That's reality and it's not unreasonable. The thing we need to sort out is where to draw those lines to optimize for best outcomes for both individuals and society.
1. Most don't have the knowledge to make an informed choice (how many people have enough medical knowledge?)
2. It is generally accepted that seat belts are mandatory, helmets on motorcycles are mandatory in most of the world (except a few states in US), but that is not seen as lack of own determination. What is the difference? All these are preventive actions.
You could say this about anything: camera lenses, frozen food, airline flights. How much do you really know about how these things operate/are made? Prices externalize that information that allows people to decide whether it’s worth it. Also most people are far smarter (especially when it regards their own bodies) than the assumption you’re making here…
250,000 people a year. Nearly 10% of all deaths. A 0.7% chance of dying (from a mistake) per hospital visit.
You know why it goes under the radar? Because there is no billing code for f-ups.
I realize of course this doesn't mean self-medication is safer; legitimate medical treatment might cause more deaths just because there is more of it.
[https://hub.jhu.edu/2016/05/03/medical-errors-third-leading-...]
"The researchers caution that most medical errors aren't due to inherently bad doctors, and that reporting these errors shouldn't be addressed by punishment or legal action. Rather, they say, most errors represent systemic problems, including poorly coordinated care, fragmented insurance networks, the absence or underuse of safety nets, and other protocols, in addition to unwarranted variation in physician practice patterns that lack accountability."
I would be inclined to wear a helmet or a seatbelt regardless of the law, so it doesn't make a practical difference to me if they are mandated.
On the other hand, it seems arbitrarily inconsistent to me, to say it's ok for motorcyclists to take a lot of risk, even with a helmet, and yet not allow car drivers to choose whether to wear a seatbelt or have an airbag.
I can drive any old pre-airbag car that's nearly as dangerous as a motorcycle, but there's little accommodation for selling new cars without every bell and whistle.
Not that I would want someone to say "ok, then we'll outlaw motorcycles and scrap all the old cars".
But I'm not sure these regulations are really necessary. If people have different risk tolerances, then they can pay an appropriate amount in insurance.
On the other hand, I do strongly believe in safety regulations where the risk is not obvious and people can't judge it. I can't see if food or drugs are potentially lethal, it has to be certified and monitored by experts.
With cars, the question of whether the seatbelts will work correctly in a crash is something that regulations need to cover, even if we were to say it's ok to not have them at all.