Re: Helmet efficacy test

On 4/2/2025 7:36 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
<snip>

Frank any myself mostly wish to ensure that people aren't pressurized to wear helmets.
 Making bicycling look like a dangerous activity is likely to reduce the attraction of cycling as a mode of transport.

If you look at the data, it's countries without helmet laws that have higher levels of helmet usage: "They also noted that the country where the helmet is most frequently reportedly used (Norway), does not actually have a mandatory law, while other countries with similar absence of helmet laws—Turkey, Greece, Portugal, Sweden, or Israel—report higher rates of helmet use compared to e.g., Argentina, which has such a law." <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-35728-x>.
If you look at the data, installing bicycle infrastructure results in a significant increase in cycling. "Research demonstrates that the presence of a well-connected bike network encourages more people—especially women and people with low incomes—to bike." <https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/why-us-cities-are-investing-safer-more-connected-cycling-infrastructure#>.
If Frank wants to reduce helmet usage then he should advocate for mandatory helmet laws. The data supports this.
If Frank wants to reduce cycling, then he should continue to advocate against bicycle infrastructure. The data supports this.
Of course the reality is that Frank just wants others to do everything the same way he does, and statistics and data are not something he considers relevant.
There is no evidence that encouraging helmet usage actually reduces cycling levels. There was one study that concluded: "Many motorcyclists dislike helmets. It is safe to assume the same is true for bicyclists. Thus a mandatory bicycle helmet law will, if anything, reduce cycling." That was it! No statistics on cycling levels pre and post helmet laws.
An excellent, peer-reviewed article on the subject is "Anti-helmet arguments: lies, damned lies and flawed statistics" available at <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268982542_Anti-helmet_arguments_lies_damned_lies_and_flawed_statistics> (Click on Download Full-Text PDF).
"When the majority of evidence against helmets or mandatory helmet legislation (MHL) is carefully scrutinised it appears overstated, misleading or invalid. Moreover, much of the statistical analysis has been conducted by people with known affiliations with anti-helmet or anti-MHL organisations."