[pdonis]

> The article isn't for either of those things.

You'd never know it from the clickbait headline.

> Mandatory helmet laws are a matter of public policy, they have nothing to do with individual people making individual decisions.

Public policy doesn't do anything by itself; all it does is determine the incentives that people face when making individual decisions to do or not do things. So correctly describing the effects of a public policy is very important to individual people trying to make individual decisions.

[a1369209993]

> You'd never know it from the clickbait headline.

What headline are you seeing? At the time of this comment, the clickbait headline is:

> > Mandatory helmet laws make cyclists less safe

Which is clearly relevant for:

> a voter or a politician trying to decide whether mandatory helmet laws will help to make your city a safe place for cyclists.

and not clearly relevant for individual people making individual decisions, whether about biking at all, or about wearing a helmet when they do. (It's obviously possible (even likely) that relevant information might show up, but the clickbait headline isn't actually claiming that.)

[pdonis]

It's easy to interpret the headline as telling you what the article is actually saying...if you already know what the article is actually saying.

But my initial reaction on reading the headline was: "Huh? They're saying wearing a helmet makes you less safe? That doesn't make sense! A helmet protects your head." I suspect I'm not alone (at least one other poster in this discussion has called the headline "deliberately deceptive clickbait", which is an even stronger claim than just "clickbait").

[JAlexoid]

What would be the correct article title, that wouldn't be like a paper abstract?

[pdonis]

How about "Public policy on helmet laws has unintended consequences"?

[substation13]

> all it does is determine the incentives

You say that like it's not a HUGE thing. Incentives will determine the entire transport ratios of a region.

Biking on freeways is for misfits and weirdos :)

[pdonis]

> You say that like it's not a HUGE thing.

I said no such thing. Obviously incentives are important.

I'm just pointing out that incentives act on individuals making individual decisions. So to claim, as the GGP (not you) did, that public policy has nothing to do with individual decisions is simply wrong.