Portland Bike Forums (by BikePortland.org)

Go Back   Portland Bike Forums (by BikePortland.org) > General Discussion > General Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-07-2008, 01:41 AM
Krampus Krampus is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 100
Post Australia, and Madatory Helmet use...

Australia also found out that enacting mandatory helmet laws decreased ridership.

Last edited by K'Tesh; 09-07-2008 at 11:44 AM. Reason: took out the icon as original didn't have on (as far as I can tell).
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 10:46 AM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755

Note: Krampus's statement above was prompted by the following statement in the OP, K'tesh's post on this thread: KPTV and safety in numbers...

"Apparently Australia found that as the number of bike riders increases the number of bike/car crashes decreases... So, lets welcome all the Newbies, and lead by example."

Krampus might choose to speak for himself on this point, but my impression about why he made the above statement in response to the original post to the thread above, was to question the validity of findings that Australia has made related to bicycle use given the extraordinary conclusions that arose from Australia's having enacted mandatory helmet laws. That's why I posted links and comments (which you now may read below) on the above thread, to info and websites that offer information about how Australia has come up with findings in the past.

Here's a question I think is worth considering: How did Australia come to find that imposing mandatory bike helmet use resulted in decreased ridership? I think considering this is important, because it seems that invariably when people advise others to wear bike helmets when biking, the Australia findings are eventually cited as proof by people opposing helmet use, that laws requiring their use discourage travel by bike. This in turn leads to the much broader claim by helmet opponents that bike helmets offer insignificant protection to those wearing them.

Here's a link to a page that concludes mandatory helmet laws decrease ridership, from a helmet effectiveness skeptics website: 'Changes in cycle us in Australia' from helmet effectiveness skeptics website

The helmet effectiveness skeptics website is www.cyclehelmets.org, also, calling themselves the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation

They're contrasted with the bicycle helmet use advocate website, helmets.org:

www.helmets.org, also calling themselves Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute

Helmets.org is a non-profit, conducts reviews and tests of new bike helmets each year. Helmets.org includes the link for the skeptic website on their researcher's resource page:

www.helmets.org researchers resource page/research.htm

Studies and statistics sometimes..maybe often...present a challenge for me as I try to understand and judge them in terms of their quality, accuracy, fairness and validity as applied to the area of study they're directed to. The page on cyclehelmets.org's website, Changes in cycle use in Australia has a lot of statistics and draws some very definite conclusions about whether imposition of mandatory helmet use in Australia reduced cycle use there. I haven't checked them out, but the writers of that page have would seem to have drawn from the results of numerous researcher's works. Footnotes for those works, some with direct links to the works are included on the page.

Are those studies good? Do they accurately detect a cause and effect relationship that occurs as people are required to wear a bike helmet when riding a bike? Is it realistic to generally presume on the basis of those studies, for any given location or setting, that if people are required to wear a bike helmet while riding a bike, people will decide to ride bikes less?

To the first two questions, I couldn't say. Regarding the last question, I'd say 'no'. I think there's interesting ideas that could be drawn from the findings on the 'Changes in cycle use' page. It's interesting to think about how Australia seems to have turned out to be the location from where such opposition to bike helmets has risen. I haven't yet read why Australia felt it needed to impose bike helmet use. Maybe looking back, if they'd implemented that requirement a little differently, the reaction to it from people riding bikes would have been more favorable.

Last edited by wsbob; 09-07-2008 at 12:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2008, 11:29 AM
K'Tesh's Avatar
K'Tesh K'Tesh is offline
Super Moderator
Site Admin
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Subject To Change
Posts: 2,742
Smile Moved posts to a new thread...

Originally posted to the Safety in Numbers post, this was unrelated to the topic, so I moved them.

Rubberside Down!
Riding my bike is MY pursuit of Happiness!!!
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:21 AM.

A production of Pedaltown Media Inc. / BikePortland.org
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.