Originally Posted by closetbiker
I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to think that any one who takes one of those courses could come out as a better informed and more skillfull road user that will be involved in fewer roadway collisions.
It's simple, if someone is informed of a better and safer way of doing something, there'll be less accidents than if they didn't have any information.
You mean like teaching abstinence and "just saying NO" as a better and safer way of doing something to sexually active teenagers is SURE to bring about the desired safer behavior and reduction in "accidents"? Does measurable change in student behavior occur simply because the proselytizers/teachers believe it is "better"? You are right, your speculation as to cyclist training effect is a SIMPLE answer, without substantiation in any way.
Your speculation about what a chimeric study will surely indicate about training-increased safety correlation, is off kilter for two specific reasons - Lack of any evidence that students of current cyclist safety training programs significantly alter their cycling behavior after the training, and lack of any evidence that the safety record of students changes in the slightest after training.
Originally Posted by closetbiker
I have 2 studies at home done by well paid corporations that show about two -thirds of cycling deaths are due to not following the rules of the road and about 30% from accidents that were not in any way preventable. They both corroborate each others findings and show if cyclists simply follow the rules of the road, there is only the tiniest of chance of death on the bicycle
Do those studies indicate the effectiveness of any training program in significantly altering cyclist behavior in any measured way? Did these two studies correlate any training program with producing desired measurable cyclist safety results? Any particular reason why these studies are not identified?