View Single Post
  #24  
Old May 15th 19, 04:16 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default HOW DANGEROUS IS CYCLING? DEPENDS ON WHICH NUMBERS YOU EMPHASISE.

On 5/15/2019 8:36 AM, sms wrote:

I recall one "survey" that was doing actual counts of riders and they
intentionally derated their count because they said that they didn't
want to count riders who were passing by the counting point if they were
on an organized ride. Then they used the derated count to proclaim that
the lower number of riders was due to a helmet law.


Scharf is a politician with a politician's skill at blatant lying.

What actually happened: After Australia implemented state-by-state all
ages mandatory helmet laws (under pressure from the national
government), some agencies conducted surveys of bicycle use.

From Robinson, "Head Injuries and Bicycle Helmet Laws," Accident
Analysis and Prevention V. 28, no. 4, pp. 463-475:
"Table 4 shows, in the first year of the Victorian helmet law, the
reduction in numbers counted was 5 times greater than the increase in
cyclists wearing helmets. In the second year, a bicycle rally happened
to pass through one of the 64 [counting] sites. Numbers of cyclists at
that particular site increased from 72 in 1991 to 451 in 1992, 81% of
the total increase. Despite the 1992 rally, compared with before the
law, numbers counted decreased by almost as much as the increase in
numbers helmet wearing..."

Scharf somehow pretends there was no decrease in cycling. I suspect he
hasn't really read any of the relevant literature.

Be very careful when reading any "studies" referred to on
cycle-helmets.com, that site has no credibility.


Be even more careful listening to lying politicians.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home