Michigan Motorcycle Helmet Repeal Review: Surprising Results for Naysayers

[XLFD]

When you look at the headline:  "Statistics: Washtenaw County motorcyclists without helmets more likely to be injured" on AnnArbor.com or the similar headlines from Mlive stories that ran in concert at the beginning of the month, you may presume without reading further that helmetless riders are getting into more injuries than their cranially-shelled counterparts.  You may think that you don't need statistics to verify such an obvious fact.  But let's read further into this story, and keep an open mind.

"MLive and AnnArbor.com examined state police data for nearly 3,000 motorcycle crashes - with and without helmets - in the six months after Michigan's helmet law was repealed, April 13 to Oct. 13.

Since Gov. Rick Snyder and lawmakers changed the state’s 35-year-old law six months ago, there have been at least 700 motorcyclists without helmets involved in accidents."

3000 accidents with at least 700 helmetess riders involved.  Do the math, that's as little as 23.3% of the crashes involved a helmetless head.  Yet, the amount of riders that were forecast to go helmetless this year (statistics gotten from other states that have repealed helmet laws) was 42%.  This was discussed here in June.

Back then the amount of crashes were a bit smaller (only 654) and those involving riders without helmets was 20%, and it seemed likely that more riders would be going without during the summer, so the percentage was expected to grow.  It did, but it still says 42% of the riders presumed to be unsafe, were getting involved with 23.3% of the accidents.  It can then be said that 58% of the motorcyclists who wore helmets  got involved with over 76% of the accidents.  That variance is statistically significant, in both cases.

It makes a strong argument that wearing helmets actually case accidents, even if they do protect you from head injuries better when you get into them.   

"In Washtenaw County, there were three reported motorcycle fatalities from April 13, 2011 to Oct. 13, 2011 according to the records. All were wearing helmets. In that same period in 2012, there were two fatalities, neither wearing helmets. One occurred Aug. 3 on Pontiac Trail in Salem Township. It involved a 40-year-old Northville man who died when a car slammed into his broken-down motorcycle as he sat on it in the roadway.

The other was Scott Pohl..."

One should not draw any conclusions from such a small sample, but consider that the two helmetless fatalities this year were hit by vehicles driving into them.  Scott Pohl had a teen driver turn in front of him, and his noggin went through his windshield and into the side of her vehicle.  The parents think a helmet may have saved him, but no helmet is rated for hitting a car at 55 mph and protecting its contents.  Motorcycle helmet standards use impacts at speeds between 9–16 mph.  Helmets would have saved neither.

In 2011, 11 riders wearing helmets were reported as suffering "incapacitating injuries;" in 2012, that number was 19. Eight of the 19 riders -- or 42 percent -- in the accidents were not wearing helmets.

In both 2011 and 2012, 11 helmeted riders suffered grievously; the percentage of those injuries in 2012 involving helmetless riders equalled the percentage of helmetless riders (42%).  This small sample illustrates no difference between the rates of 'bad injuries' between the two riders.

From April 13 to Oct. 13 2012, there were 105 motorcycle accidents in Washtenaw County where it was indicated in the report whether a helmet was worn or not. Out of that 105, there were 77 accidents where riders rode with helmets and 28 where riders went helmetless. Fourteen percent of riders with helmets suffered "incapacitating injuries." The number was 28 percent for helmetless riders.

Sifting through this: 73.3% of the accidents in that county had helmeted riders, 26.7% without, close to State average already noted.  But still statistically different than what one might expect, when only 58% ride with a helmet.

Statewide, cyclists without helmets were 43 percent more likely to suffer “incapacitating” injuries. Of more than 100 deaths, they were three times more likely to be killed, according to MLive.

When helmeted riders are three times more likely to crash, and three times less likely to die in a crash, the deaths for each are roughly the same.  There was one more helmeted rider dying this year than non-helmeted riders.  Incapacitating injuries for helmeted riders eclipsed the number of incapacitating injuries for helmet-free riders, even when you factor off their 58% majority.  Interesting.

Helmetless operators were at fault 50 percent of the time, compared with 41 percent for those with helmets across the state. They also were more likely to have been drinking, one in seven compared with one in 17 with helmets.

These two statistics primarily show differences in character between the two rider types.  Fault is sometimes subjectively placed, and the numbers are statistically close, so I don't see any conclusion there.  The second shows a significant point.  If you factor out alcohol influenced crashes, helmeted riders account for 78% of the crashes.  Wow.

But let's not forget, this is one year's statistics, albeit the first year in quite a while that the public has had a choice to ride without a helmet.  One may believe the amount of miles driven by riders increased significantly, that many new inexperienced riders without helmets were on the road... and the associated threatened spike of deaths did not happen, the injury fatalty numbers were less than 2010's numbers.

