Originally Posted by ianjk
I always wonder about how these studies get their statistics, for example I have 3 hosed helmets from spills and never had to go see a physician because my helmet took the impact... and know plenty of others in the same boat...
the usual way. lots of data from varying input.
When our helmet law passed, it was claimed as a success because there was a doubling of helmet use and a 30% drop in cyclists treated for head injuries, but it soon became apparent that this was a false claim because it wasn't just head injuries that dropped 30%, all injuries to cyclists dropped the same amount.
Upon further investigation, it was found that there were 34% fewer reported collisions between cars and bikes and that the ratio between pedestrian and cyclist deaths remained the same after as before the law.
The real problem reared its head when that despite the increased presence of helmets on the remaining cyclists on the road, and the fewer collisions between cyclists and motorists, there was a significant increase in deaths to cyclists in the three years following the implementation of the law. The direct opposite result of what was hoped for.
Last edited by closetbiker; 11-03-10 at 02:05 PM.