tools?

Eh? Care to comment? I'd be surprised, because most of you "My tax dollars and insurance Premiums" asses only object to activities you don't participate in, but you'd see not a THING wrong with get paid for losing a foot to a shark or getting the bends while scuba diving if that was YOUR nut, right?

[drdigi420]

30. They dont

next straw man, please.

[BiggJawn]

62. Why do tax dollars pay for it?

We have insurance, you know. that's a pro-helmet-law MYTH, that all motorcyclists are un-employed Trailer Trash who will wind up on the Public Dole after they maim themselves in a bike wreck.

Also a Libertarian battle cry,but it's not the injuries, it's the taxes those dope-smoking ReTHUGs object to.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bowline]

14. Ad Hominem attack...always an effective debating technique?

Perhaps a better idea would be to suggest a way to allow people the freedom to chose whether or not to wear a helmet while requiring them to carry enough insurance to offset the increased risk to themselves. Perhaps require both car drivers and motorcycle riders to agree, before being issued a license, that the will not receive any public assistance if their negligence causes them to be hospitalized or killed. Perhaps, instead of punishing the majority, we hold the minority accountable for their actions. Interesting concept, eh?

P.S. Is "Asshole" really necessary, and is it really the best insult you could come up with? You really tend to lose credibility when you resort to that kind of childish name calling.

[JayS]

22. In Texas, you are required by law to carry insurance that will...

...cover your medical expenses in order to ride without a helmet; however, I know of no one ever receiving a citation for this and very few that even know such a law is on the books, if it is even still on them.

I've never seen a truly objective cost benefit analysis regarding the effect on the overall medical costs of riding without a helmet. I would suspect that riding without helmets on highways ends up being the less expensive option as one generally ends up dead in this case but in lower speed scenarios it is the more expensive option because relatively minor incidents stand a good chance of being major ones.

[Bowline]

25. So the law requires you to accept responsibility for your choices?

Excellent! Even better if it were strictly enforced across the board. Laws such as the one you stated are great because they allow one to freely make a choice yet require that one be responsible for that choice. As it should be.

[JayS]

29. Yup, I like it. Motorcycle insurance is fairly cheap also. I insure...

...my motorcycle, myself, and a passenger for $308 per year.

[lostnfound]

54. Insurance ought to pay for therapy for the EMTs that show up at the scene.

It's not only about the dead guy.
We are all connected.
Whether we want to be, or not.

[BiggJawn]

65. Oh, here we go again.....

I've heard this argument before. It was in a rant about how people who eat fatty fast food are bastards because they don't care about the emontional trauma suffered by those who witness their last heart attack, or the EMT's who are called to the scene. Started quite a flame war, too, if memory serves....

Uh, I think most EMT's understand that seeing bits and pices of what used to be people goes with the job?
Do I charge extra for "emotional trauma" when somebody brings a VCR in that they tried to "fix" themselves? no, I don't. Goes with the territory.

Never mind the motorcycle, I should go throw myself down a mineshaft NOW, lest anyone be tramatised by the discovery of my bloated corpse in my bath tub in my lonely apartment someday....

[lostnfound]

68. A volunteer fireman friend just responded to one of these over weekend.

So it was fresh in my mind. A very messy scene. I wasn't arguing; I don't really have an opinion on this subject other than that I see both sides. I don't like seatbelt laws, either, really. At least not for adults. But what we do DOES affect other people, there's no escaping that. And I don't think that the effect is minor. I know another EMT who went off the deep end over what he saw at an accident. Of course, it can happen with or without helmets.

[BiggJawn]

69. Then why did they become EMTs?

If they "go off the deep end" when confronted with death and destruction?
What? they thought that as members of the VFD they'd be responding to field fires and cats up trees all the time?

Sorry, I realize that someday, I'm gonna leave a slight mess behind me, that somebody is gonna see me dead. Can't be helped. The LAST damn thing I want going through my mind when I keel over off my toilet is "shit! now somebody's gonna get their lunch spoilt by seeing me here in another 3 weeks." Too bad about them. at least they'll still be alive.

[lostnfound]

70. Actually, I think they become VFD to try to save lives.

Cleaning up mechanized death is just part of the bargain.

[Bridget Burke]

9. Just be sure your paperwork is current & your relatives know your wishes.

Why do you think they call them "donor-cycles"?

[BillZBubb]

11. Strongly disagree!

If you (not you, the hypothetical you) are injured, the harm extends beyond you. Were the harm of such irresponsible behavior limited to just the rider, sure it would be a matter of individual choice. I'd have no problem with that.

But, major traffic accidents of any sort involve medical expenses, insurance expenses, police and court expenses, and cause suffering to others involved. What could and should have been a minor injury probably turns into something deadly or severe and very costly to everyone.

