Question

Bike helmet supporters claim that helmets reduce the risk of severe injury, citing studies that

compare medical outcomes of those who crash with and without a helmet. However, those
critical of bike helmets argue that while the rate of severe injury decreases with a helmet, the
likelihood of an accident increases due to factors like reduced peripheral visibility. These lines
of reasoning reveal that bike safety is often not simple to define and requires more careful
analysis.
Which of the following statements best expresses the main conclusion of the above argument?
Option 1: Bike helmets obstruct peripheral vision.
Option 2: Bike helmets reduce the risk of severe injury.
Option 3: Bike safety is a complex issue.
Answer
O Option 1
O Option 2
O Option 3

Answer 1

the correct answer is Option 3: Bike safety is a complex issue.

Step-by-step explanation:

The argument presented in the passage is that bike safety is a complex issue and requires more careful analysis . The passage presents two lines of reasoning that are critical of bike helmets. The first line of reasoning argues that bike helmets obstruct peripheral vision, which can increase the likelihood of an accident. The second line of reasoning argues that while the rate of severe injury decreases with a helmet, the likelihood of an accident increases due to factors like reduced peripheral visibility . These lines of reasoning are presented to illustrate that bike safety is not a simple issue and requires more careful analysis .