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 numbe

The argument above is well-presented and appears to be relatively sound at first glance: since the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased during the last ten-year period despite of the increased number of people wearing helmets, it seems cogent to assert that the government should focus on educating people about bicycle safety than encouraging wearing helmets. However, more light is shed on the issue and more detailed information is concerned, the unsubstantiated assumption leads me to question the validity of the argument.

First of all, the author assumes that more people are wearing helmets currently compared to ten years ago. Since the percentage of people wearing helmets has increased over the last ten years, the author hastily assumes that the actual number of people who equip with this safety protection has also increased. However, it is plausible that the cutting-edge technology allows many people to ride other modes of transportations such as buses or subways rather than bicycles, so that the number of bicyclists has decreased during the ten-year period. In such a case, it is far-fetched to argue that more people are wearing helmets in comparison to people in the past.

In addition, another assumption the author makes is that helmets are not effective since the number of bicycle-related accidents increased ruing the same ten-year period. However, the author should take into account alternative reasons for accidents such as increased number of cars on roads. In other words, those accidents possibly happened not because bicyclists performed reckless ridings but because the increased number of cars yielded severe traffic problems. If this would be true, the ineffectiveness of wearing helmets can be weakened. Thus, the author should provide more valid information regarding bicycle accidents.

Lastly, the author assumes the soundness of the conclusion that the government should focus more on bicycle education and less on requirement of helmets is sound. By doing so, the author adamantly believes that only one of these methods is effective to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accident. However, it cannot be deduced that the positive aspects of bicycle safety education overrides the necessity of helmet usage. After all, the usage of helmets could be the essential part on reducing the number of bicycle accident. Therefore, the author should provide more concrete evidence to verify the credibility of the conclusion
.
In conclusion, the argument is not persuasive in many respects. To bolster the argument, the author should provide more information on the number of bicyclists in the past and present and corroborate the relationship between the increased number of accidents and wearing helmets and soundness of the conclusion.