[Frances]

15. And what about teens?

How many teens would voluntarily wear helmets? Can you imagine the peer pressure not to wear them?

I'm old enough to remember when hockey players didn't want to wear helmets. Sometimes an individual has to make a change for the good of a sport--or a society.

[Bowline]

18. Teens are the responsibility of their parents.

Hold the parents accountable for the actions of their children.

[Frances]

41. I don't think you have ever had teenaged sons

or you wouldn't be saying that.

[el_gato]

43. If you can't take care of your kids

don't expect the rest of us to do it

[Frances]

57. Give me a break

Have you ever taught high school?

As an adult (I assume you are an adult), have you ever been around teens?

Teens have got to be teens--making mistakes and rebelling against parents is a necessary part of growing up.

Parents and teachers need some authority to back them up on life and death decisions. (And teens like it when they have an "out" from doing crazy things that their friends push them to do)

I'm curious. You sound like one of my Alabama relatives who didn't believe in taking any responsibility. When anything went wrong, she'd say, "It's God's will."

[el_gato]

59. You need a break

In fact you need a reality check.

I'm the one pointing out that people have to have some
responsibility for their own actions. You're the one
whining about using the government to raise your children.

May I suggest you take some reading comprehension lessons.

[Frances]

77. My children are in their 30s and are extraordinarily successful

so I don't need any help raising them.

However, I would like to see EVERY child fulfill their potential the way my children have.

[Surf Cowboy]

47. Umm, don't know how to tell you this, but...

The helmet isn't going to be an issue until AFTER THE ACCIDENT. At that point, nobody but the rider is going to be hurt any worse because our boy wasn't wearing a bone-dome.

[BillZBubb]

60. Umm, I don't know how to tell you that is too simplistic.

After a personal injury accident every party is affected--mentally and financially. Helmet or no helmet. For instance, if the no-helmet guy dies and was not at fault, the other driver is in for a world of hurt, psychologically and financially. Much more so that if a helmet had prevented death or serious head injury.

[Surf Cowboy]

66. Oh for God's sake...

Take some of your ultra critical consequences analysis and apply it to any of the other products and/or activities that I mentioned as producing more injury than helmetless cycling, such as cigarettes, alcohol, cars, and athletics. Are you telling us that we should feel worse for the survivor of the accident than for the decedent simply because he saw something gross? What about all the children who watch their parents or grandparents die horrible deaths from cancer? Can they have some sympathy too, or is it just for not-at-fault motorists?

[Causidicus]

53. Life's rough...deal with it.

If we want government out of our homes, out of our files, and oout of our reproductive systems, why should we want them on our heads?

Drunk driving is an instance where the harms extends beyond you- not motorcycles. The line has to be drawn somewhere. If not, there's no end to what the govt will do under the name of "protecting you" (ever hear of a little thing called the Patriot Act?)

[BillZBubb]

61. Equating helmet laws to the Patriot Act!

Classic. Too funny.

[rexcat]

12. Since driving on our roads is a privilege and not a right

society has the right and obligation to set the standards for operating a motor vehicle. The cost to society for those who do not wear seat belts or helmets is too great. Not only is there an increased loss of life but the costs to those who survive the crashes is more than society should have to pay. On the other hand those who did or did not take the precautions while driving deserve to be taken care of by society. If one does not want to wear a seatbelt or a helmet that is fine but I say society has the obligation not to allow those people on the road.

I worked in hospitals for 14 years and saw my fair share of accident victims come through the emergency room. I saw children severely injured because the parents did not have the common sense to place their children in car seats and buckle them up. I saw children turned off the ventilator because the kids were brain dead from the auto accidents. I saw my fair share of horrible head injuries related to motorcycle accidents. It is not pleasant by any standards to see people die at any age especially the kids.

With all due respect your argument does not hold water.

[Bowline]

16. By that standard shouldn't we totally ban cars and motorcycles?

If we eliminate cars and motorcycles we eliminate accidents. Insurance rates plummet and no one dies from a multi-horse accident at 5 MPH.

The choice to drive a car, ride a motorcycle, wear a seat belt or helmet is a choice that comes with certain responsibilities. Among those is the responsibility to ensure that one does not become a burden on society as a result of ones actions and choices.

[rexcat]

34. Eliminating cars is an absurd argument ...

and for the most part driving a motor vehicle can be a safe activity given that drivers know how to drive responsibly (which seems to be crux of the problem) but I do agree with your second statement. I also think society as a whole has the obligation to protect its citizens when necessary and again driving is a privilege and not a right therefore society has the right to regulate the activity.

