"NYC XYZ" writes:

A news item the last two days has been how the City is planning another
200 miles of bike lanes. For some reason, the liberals can't resist
throwing in the tidbit about some study finding that ~97% of bike
fatalities in the City involve riders not wearing a helmet. WTF???

First, it is not "liberals" per se---politicians and city staff in
general like to throw out statistics, whether valid or not, that help
make a project they are pushing sound like it is necessary.

Second, why would a 97% figure sound surpising? Around where I live,
helmet use is far higher in the more wealthy communities compared to
the poorer ones, but the the wealthy communities also have the
resources for bike education programs in public schools that attempt
to teach children to obey traffic laws. The kids still run stop
signs, but at least they are more likely to be on the right side of
the road. If something similar is true in NYC, the 97% figure is
quite plausible. It simply means that the safest cyclists also tend
to use helmets (and probably lights at night as well). In addition
(around here) unlicensed drivers are more prevalent in the poorer
areas. That also may be true in NYC as well.

If you couple some extra protection from a helmet with using lights at
night, more or less obeying traffic laws, and riding where there are
fewer unlicensed drivers, then a huge fatality rate reduction (and
substantial accident rate reduction) is quite plausible.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB