Australian debunking of helmet law critiques
Summary: Two Australian studies have concluded that the arguments advanced against Australia's helmet laws are bogus.
The first study is from the Medical Journal of Australia, and is titled "No strong evidence bicycle helmet legislation deters cycling" The authors are listed as Olivier J, Boufous S, Grzebieta RH. The issue is Med. J. Aust. 2016; 205(2): 54-55. The abstract says:
The article says critics of helmet laws contend that a focus on the laws distracts people from the more important concerns about cycling safety and infrastructure improvements. Opponents of helmet laws argue that they impede any increase in cycling. These arguments must be evaluated carefully.
The second article has an inflammatory title: Anti-helmet arguments: lies, damned lies and flawed statistics. It appeared in the Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety - Volume 25 No.4, 2014.
The abstract says that some have portrayed the Australian and New Zealand laws requiring helmets as a failure. "Many of these criticisms claim helmets are ineffective, helmet laws deter cycling, helmet wearing increases the risk of an accident, no evidence helmet laws reduce head injuries at a population level, and helmet laws result in a net health reduction." The study reviewed the data and critiques and showed that they are "statistically flawed." Most of the evidence presented "appears overstated, misleading or invalid."
The same author has a deck of lecture slides available titled Statistical Errors in Anti-Helmet Arguments.
Back to the top
Back to the Home Page