[el_gato]

37. We could require pedestrians to wear helmets and knee pads

Cars kill, that's a fact of life. They are inherently dangerous
and thay do a massive amout of damage to our society.
The same can be said for lots of things, cigarettes, alcohol,
and bacon. If we choose to live in a free society we have
to live with the risks that are involved.

[Bowline]

40. Better be careful talking like that around here...

...some might actually take offense at your shilling for freedom of choice and personal responsibility.

[Surf Cowboy]

49. There are lots of head injuries from driving cars, as well...

in fact, I'll bet that there are more, since there are far more cars on the road. Shouldn't all drivers be wearing helmets? Then I-95 can look like the Coca-Cola 600 in Charlotte every day.

[rexcat]

73. Cars in a sense don't kill...

its the idiots behind the wheel that are the problem.

[Straight Shooter]

44. rexcat71, I like the way you think

And I especially like the way you communicate your thoughts

:thumbsup:

[rexcat]

72. Thanks!

[el_gato]

36. Your argument is flawed

First of all, CARS KILL. The inherent danger that cars present
are due to the fact that you have a large mass traveling at high
speeds. In every sense, cars are dangerous and inherently so.
What you should be stating is that we need to get rid of automobiles.
Oh, wait, we all want to live in a free society. So how do we
square these two conflicting desires. Well the answer is that in
order to live in a free and open society we have to accept the
risks that come along with it. In other words, we can go down the
road of elimination of risk in life but we would not be living
in a free country.

Now what I really want to know if why some of the paternalist types
are not responsive to the idea that you can pay insurance for
the risk involved in not wearing a helmet at was cited by bowline
and a few others. It seems to me that paying a little extra in
insurance obviates the problem that you are whining about, i.e. tax
dollars for taking care of those who have head injuries. The
lack of interest in that option just demonstrates the true
nature of the paternalistic types who want the government to have
total control over the actions of the individual.

[rexcat]

75. The drivers of cars are dangerous behind the wheel of a large...

masses going down the road. People tailgate at 30, 40, 50,...,80 miles an hour. People are not attentive when driving and most accidents are caused by human error (i.e., not paying attention, talking on cell phone, eating, applying makeup or just plain reckless driving). On occasion there is mechanical failure but it is rare.

I do not think we should get rid of automobiles. Again, my I say that is an absurd argument given the need for transportation in our society. Again, in our society driving an automobile is a privilege and not a RIGHT, hence the States regulate driving by issuing licenses. If people can't comply with some simple laws to help protect themselves from their own stupidity then society has an obligation to say you can't partake in the activity!

So it appears from your arguments that the government should get out of the business of issuing drivers licenses. We can't have the government telling us what to do. Give me a break!

I think you should spend a weekend in trauma center emergency room and then watch the doctors turn off the life support of what was once a living human being. I have watched the agony of families being told their loved one is dead and it is not at all a pleasant experience.

[Occulus]

19. If Daddy refuses to wear a helmet,

will nine-year-old Jonny be more or less likely to follow suit?

[Bowline]

21. I would have to say he's more likely.

How does that equate to the need for the government to tell me what I should do and how I should raise my kids? Aren't I ultimately responsible for my children, as you are for yours?

[merh]

23. It is against the law in most states to commit suicide!

Guess like mandatory helmet laws, if you die because you don't follow the law, who they gonna charge?

[Warpy]

27. Without a helmet, you get one crash

Afterwards, you will be severely brain damaged or dead. If it's the former, you will spend the rest of your life in a skilled nursing facility, costing the country millions of dollars for your care.

With a helmet, there may be more than one crash to a customer, and they may produce broken bones, but will probably not result in a lifetime of disability or death.

Anyone with trauma, emergency, or neurology experience will tell you the same thing.

You may not give a rip whether or not you'll spend 30 years of your life in a nursing home, being fed through a tube in your gut. However, in the absence of universal health care in this country, it matters very much to the rest of us.

[Bowline]

35. How can you possibly presume to know how I will cover my medical bills?

Or anyone else for that matter. To simply declare that everyone who is brain damaged will be a drain on your taxes is simply untrue.

[el_gato]

38. He doesn't , it just sounds good

They trot out that phoney bullshit everytime this subject
comes up.

[Bowline]

39. Ahhh, I see. n/t

[progressivebydesign]

13. I had numerous friends and acquaintances that died...

.. all in motorcycle crashes. All not wearing helmets. Laws are in place to protect those in society who are too clueless to protect themselves... Seatbelts? I can't believe someone would actually be against mandatory seatbelt laws. I encourage ANYONE who is against helmet and seatbelt laws to work a week in a trauma center, or with an paramedic group.

You know, it feels really great to drive 70 mph on some of the local roads in my town.... even though the posted speed limit is 25... How unfair that I"m not allowed to do that!! /sarcasm off.