The unhelmeted drivers, even though they are looked at as risk takers, must be doing things wrong.  Yet, respected Ann Arbor.com and Mlive publish stories that only show the pro-helmet side of he statistics.

But the statistics shows that for every pair of sober riders without a helmet that gets into a crash, there are seven sober helmeted riders that crash.  What conclusions can you draw from that?!

Here's a link to check out all of the accidents and percentages broken down for use of a helmet or not

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/12/uneasy_riders_search_ho...

[XLFD]

Data analysis can be easily skewed by the analyzers, as can be seen by Mlive's analysis of three western Michigan counties:

 

MLive pored over crash data for Kent, Ottawa and Allegan counties, and concluded motorcyclists who do not wear helmets suffer incapacitating injury at a markedly higher rate than helmeted riders.  Across the three-county area, 352 crashes involving nearly 380 riders, drivers and passengers alike, were reported by police agencies between April 13 and Oct. 13 this year.  Among MLive’s findings are unhelmeted motorcyclists suffered injury at higher rates, both incapacitating and otherwise, and had higher death rates. Unhelmeted motorcyclists also were more likely to be at-fault in a crash than those who wore helmets.

BUT HERE"S THE DATA:  Across the three counties, 267 motorcyclists involved in crashes wore helmets, and 85 did not, according to the state police data. 

Of those, 20 percent of unhelmeted riders suffered incapacitating injury, versus 16 percent of helmeted riders. Thirty-seven percent of helmeted riders sustained non-incapacitating injuries, over 34 percent of helmeted riders.

What’s more, 4 percent of unhelmeted riders died of their injuries. Two percent of helmeted riders died, the data show.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2012/12/motorcycle...

THUS, in the three county area, 43 (267 X .16) helmeted riders suffered incapacitating injuries, while only 17 (85 X .2)helmetless riders suffered such, but Mlive thinks the rates for incapacitated injuries is at a markedly higher rate than helmeted riders.  This rate evens out when the amount of helmeted riders is presumed to be 72%, well above the amount expected to be out there (58%).  From the data one can only conclude Mlive's analysis is fallacious. 

Fatality-wise, 3 of the 85 helmet-free riders died, whereas 5 of 267 helmeted riders died.  For this rate to even out we must presume 62.5% of riders wore helmets.   Mlive's conclusion again falls short of rigor, and the facts of the matter. 

[easymoney]

 

As a long time rider, 1961, I have lost friends,neighbors and aquaitences in biking accidents, only one was the fault of the rider(drunk). My own son was hit by a car and spent a month in the hospital, mesh for a stomache, rods down his leg and not sure how many pins, first thing out of his mouth after coming out of a coma," who's going to lend me the money to fix my bike." He's still riding today, as am I .( the accident was ten years ago)

I live in a state wear there is no helmet law and I choose no to wear one, I've always felt it should be a matter of choice.

Lets face it folks, if your in a wreck on a two-wheeler at any rate of speed, your going to get hurt, as anyone who rides know, its not IF you go down, but WHEN.

[AQUAMAN]

The national ABATE organization has some very nice bumper stickers/lawn signs that tell the tale more than not to me: Watch Out for Motorcycles! I think most people aren't looking for them as necessary, and most if not all never even rode a bike. Since I used to like riding with my hair in the breeze, but now haven't much hair left, I remain with the helmet for warmth, and of course, safety, not to mention the bugs that hit the noggin. Let's see that bike you ride Easy. Thanks. P.S. Here's my three in Michigan.

[XLFD]

I rarely ride bikes without a biological motor, but I can commiserate with individual motorcyclists on their headgear choices, as I generally wear a bike helmet only during cooler weather (under 70 degrees) for what I consider safety purposes, because of the sweat factor.  The helmet makes one sweat more and concentrates the runoff down into the eyes.  I also note that your general motorcycle helmet does restrict vision and hearing, unlike the bicycle version, so I can understand why more accidents seem to occur for helmeted riders. 

A good study to read, at least the abridged version, that utilizes NHTSA data to  evaluate the effectiveness of motorcycle helmets in accident situations. A latent variable model is developed and estimated. It is concluded that (1) motorcycle helmets have no statistically significant effect on the probability of fatality; (2) helmets reduce the severity of head injuries; and (3) past a critical impact speed [13 MPH], helmets increase the severity of neck injuries. Further analysis establishes the qualitative and quantitative nature of the head-neck injury trade-off.

[XLFD]

The statistics have not been finalized for the last month of 2012, but so far the stats say:  2010: 120 motorcycle fatalities, 2011: 110 motorcycle fatalities, and 2012:  101 motorcycle fatalities.  It looks like the alarmists telling us that minimally 140 deaths would occur, and that the majority of deaths would be by those without helmets were wrong on both counts.  Will they admit it?  I haven't seen anything yet put out by these fatalists that haven't skewed the facts.