On 3/19/2017 6:30 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

The moral of this little story is that there is a danger in quoting
sources. Some rotten, no good, SOB, might read them.

Except that the Odense study compared two control groups. One with the
daytime lights, one without them. So each group had the benefit or
non-benefit of the various other changes you cited.

It was nothing like the bogus helmet "studies" we've seen in the past
where cycling rates have risen and fallen based on factors unrelated to
helmets--when cycling rates fell, it was due solely to helmet laws. When
cycling rates rose, they should have risen as fast as the population
went up. Of course you can look at China where there are no helmet laws
and where cycling rates have plunged due to other factors (private car
ownership, and a boom in subway construction).