[Bowline]

17. I am most strongly FOR seat belts and helmets. Wouldn't be without 'em.

What I am strongly against is government intrusion into my personal choice to wear or not wear them. The government should restrict itself to protecting our civil rights, ensuring our ability to freely live, work, and play in society, and protect the public from fraud and abuse. It should NOT be sticking it's nose into my private life. It should force to wear a seat belt or helmet any more than it should force me to wear a condom during sex, or carry an umbrella when it rains.

[Arclight311]

24. Oh, are we really arguing about this?

Hey don't wear a helmet... that's fine... I like paying higher insurance premiums for no particular reason... it keeps me entertained...

I think we should all move back in time... like Asscroft would like us to... I'm all for the Amish lifestyle... hey, but then I'll need a helmet for the carriage ride into town...

And, asshole was a warranted comment... only stupidity and recklessness get the coveted title of "asshole", as the many others who can't seem to manage while driving a car and those who don't wear helmets when riding motorcycles... oh, and the Bush administration who need to be wearing helmets too while in office, officiating...

Bye,

Tom
Atlanta GA

[Bowline]

28. Ad Hominem AND Strawman in the same post. Excellent!!!

If you had bothered to read my post I said I DID support, endorse, advocate both seat belts and helmets. I just don't believe the government should make that choice for me.

Now, if you have an actual point to make we'd all like to hear it.

[el_gato]

31. Name calling reflects your reactionary attitude

We could live in total lockdown where everbody is required to wear
knee pads and a helmet just to walk down the street but who wants
to live like that.

It's people who advocate the total control over of our personal lives
who are leading this country down the road to fascism.

If this is your position then you should first try to outlaw
sports in schools and smoking and drinking and eating fatty foods.

[Surf Cowboy]

52. Right on.

We know that smoking kills far more people than motorcycles, helmeted or not.

So, before you start trying to force people to wear helmets, let's really go after the big numbers of people who are dying.

1. Ban smoking altogether;
2. Ban drinking of alcohol (boy, that worked well last time);
3. Ban sports;
4. Ban automobiles;
5. Ban work (workers' comp costs this country innumerable times what cycle head injuries do);

Then come back so we can work on this helmet thing...

[cmd]

51. Welcome to DU, Arclight311

and the best line in this thread goes to you!

"and the Bush administration who need to be wearing helmets too while in office, officiating... "

[cmd]

55. And don't let the boo birds scare you away

Looking to hear more from you.

[Surf Cowboy]

50. Perhaps in the future, you should hang out with

smarter people who wear seatbelts and helmets.

OH, and BTW, what the hell is this?

"Laws are in place to protect those in society who are too clueless to protect themselves..."

[mainer]

33. A downside on helmet laws...

Where else do you think we get healthy young organ donors?

(Transplant docs call them "donor-cycles".)

[Danger Duck]

45. Good point

But taking organs from someone seems unethical, just like taking stem cells. I think * should start campaigning against organ donors, since all life is precious, and Bikers will need their organ's for the post rapture era.

[Danger Duck]

46. Oh

I know I'm new. The above comment is sarcasm.

[Cleita]

48. To tell the truth if these assholes don't want to wear helmets, I

say Cheney em. Sometimes we get too far into nanny laws. I would insist on laws for children under eighteen and passengers on the bikes, but hell with it if some turkey wants his brains spilled all over the freeway, it's his choice. The ER physician should be used to dealing with accident victims on all levels. He should consider it part of his daily work.

I really think that adults who are of sound mind should be able to decide how they are going to treat their bodies and be prepared to suffer the consequences if needed. The fact that most insurers probably won't cover a motorcycle accident where a helmet wasn't worn should probably be sufficient incentive.

[Bowline]

71. Hear Hear!

Let adults decide for themselves what's best for them.

[skygazer]

64. Great debate

I can't imagine getting on a motorcycle without a helmet or getting in the car without buckling my seat belt. However, I don't care for helmet and seatbelt laws (except those that fine parents for not having their children secured - that to me is an issue of negligence). I just don't think laws are the answer to every social problem. I ride horses as well and I wouldn't think of riding without protective headgear - but I don't want that legislated. We can't protect everybody with laws. Personal responsibility and (dare I say it) common sense have to come into it somewhere.

[onecitizen]

74. As a former trauma nurse.......

I second that sentiment.

[Tight_rope]

78. Co-Worker (Texan) bought extra-insurance policy on husband!

Yes. My co-worker bought and extra-insurance policy on her husband who is an avid motorcycles reader. Now don't get me wrong, she loves he husband dearly. But she says that if he stupid husband wants to listen to a stupid-ass man who says don't protect your brains then she might as well get rich from bother of their stupidities.