Mr. Mixie, I said I don't know how the premiums are set in the U.S. In Canada, if you buy travel insurance, you are required by the insurer to disclose if you will be participating in any "high risk" activities. You have to tell them what it is before you are issued the coverage or else you are not covered for injury sustained doing that activity. The premium for the policy goes up accordingly, if they insure you at all
And, uh, since the insurance company is the entity providing the coverage, it is in their sole discretion to decide what is risky, and how much they wish to charge you for coverage, if they cover you at all.
I BELIEVE that similar practices exist in the U.S., (aren't professional athletes restricted from participating in "risky" activities by their insurance policies in the U.S.?) but I can't say for sure as I don't buy insurance there, so I didn't want to be arrogant and make any assumptions
That should take care of your summary comment that I know nothing about what I'm talking. I do - from experience. You can put your head back down now, from wherever you extracted it.
Mr. Aloutris, you are correct of course, and I knew that when I posted. But, as you mention, those things CAN occur (they may not). The rider is free to take the risk of eye damage occurring, just the same as head damage occurring when not wearing a helmet. My point about choosing comfort over safety is still valid in this illustration I believe.