On 31/07/06, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 01:53:36PM +0530, Kiran Jonnalagadda wrote:
> So you acknowledge then that there is a problem with the basis on
> which driving licenses are handed out. Isn't enforcing helmets then a
> case of attacking the symptoms instead of the cause?
If there's some fresh human roadkill on the highway, who's
paying to pick it up and resuscitate it? In case you wind
up as a human veggie on the vent, who's going to pay for
that?
In case in India emergency personnel is not required by law
to deal with patching leaky brains well enough to give
them years and years of "life" on life support -- all paid
by taxes, of course, you've just gots yourself a case.
If not, then compulsory helmeting will reduce health costs,
and thus could lower the tax load.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the government provides
much in the way of emergency services. The normal response to an
accident seems to be for bystanders to hail a autorickshaw and heave
the patient into it.
I know of one ambulance service in Bangalore, but I believe it's run by an NGO.
-- b
