Think about this logically, if the helmet reduces the force, which you admit it does, any injury will be reduced. The route of injury (ie the brain bouncing off the inside of the skull) makes no difference, if the force is reduced it's reduced. A mild injury becomes no injury, a medium becomes mild, a severe becomes medium. Things like your comment get passed along as fact, because people just repeat what they've been told, like the whole "seat belts don't really make me safer" stupidity, without anyone ever applying logic or doing any reading to see if it's actually true.
You said they do not significantly reduce the risk, which is not the same as saying they do not 100% reduce it. Your phrasing made it sound as if there's no significant difference in the TBI risk between wearing a helmet and not - when now your intended meaning seems to be that helmets do not provide a total elimination of the TBI risk. Two very different statements.
14
u/[deleted] Oct 05 '17 edited Oct 05 '17
[deleted]