lukesdad
Guest
People between 13 and 19
So everyone between 13 and 19 was questioned then ?
People between 13 and 19
So everyone between 13 and 19 was questioned then ?
i cannot see on the graph were the helmet use is?
Given it was a stat on teenagers I would say they were the most likely group to be surveyed.
oh i see, so the amount of head injuries have decreased consistently. A more accurate measure would be accidents or similar accidents to head injuries. There are numerous variables that could have led to that stat
ok, if more people are judged to be wearing helmets overall and the percentage of people wearing helmets is the same then more people are cycling.
to simplify for your benefit:
50% wear helmets (just an example)
100 people wear helmets, 200 people cycling
300 people wear helmets, 600 people cycling
if 600 people cycle as opposed to 200 there is 3 times more potential for accidents
so if a stat suggests more people wear helmets equaled more accidents it could be explained this way
Exactly which is why its the percent of head injuries [%HW] (as a percentage of accidents) not the number of head injuries that is plotted.
...and of course none of them would say they were breaking the law by riding without a helmet would they ?
...and of course none of them would say they were breaking the law by riding without a helmet would they ?
Ah but that is on reported accidents. Did the number of unreported accidents without head injuries increase ?
Given that the helmet wearing was from on street counts then it doesn't matter what they say does it?
You dont know do you ?
I don't know about you lot but this is hard work keeping all these helmet threads going at the same time.
So a very small percentage then or were there 1000s of street counters ?