Two contributors to the 1999 Institute of Medicine report on injury control have written a thoughtful article on the origins of the injury field within public health, its current role, and some challenges facing us. They argue that to define injury prevention as a public health problem does not mean that “the public health approach is the only useful perspective for thinking about injuries”. The article addresses certain controversies in the field: the costs of regulation, paternalism, balancing safety and freedom, and other ethical dilemmas. Finally, the authors contend that public health advocacy must be embraced but with caution and constraint. (

.)

How many times do we need to prove that bicycle helmet legislation is effective? This study, the accompanying editorial, and the letters to the editor in the following issue demonstrate a lack of consensus. Does helmet promotion reduce cycling? Are we reducing head injuries at the cost of increased heart disease? Read these pieces and find a colleague to debate it with you . . . (

.

. Letters, all entitled “Butting heads over bicycle helmets”, by

.)

Most …