Lest anyone think Peter is a lone voice...

Butch wrote:
Hi Peter, Sorry for the delay in response but the weather is so great
I have been out riding. I am sorry if I upset you so much, I suspect
you must be quite young to be so naive. You don't seem to get the
point that when a helmet works the accident is not major and is not
reported.

Which should mean, if they work, that reported injury rates go down as
more people wear them. Whereas what we find is that the trend for
cyclists is the same as for pedestrians regardless of changes in
cyclists' helmet-wearing rate.

For your information in our country Health care is so
expensive that most people seldom go to ER.

Luckily Peter is quoting UK stats, where people go to Casualty (ER)
for any injury they haven't got a plaster to fit. Among other things,
these stats show walking and cycling to be about equally hazardous,
and to vary the same way over time - despite cycle helmet wearing
rates increasing from 0 to about half of cyclists in the last 20 years.

One of the reasons people perceive cycling to be dangerous is the
relentless propaganda saying it is, from those promoting helmets.

Wear a helmet, if you wish, to prevent those small injuries you're not
going to go to the ER for. But forget about it saving your life.

Colin McKenzie

--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that
it leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!