Re: Helmet efficacy test

On 3/26/2025 12:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

 If activity A causes more TBI deaths than activity B - whether measured in total (i.e. "cost to society") or, say, in lifetime odds of death (as in "odds of dying by...") or in, say, number of deaths per mile (for transportation modes) - then why should activity B get subjected to helmet nagging when activity A does not?
 On average, bicycling is safer than walking by all those metrics. You obviously don't believe that, but that just means you have more reading to do.

Regarding sources of head injury: See the big pie chart at this site:
https://how-sen.com/journal/2014/2/bike-helmets
I don't agree with absolutely everything in the article - specifically, Thompson & Rivara's claim of 85% or 88% benefit have _never_ been corroborated. Even their own subsequent work showed much lower protection, and AFAIK all other studies have shown lower protection yet.
But the author makes many good points, and I agree with almost all.
--
- Frank Krygowski