Position on ABATE?

[MarkM]

I previously linked a study that showed no increase in spinal injury due to helmet use. That study was from 1992 and analyzed 1,153 cases. Another study was completed in 2011 that analyzed 40,588 cases with the result, "Helmeted motorcyclists are less likely to suffer a cervical spine injury after a motorcycle collision." Furthermore, helmeted riders showed a 65% reduction in traumatic brain injury and a 37% decrease in death. The study's authors go on to recommend, "Re-enactment of the universal helmet law should be considered in states where it has been repealed." I'm still waiting for a study that shows the reverse to be true. I'm not expecting one anytime soon.

I always wear a helmet, and I admit to scoffing at riders who don't. But I still defend their liberty to make that choice.

 

[gunderwood]

Missing the studies point -

IF this is the study I read in the past the study does not deal with a statistical analysis of making a cause and effect argument with helmet wearing and riding. Rather, the study looked into the issue of spinal injuries that were thought to occur after the accident as a result of emergency responders removing the riders helmet to secure the airway of the injured rider. The rider/patient population was not the motorcycling universe. It was the rider/patient population that had decided to wear a helmet and had an accident that required hospitalization.

Several factors have gone into decreasing this spinal injury possibility (if it existed in the first place) including, training responders, changes in standards/design and others.

That wasn't the study he linked too or at least as far as I could tell from the link provided.

 

[gunderwood]

I always wear a helmet, and I admit to scoffing at riders who don't. But I still defend their liberty to make that choice.

Agreed. The helmets saves lives line is really a distraction from the central issue which is if the government can ban a certain activity based on a the presumption of additional risk of injury/death. For those that say yes, I ask the following question:

If society has an interest in preventing you from taking a risk, why should you be allow to ride a motorcycle on public roads in the first place? It's simple to fix as lots of vehicles don't qualify for operation on public roads; no registration, no insurance, no riding. Furthermore, if you really believe what you are suggesting, it shouldn't matter the public outcry or what a few "riders" what to do because riding a motorcycle isn't just a little bit more risky than an automobile, it's a lot more risky...to the tune of approx. an order of magnitude (again depends on who complies the stats).



As a side note, both of those studies read like political propaganda rather than real scientific research (given what I can read of them). "Debunking the myth" is hardly a reasonable title as is their summary recommendations (ACS is politically active and lobbies). It's nothing new mind you, but it's hard to imagine similar such papers being published in an esteemed journal like IEEE, etc. Regardless of the data and analysis validity, that's hardly proper neutral presentation.

 

[MarkM]

As a side note, both of those studies read like political propaganda rather than real scientific research (given what I can read of them). "Debunking the myth" is hardly a reasonable title as is their summary recommendations (ACS is politically active and lobbies). It's nothing new mind you, but it's hard to imagine similar such papers being published in an esteemed journal like IEEE, etc. Regardless of the data and analysis validity, that's hardly proper neutral presentation.

That's a good observation. That the second study concluded with recommending that states consider re-enacting helmet laws is a dead giveaway of the political motivation of the authors. Probably their financial motivation as well.

 

[osbornk]

That's a good observation. That the second study concluded with recommending that states consider re-enacting helmet laws is a dead giveaway of the political motivation of the authors. Probably their financial motivation as well.

We seldom get an unbiased study. Isn't it odd that most of the studies affirm the position of the folks who fund or perform the study? They skew the results by who is or is not included in the study, the perimeters of the study or other "adjustable" conditions.

 

[bunkyone]

Hey all: mark Twain once said; " There are three kinds of lies; White lies, damned lies, and government statistics." These studies are proof of the third. If you want to go further afield, look at the studies funded by other agencies or organizations. They all, without exception will reinforce the position of the sponsor. I have very little respect for the pollsters, and even less for the agencies that sponsor this waste of paper. We all know that helmets and proper riding gear save lives, we don't need anyone telling us this. It is still a free country (at least for now) and we have to respect the individuals right NOT to. Vaya con Dios, Dutch

 

[squeaky4432]

Mark Twain

Hey all: mark Twain once said; " There are three kinds of lies; White lies, damned lies, and government statistics."

Actually, the correct quote is "There are lies, damned lies and statistics." Source is www.brainyquote.com.

Bob Schrader

 

[miairhead]

Interesting study

http://www.bikersrights.com/statistics/goldstein/goldstein2.html

 

[bunkyone]

Bob; You are, of course, right, I have heard it the way I quoted it so often, that I took it for granted that it was correct.. Thanks for the correction. Wonder what 'ol Sam Clemens would think about our world today? Vaya con Dios, Dutch

 

[amiles]

Speed limits for roadways are set by trained highway engineers. Later they are subject to constituents long & loud complaints to their representatives. These numbers are seldom increased by this process.

There was a letter in our newspaper wherein the writer was bemoaning the terrible curse of speeding motorcycles. He claimed that on his (35) mph posted street the bikes were speeding to the tune of 70 mph. His solution, drop the speed limit to 25 mph. Perhaps this would drop the motorcycle speed to 60? Too bad that the forces of the law were unable to monitor the situation and deal with it accordingly.
This is the type of mentality that our representatives hear the loudest and absent any letters/calls to retain the present speed , will choose to appease the squeaky wheel.

 

[henzilla]

Speed limits for roadways are set by trained highway engineers. Later they are subject to constituents long & loud complaints to their representatives. .

What I have seen recently in TX is the State field engineering study says 65MPH is good on a rural state highwayand passing zones good...then the local counties get involved to slow it down and make a double yellow zone run for miles and miles. It takes the guesswork and abilities out of the rider/driver's hands. You would think we are driving Model A's around here again

Ouch...fell off my soapbox