The following appeared in a health newsletter.

“A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of accidents caused by bicycling has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets and they take more risks as a result. Thus, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets.”

The above article appeared in a health newsletter. The arguer wants to suggest that in order to reduce serious injuries inflicted from bicycle accidents, the government should lay more emphasis on educating people about bicycle safety rather than encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets. The arguer presents various arguments in support of his recommendation. The first argument presented by the arguer is a nationwide study which indicates that ten years ago 35 percent bicyclists were using helmets and which has increased to 80 percent in the recent time. The arguer further mentions that according to another study in spite of increase in the number of bicyclists using helmets the accident rate has increased by 200 percent. The second argument which the arguer presents is that after wearing helmets bicyclists feel safer and that’s why they take more risks and thus more accidents are caused. The arguments presented by the arguer are without any substantial evidence.

The first argument presented by the arguer is absolutely baseless. It is based on a nationwide study. The study brings out the fact that more number of bicyclists in the recent times were using helmets as compared to the bicyclists of older times. In spite of more present bicyclists using helmets the accident rates have increased drastically. The arguer has not mentioned in his argument whether all accidents were caused by those bicyclists who were wearing helmets. It is very much possible that the rise in the accident rates is due to the increased traffic on roads. The arguer fails to mention the condition of the roads as bad roads can lead to more accidents. The arguer also fails to mention whether the trend of accident was more in a certain time period or consistent throughout. If the accidents were more in a certain time period it could be due to some natural calamities like heavy rain. The arguer fails to show any relation between more bicyclists wearing helmets and increased accident rates. It is very much possible that accidents were caused by bicyclists who were not wearing helmets.

The second argument that the arguer gives in support of his suggestion is the feeling of safety that a bicyclist feels after wearing a helmet which makes them more accident prone. This assumption by the arguer is absolutely insignificant. The arguer has not mentioned any incident to support his viewpoint that bicyclists took extra risks after wearing helmets. The arguer has not mentioned that the accidents were caused by those bicyclists who took more risk rather than those bicyclists who did not take any risk. This assumption of the arguer is very weird and does not have any substantial support.

The arguer has not been able to justify his stand. The arguer has not presented us with relevant arguments in support of his stand. The arguer also fails to establish a relation between causes of accidents with more number of bicyclists wearing helmets. The arguer has not mentioned whether bicyclists were educated about safety rules earlier or not. The arguer seems to be very confused in his recommendations.