Maelochs

Insurance companies.

[QUOTE=avole;20785460] Anyway, taking it from the top, do you not understand cyclists use the road, as do cars, and pedestrians the pavements? [/quote** No, Captain Pomposity, i didn't know that. Really. Seriously, can you not debate a topic without trying to demean the people who don't agree with you? Maybe reading is Fun-damental never made it to your school? (See, you don't like it when people demean you ... so think about it next time.) I never suggested helmets lessen pedestrian deaths. What i said was that the people who did the study noted that both cycling and pedestrian deaths went down .... and they could not account for the drop in pedestrian deaths, which means they didn't understand some parts of the changing mechanics of the situation ... perhaps deaths of No-Car Road Users dropped because drivers started being more ware of non-car-road users? I have seen that in a lot of places I have lived. But, hey, feel free to argue against whatever, whether I said it or someone else or no one.

Utter lack of reading comprehension for the total loss. What I said was that possibly, because of the news coverage in Australia about the changes in bicycle law and the encouragement to have cyclists wear helmets in compliance with the law, more drivers thought more about cyclists. Why you would think drivers could see cyclists better because the cyclists were wearing helmets ... yeah,. Whatever. if anyone had said that, it would have been a ridiculous thing to say.
Whose "beloved driver?" Had to resort to ad hominem again because you ran out of logic?

Try to understand this: In the U.S. drunk driving used to be widely accepted. over a span of a few decades, ad campaigns ot change that attitude and redefine drunk driving as a selfish, dangerous, and socially unacceptable behavior were very effective. Law enforcement jumped on board, and drunk driving (and the tolerance thereof) went Way down.

By the same mechanic----"Share the Road" ad campaigns have drastically altered the average drivers's view of cyclists (based on the reactions I get from drivers now versus several decades ago when such campaigns started. More drivers accept cyclists as legitimate road users and fewer throw things, swerve, or shout threats. See the correspondence? Public ad campaigns affected both drunk driving and cycling safety? Clear now?

Because i started riding in the 1960s and have seen a dramatic increase in people biking over the years.. Are you prepared to state that bicycle use has Not increased in Australia since 1070? Are you prepared to back that up with research data? Otherwise, you are just bickering, not actually debating.

As for the rest .... I know that data has been posted here several times showing that a large percentage of the under 1000 people killed annually on bikes in the U.S. were either riding ninja, salmoning, or drunk. So in those cases, it is unlikely they were wearing helmets. How many such deaths occur in Australia? How many of those were wearing helmets? In those cases ... simply sing lights, following the laws, and not riding drunk would likely prevent any death or injury. Helmets are not so much a factor as smart operating.

As for "estimate," again, you seem to need to insult me, and cannot simply discuss this like an adult. Yes, I know what ;'estimate" means. In this case, these people built a mathematical model based on deaths during a 20-year period, invented a method for calculating how many riders were actually riding then, invented another method to estimate how many riders are riding now, and estimated, based on their made-up growth rate (it is notoriously hard to track miles ridden, conditions, and number of riders---if you are honest you will admit this) and basically Invented a number, based on vague statistics, which Within Their Model (not in reality) corresponded to a growth in cycling fatalities. They then assumed that all reductions in deaths were due helmets .... not bike lanes, not an increase in awareness of cyclists, not hi-vis clothes and the ready availability of bike lights (I am not sure if people who have not been riding for decades understand how amazing our lighting options are now, versus even 30 years ago--I can buy more candlepower today than ever before and for far, far less money, i don't need a huge battery or a heavy, bulky, expensive generator, I can get ten to fifty times the brightness out of a tail light and because of improved battery tech can have really bright lights All the time---I am Tremendously more visible (and thus less likely to get hit) just because I can put so much light on my bike so cheaply,) not "share-the-road" campaigns ..... they decided that helmets were the sole significant difference.

Yeah, I understand scientific studies pretty well.

Say ... do you understand that people can disagree and not have to ridicule each other? How about if you do, in your next post you try that?