I just wondered, with all this talk about helmets not having any positive benefit, if there had been any collation of the type of head injury deaths or serious injuries most prevalent since their compulsory introduction in certain countries as marked against the type of head injury deaths/injuries before.
I.E. Had rotational injuries causing death or serious injury increased, decreased or stayed the same?
If there was no significant drop in other fatal or serious head injuries it would then be shown that wearing helmets was in fact more dangerous than not. This would be a difficult statistic to argue against if one then wanted to introduce compulsion.
Still they probably don't collate figures like this because of that very reason.
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:37:58 GMT someone who may be "Sniper8052(L96A1)" <[email hidden]> wrote this:-
Quoted message said:
If there was no significant drop in other fatal or serious head injuries it would then be shown that wearing helmets was in fact more dangerous than not. This would be a difficult statistic to argue against if one then wanted to introduce compulsion.
Unlike helmet zealots, the pro-choice lobby is not showered with tax-payer's money to look at the issue. Any such information would probably be referenced from www.cyclehelmets.org.
Quoted message said:
Still they probably don't collate figures like this because of that very reason.
The question of what data is collected and what is presented is an interesting one. Those who collect and present the "official" data are the ones who are responsible for road "safety". Thus it is no surprise that the figures they present "show" things are getting better, with a few blips. This can be quite ruthless, as the suppression of the Isles Report demonstrates.
-- David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.
The question of what data is collected and what is presented is an interesting one. Those who collect and present the "official" data are the ones who are responsible for road "safety". Thus it is no surprise that the figures they present "show" things are getting better, with a few blips. This can be quite ruthless, as the suppression of the Isles Report demonstrates.
So where can one obtain a copy of the Isles report? (Not a sarky question, I'm interested to read it)
So where can one obtain a copy of the Isles report? (Not a sarky question, I'm interested to read it)
You'll be lucky, is the answer. It was suppressed, leaked to the press, and never openly published to my knowledge. But you can read about it - and about the earlier research which it duplicated - in Risk by John Adams. Well worth reading.
So where can one obtain a copy of the Isles report? (Not a sarky question, I'm interested to read it)
You'll be lucky, is the answer. It was suppressed, leaked to the press, and never openly published to my knowledge. But you can read about it - and about the earlier research which it duplicated - in Risk by John Adams. Well worth reading.
