Spot the year

[Tony Raven]

Just for fun I took the graphs of head injury rates amongst cyclists in
Western Australia and New Zealand and removed all traces of dates etc. I've
posted them at http://www.cycling.raven-family.com/Helmet%20Graphs.jpg

Without the hints on the original graphs, can you spot when
the mandatory helmet law was introduced? Answers in ticks
from the left on a postcard without cheating and looking up
the originals.

Thought it would make a good challenge for the Swampmonster
to ask her to point it out if the opportunity ever arose.

Tony

[Just Zis Guy]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:53:38 +0100, "Tony Raven"
<junk@raven-family.com> wrote in message
<2j3tljFsurvrU2@uni-berlin.de>:

>Just for fun I took the graphs of head injury rates amongst
>cyclists in Western Australia and New Zealand and removed
>all traces of dates etc. I've posted them at http://www.cycling.raven- (http://www.cycling.raven-/)
>family.com/Helmet%20Graphs.jpg

Yup. Been there, done that. The really striking thing is
that the Australian weareing rate apparnetly went from
around 30% to around 80% in the three years up to and
including compulsion. Can you see any justification for 90%,
88%, 85% or 69% efficacy in that chart?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk (http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/)

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

[James Annan]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> Yup. Been there, done that. The really striking thing is
> that the Australian weareing rate apparnetly went from
> around 30% to around 80% in the three years up to and
> including compulsion. Can you see any justification for
> 90%, 88%, 85% or 69% efficacy in that chart?

3214%, obviously.

James

[Anonymous Cowar]

On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 21:53:38 +0100, Tony Raven wrote:

> Just for fun I took the graphs of head injury rates
> amongst cyclists in Western Australia and New Zealand and
> removed all traces of dates etc. I've posted them at http://www.cycling.raven- (http://www.cycling.raven-/)
> family.com/Helmet%20Graphs.jpg
>
> Without the hints on the original graphs, can you spot
> when the mandatory helmet law was introduced? Answers in
> ticks from the left on a postcard without cheating and
> looking up the originals.

Here's a spoiler for the australian graph showing the
percentage of crashes that result in a head-injury:

http://agbu.une.edu.au/~drobinso/ozdoc.html

(It looks similar so I assume it's where you got your graph
from, Tony?)

The answer being that helmet compulsion was introduced 2
ticks from the RHS, just before pedestrian head injuries
fall and cyclist head-injuries rise.

AC

[Just Zis Guy]

anonymous coward wrote:

> http://agbu.une.edu.au/~drobinso/ozdoc.html

Obviously those are Cook & Sheikh helmets they are wearing
- the cycle helmets have protected the pedestrians very
well indeed!

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk (http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/)

Victory is ours! Down with Eric the Half A Brain!

[Tony Raven]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> anonymous coward wrote:
>
>> http://agbu.une.edu.au/~drobinso/ozdoc.html
>
> Obviously those are Cook & Sheikh helmets they are wearing
> - the cycle helmets have protected the pedestrians very
> well indeed!

I think, in dedication to their cause, C&S should wear
enough helmets to protect all of us. After all their first
priority is safety and they can be far more certain that
people will be safe that way than trust to the vagaries of
whether individual do or don't wear helmets. ;-0

Tony