Posts by Kevin McCready
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ok, so I've checked the de Jong abstract. It proposes a model (hmm that could end badly) that says helmet laws reduce cycling numbers and therefore people, on a population level, don't get exercise and die earlier. Correct me if I'm wrong but this is childish and should not have been published. Wouldn't it fail a First Year stats assignment? Where's the evidence that a shortfall in cycling wasn't taken up by more walking, more swimming, more gym, more whatever?
-
Oh, and for access to academic papers you can't go past the free Scihub =
http://sci-hub.cc/ -
I'll get to the de Jong study ASAP. Meanwhile, be wary of Cochrane =
https://kmccready.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/cochrane-collaboration-failure/ -
Moz you seem to be misquoting the wikipedia article. It states: "Research on the helmet law's effects in New Zealand has produced mixed outcomes." Bart and Moz my mind is still open on the issue and I'm happy to read the one study you claim clinches your case. Which study do you think I should read?
-
Bart, on the one hand you rightly point out that any link between helmet laws and cycling participation is correlation only, then you say we shouldn't have helmet laws deterring people. You can't have it both ways.
In my experience the anti-helmet brigade (not necessarily you) are like climate change deniers - leaping on any slight "evidence" and spinning the story to push their barrow. I'm particularly dubious of the appalling methodology of tickbox surveys asking if compulsory helmets deter you from riding.
The Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario completed a cycling death review for the period 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2010. "Those cyclists whose cause of death included a head injury were three times less likely to be wearing a helmet" And 75% of cycling deaths are caused by head injuries.
As someone said on another forum - It will be interesting to see whether alleged helmet aversion disappears in the next generation, with children having brought up to consider them “normal”.
-
Bart, I followed the links re helmet laws. I remain unconvinced and gladly wear my helmet. Have you got a link that proves your stance?
-
Your friend for getting academic papers is
http://sci-hub.cc/I have to confess I haven't worried too much about car doors since I was 14 (I'm now 57). I ride to take up my lane and block other traffic when I need to. It's in the road code: “it is acceptable to move further out into the path of traffic to prevent other users from passing you.” Most drivers these days are accepting of my riding style (as opposed to 5 years ago). Change is coming!!
-
The response to your St Petersberg jibe may not prove the bot is a real person. AI is getting better and even capable of appearing to pass the Turing Test.
-
What has stunned me in the last few days is the number of people who drink the Scarcity Myth koolaid. We're a wealthy society merely in need of a decent tax system.
-
Would be nice if the Green/Labour coalition could agree on preferential counting in electorate seats. This would be a simple interim step for electoral reform until we get proportional representation in electoral seats. It would eliminate strategic voting and be a plus for NZ democracy.
https://kmccready.wordpress.com/2015/03/29/preferential-counting-in-nz-electorate-seats/
