CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Lawrence DW, Patel NB. Inj. Prev. 2008; 14(2): 78-79. |
|
Affiliation |
Karolinska Institutet, Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of International Health (IHCAR), Injuries’ Social Aetiology and Consequences Group, Stockholm, Sweden; San Diego State University Graduate School of Public Health, San Diego, California |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2008, BMJ Publishing Group) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
18388225 |
|
Abstract |
Lists the ten topics that have generated the most complaints from SafetyLit readers and the "rationales" used by the protestors to explain their objections. For example, the three topics from which the most complaints arose were: 1. Articles that they believe promote bicycle helmet wearing. Their argument is that bicycle helmets make riding seem dangerous and therefore fewer people choose to ride. With fewer bicyclists on the road, the disparity between cyclists and motor vehicles is increased and thereby the visibility of riders is decreased. Thus, they say, helmets make it more likely for riders to be struck by motor vehicles. Included in this category are complaints about bicycle helmets in general and not about bicycle helmet legislation (included in item 3) or about a bias against persons with disabilities (see item 2). 2. Articles about traumatic brain injury or spinal cord injury prevention. These complaints come from those who take an extreme view on issues of the rights of persons with acquired disabilities. They argue that efforts to prevent central nervous system injuries suggest that persons who have experienced these injuries are less valued than persons who are uninjured. 3. Articles about "nanny government" laws or regulations. These are complaints about issues such as: building codes; motor vehicle design standards and regulations (eg, air bags, helmet laws, speed limits, cellular telephone prohibitions); consumer product risks and regulations Language: en |