On 2/20/2019 4:33 PM, James wrote:

snip

“There are numerous claims that the benefits of cycling far outweigh the
‘disbenefit’ of introducing mandatory helmet laws,� Professor Grzebieta
says. “We are highly sceptical of this claim and suspect poor
assumptions are being made in the scientific methodology.�"

LOL, the claims of reduced cycling numbers because of the introduction
of an MHL never had any scientific methodology to be skeptical of, so
while the professor is correct in being "highly sceptical" and being
suspect of "poor of assumptions," he is incorrect in stating that there
was a scientific methodology behind this claim in the first place.

The last odd propaganda I recall regarding Australia was that following
the introduction of an MHL cycling rates increased at a slower rate than
population increased and the existence of an MHL was cited as the
reason. Of course this is absurd. Cycling rates go up and down for all
sorts of reasons including transit infrastructure, cycling
infrastructure, weather, economic changes, etc.

The real question is whether or not the state should be dictating the
level of risky behavior that is acceptable. In a country with national
health care the state does have an interest. Four U.S. states allow
motorcyclists to not wear helmets if they provide proof of medical
insurance at a certain level. For cycling, while the percentages are
high when looking at injuries and fatalities of helmeted versus
non-helmeted cyclists, the raw numbers show a pretty small difference.
That study looked at 1990 to 2018, and for 29 years the reduction in
fatalities, if the estimate is correct, was about 46 per year.

This is the time that someone chimes in that there are more deaths
caused by obesity due to an MHL encouraging former cyclists to stay at
home watching television and eating junk food, though of course a) there
is absolutely no evidence that an MHL reduces cycling levels, and b)
there is no evidence that if someone did give up cycling that they would
adopt an unhealthy lifestyle.

I often see complaints about the large number of unhelmeted cyclists
using corporate bicycles in my city, home to a very large fruit company,
where I am currently the mayor. One complaint is that all those
unhelmeted riders set a bad example to young people who are required to
wear helmets (one of the fruit company's campuses is adjacent to a
middle school). The optics of explaining that while helmets are a good
idea, requiring them for adults is probably not a good idea, are difficult.

Wow.Â* I've written to the university research integrity unit, as have
numerous others.

Right.