Actually that article did seem to correct for number. But the amount of exposure data it had was small and there were some seriously dodgy proxies.THe other factors are:
1. There was a whole spectrumm of road improvements at this time with a clampdown on speeding, dangerous driving, tailgating, drunk driving, and vehicle standards. NOne of these were considerd annd any of them could have explained a decrease in cyclits injuries including head injuries
2. The data neds to be corrected for the number of cyclists. One of the most common errors with the Australian research is the failure to do this.
Yes - the number of head injuries decreased
However the number of cyclists had also decreased
When you factor this in, the number of head injuries was GREATER per cyclist / journey / mile after helmet introduction!
Whatthe Australian data really provess is that a compulsory helmet law INCREASES the hazard
Actually that article did seem to correct for number. But the amount of exposure data it had was small and there were some seriously dodgy proxies.
I'm positive that you praying for me, or anyone else, will have even less effect that wearing a helmet.I'll pray for him and a few others who're on this forum tonight.
It appears cunknob
Elsewhere a guy in the local cycle club who is 'old school' and never wears a cycle helmet just a cap crashed a month ago and fractured his skull and was in a coma for 2 weeks. Whilst he may still of been if he'd been wearing a helmet surely the added head protection would have lessened the chances of serious injury?
Oh pleeeease!!Impact protection of a helmet rated to EN1078: 50 Joules
Impact energy required to fracture a human skull: 500 Joules
Physics suggests the chances of a helmet lessening the probability of serious injury are small.
He always messes everything up with facts. The big meanie.Oh pleeeease!!
No one, who's listening...im talking sense/intelligence - those who arent are lost to redicularity !
Oh pleeeease!!
Only if you do first!Thank you for your insightful comment. Would it be possible for you to please supply an argument next time? Or indeed, insight?