Originally Posted by
I-Like-To-Bike
No matter how many times you cite this one silly report it gains no more credibility and your bent misinterpretations of it add no credibility to your own.
Were the alleged 25% admissions and alleged 4% "operations" all associated with head injuries? Yes? No?
If Yes, what was the the helmet wear breakdown for these cases, if No, what the heck do you think bringing up these percentages indicates about helmet wear, or your infatuation with this one so-called "study"?
http://www.scribd.com/doc/42230497/O...e-Trauma-Study
This is the most relevant part, but it's not too informative:
"Except for helmet use, there were no statistical differences between those commuters who experienced a serious traumatic event and those who did not. Thirteen percent of commuters who did not wear a helmet experienced a serious traumatic event, compared with 5% (43) of those who did (p 0.023). In an additional analysis comparing commuters who reported a traumatic event with those who reported a serious traumatic event, lack of helmet use was the only statistical difference between the two groups (p 0.013)."
Of the 962 commuters, about 30 experienced traumatic or serious traumatic events with head injury, 35 indicated face injury, over 12 months.
It is an interesting study for other reasons, though: most traumatic events and serious traumatic events by far occurred while riding on the shoulder or in a bike lane, and on residential streets. I.e. take the lane and ride in traffic.