Tag Archives: New York

E-Bikes and Brain Injury: The Risks, the Recovery, and the Law

E-bikes continue to grow in popularity, allowing one to avoid automobile traffic. But because e-bikes can reach speeds of 20 to 28 mph or more, crashes carry serious consequences, including severe traumatic brain injuries. More so, studies have found that young e-bikers suffer traumatic brain injuries at nearly twice the rate of traditional cyclists (37.8% vs. 19.4%). Notably, only 44% of hospitalized e-bike riders were wearing helmets, and helmetless riders were almost twice as likely to sustain a head injury.

The case of Bella Prince, a Utah teenager who crashed her e-bike into a retaining wall at 40 mph and tumbled 25 feet down a cliff, brought special attention to the e-bike issue in the State. The teen survived because of emergency neurosurgery, but she was left with a severe traumatic brain injury. Horrific stories like Bella’s are driving legislative action. Utah’s HB 381, Electric Mobility Device Amendments, passed both the House and Senate with broad support on February 13, 2026. The bill requires helmets for e-bike riders under 21 and empowers police to impound e-bikes from unsafe riders. (As of March 16, 2026, HB 381 has not been signed into law by the governor.)

Currently, only Alabama, Connecticut, and Massachusetts require helmets for all e-bike riders of every age and class. California, Georgia, Louisiana, Ohio, Tennessee, and Virginia, mandate helmets for all Class 3 e-bike riders, with Class 3 defined as bikes that are pedal-assist up to 28 mph. California also enacted a package including AB 1778 in 2024, which created a Marin County pilot program requiring all Class 2 riders to wear helmets and banning riders under 16 from Class 2 e-bikes. In New York, pending bill S2526 would require helmets for all e-bike and bicycle riders in larger cities, though the same bill has failed in prior years. New Jersey S4834/A6235 abolished the three-class system entirely and reclassified all e-bikes as “motorized bicycles” requiring licensing, registration, insurance, and mandatory helmets beginning in January 2026. However, as of now, no federal e-bike helmet law exists.

Yet e-bikes can also be part of traumatic brain injury recovery. The pedal-assist feature allows TBI survivors with limited stamina, balance issues, or motor challenges to engage in outdoor physical activity, which research links to improved cognitive function and mental health during rehabilitation.

Ultimately, the message is clear: e-bikes offer real benefits, but only when ridden safely.

Stalking Awareness Month Spotlights Hidden Brain Connections

The Federal Office for Victims of Crime, part of the Department of Justice, states, “Stalking is a crime of power and control.” January marks the 22nd annual National Stalking Awareness Month; the 2026 theme “Know It, Name It, Stop It” urges Americans to recognize and respond to this dangerous crime that affects over 40 million people nationwide.

This Sunday, January 18 commemorates National Stalking Awareness Day of Action. In New York, landmarks across the state will be illuminated in yellow, symbolizing caution like a yield sign, to honor victims and survivors. North Dakota and other states have also issued official proclamations and specific actions to recognize the day and the month.

Stalking’s link to traumatic brain injury is a troubling bidirectional relationship. Research shows 60% of stalking offenders have experienced a TBI, which impairs impulse control and increases aggression. Conversely, 75% of women in abusive relationships sustain at least one brain injury from violence like strangulation.

CDC data reveals 22.5% of women and 9.7% of men experience stalking during their lifetimes. In 2025, President Biden proclaimed, “My father used to say that one of the greatest sins a person could commit is the abuse of power – and that is fundamentally what stalking is.” President Trump has declared, “Stalking any individual, especially our young people will not be tolerated. My Administration remains committed to ending the crime of stalking.”

For resources and state-specific legislation, visit StalkingAwareness.org.

New NYC Mayor’s Socialist Vision Raises Questions for Brain Injury Care

Zohran Mamdani, New York City’s incoming ‘democratic socialist’ mayor, has declared that “socialism means a commitment to dignity, a state that provides whatever is necessary for its people to live a dignified life.” Mamdani’s personability and oxymoronic political stance gained the support of the majority of the City’s voting public. For New Yorkers with brain injuries, this philosophy carries both promise and peril.

Some socialist healthcare systems have demonstrated genuine achievements in brain injury rehabilitation. Denmark’s centralized model delivers specialized rehabilitation to 84% of severe traumatic brain injury survivors, far exceeding other nations. Cuba’s CIREN [International Center for Neurologic Restoration, located in Havana] self-reports that it “has gained international recognition for its innovative approaches to neurological treatment and rehabilitation”, since its founding in 1989.

Lest this political stance be seen only for its benefit, troubling patterns emerge. Sweden’s universal healthcare system reaches only 46% of its most severe TBI patients with specialized care. Cuba, despite world-renowned facilities, suffers 70% medication shortages that cripple daily care. The Soviet Union’s legacy of “there are no invalids in the USSR” reminds us that socialist rhetoric can mask institutional neglect.

Mamdani’s proposed $363 million mental health investment and public hospital commitments sound transformative. If enacted, and beyond the fact that the City likely will not be able to achieve that number because of movement from NYC after the needed massive tax hikes, these grand plans often stumble against bureaucratic realities. Simply, many highly skilled doctors may relocate. Ultimately, whether Mamdani’s vision delivers meaningful improvements for brain-injured New Yorkers or becomes another case of ambitious promises meeting harsh constraints remains uncertain. For now, cautious observation is wisest – New Yorkers must wait and see.