Responses

Download PDFPDF

Risk compensation theory should be subject to systematic reviews of the scientific evidence
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: Response to Busted flush

    eLetter from Editor
    In a spirit of open access I agreed to post the letter from Richard Burton but cannot permit it to pass without comment. Though it is somewhat difficult to do so because it is not always clear what Burton means, it is evident that either he does not understand what peer review means or has distorted the meaning.

    The reference to the Thompson and Rivara articles on helmet...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Busted flush

    Dear Editor

    Thompsons and Rivara have published a number of articles in scientific journals. Most, if not all of these purport to show that cycle helmets are extraordinarily effective, against whole-population robust research. Many of them have been peer reviewed and found to be worthless e.g. their claim that cycle helmets prevented 85% of injuries and deaths, based on the fact that helmeted cyclists riding in pa...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Risk compensation

    Dear Editor

    I would suggest that if there is a risk compensation affect with respect to bicycle helmets it would be very short lived. As any cyclist knows even with a helmet it still hurts like hell when you fall off!

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.