If there were a hall of fame for pointless studies, the recent University of Pittsburgh inquiry into head injuries and motorcycle riders would be a sure inductee.

It is not that the topic is pointless. It is just that the results should be obvious to anyone whose un-helmeted head has not bounced off a highway.

Those results show (no drum roll needed) that since Pennsylvania repealed its helmet law for motorcycle riders, head injuries among those riders have risen 60 percent.

If the lawmakers, lobbyists and riders who worked hard to repeal the bill in 2003 were honest, they would say they knew that would happen. They knew more people would be hurt, yet they repealed the law anyway.

Which brings us to the question, How far should government go to protect people from themselves? In an America that still believes in that "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" line, government indeed should play as hands-off as possible, even if those happy pursuits involve a high risk of traumatic head injury and/or death.

That leaves it up to the people to inform themselves about the issue and make the smart choice.

The facts are clear: Helmets do not prevent all injuries in motorcycle crashes. Not even Kevlar-encased bubble wrap safety suits would do that. But there is no question that helmets do reduce the number and severity of head injuries in motorcycle mishaps.

Only the most hard-core live-fast-and-die-young types would argue that unprotected riding is a good idea.

The Pittsburgh study has disproved the free-riding propaganda that un-helmeted riders are somehow safer than their hard-hat counterparts.

Maybe there was a point to the study after all.