Abate Report.

[polarisrider1]

this is from The COC about ABATE and the helmet laws. a good read.



ABATE releases multi-year motorcycle fatality analysis...

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
12 April 2013

Contact: Jim Rhoades (734) 578-6144 or Vince Consiglio (248) 672-0957, www.abateofmichigan.org

ABATE releases multi-year motorcycle fatality analysis, calls for increased education, enforcement and penalties

With one of the longest and hottest riding seasons on record, higher gas prices and a slight increase in motorcycles registrations, 2012 saw a small increase in motorcycle fatalities with over half of those being fatalities being riders not endorsed to operate a motorcycle. The year also saw an increase in motorcycle tourism since the enactment of the rider choice law on April 12, 2012 allowing adults to choose whether or not they want to wear a helmet.

Recently, reports from the Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning (OHSP) analyzing the fatality and fatality rate increases since the helmet choice law went into effect have been presented in an erroneous and biased manner.

"Our primary concern about the accuracy of the data from OHSP is that two single points of data are being compared, when a multi-year comparison will give the clearest and most accurate depiction of motorcycle fatalities," said Vince Piacenti, Statistician, for ABATE Michigan. "The average fatality rate on motorcycles from 2005 - 2011 is 119.7 with a standard deviation (sigma) of 8.4. Standard practice is to add +/- 3 sigma to be statistically significant. This means that the normal year-to-year fatality rate can vary from 95 to 145. Anything within this range is normal variation; the fatalities would have to be above 145 or below 95 to make a statement with statistical confidence. Fatalities in 2012 were 129, which fall within the normal range of variation and proves conclusively that the helmet-law amendment has had no adverse effect on motorcycle safety."

What should concern the Michigan State Police, OSHP and the public is the fact that more than half of the fatalities involved riders NOT endorsed to drive a motorcycle.

"Losing a member of our motorcycle family is devastating. To know that a death could be prevented from motorcycle education and increased enforcement from State Police is unimaginable. Our mission at American Bikers Aiming Toward Education, or ABATE Michigan, as we approach Motorcycle Safety Awareness month in May is motorcycle safety. ABATE encourages the Michigan State Police to be proactive this coming riding season by focusing on car driver/motorcyclists awareness and motorcycle education," added Vince Consiglio, President, ABATE of Michigan. "But we also want to make sure those that ride without an endorsement face stiffer fines and we also support limiting Temporary Instructional Permits (TIP) to two per adult. If you need more than two TIPs, you shouldn't be riding."

Because more than half of Michigan motorcycle fatalities are unlicensed-or unendorsed- motorcyclists, ABATE's goal in teaching motorcycle rider education classes and going into the drivers' education classrooms is to ensure that everyone arrives home safely.

"A motorcyclists has a responsibility to know how to handle his or her bike," Consiglio added. "However, a motorcyclist is much more vulnerable than a passenger vehicle occupant in the event of a crash. The majority of Michigan 2012 fatalities were wearing helmets."

A motorcycle endorsement on a driver's license is required by law to ride on public roads and can be obtained by attending and passing a motorcycle rider education class, which are available statewide for a fee. A list of Secretary of State approved Michigan Motorcycle Safety Program instructors, along with their locations and contact information can be found the Secretary of State's website. ABATE Michigan supports public and private rider education. A current list of ABATE Michigan motorcycle rider education classes locations and times can be found on ABATE Michigan's website.

On April 12, 2012 the requirement for motorcycle helmets was amended to allow adult choice for motorcyclists 21 and older, providing they completed an accredited motorcycle-safety course or had a minimum of 2 years riding experience.

"Our members have reported an increase in motorcycle tourism since the enactment of the rider choice law," said Scott Ellis, Executive Director of the Michigan Licensed Beverage Association, which represents more than 1,800 restaurants, bar, party store, hotel, and casino establishments across the state. "From Monroe to Muskegon to the Keweenaw Peninsula, more out-of-state motorcyclists are stopping, staying and spending money at our restaurants, hotels and attractions."

At least 20 different state license plates were counted on motorcycles at last year's sixth annual Muskegon Bike Time. With the increase in participants, planners are already concerned how many bikes and vendors can fit in the downtown area for this year's event.

ABATE is a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving the overall rights and promoting the safe operating practices of all Michigan motorcyclists.

ABATE Michigan has partnered with public schools and private driving instructors to teach more than 75,000 new drivers about motorcycle awareness, using resources donated by ABATE members.

 

[Firecatguy]

great read.....so safety is more about the rider than helmets signs and what have you??so they are saying you cant make things safer by taking signs down and putting helmets on? hmmmmm a good study not just some guy on a bike who seen someone crash thank god for ABATE glad Ii am a member and will always be they will not be run over by the states and there stupid state payed employees with all their brilliant ideas...

I wounder if you make snowmobile saftey class mandatory would yeld same results a taking signs down?

 

[polarisrider1]

I put this up since I am a COC member. Glad to here ABATE wants to put it's effort into safety and they are against non endorsed riders.

 

[polarisrider1]

More....
Motorcycle helmet law debated
A University of Michigan researcher estimates there would have been 26 fewer deaths and 49 fewer serious injuries in Michigan last year if all riders had worn helmets, as it was previously required under Michigan law.
AP WireLansingApr 10, 2013Last year, Michigan joined 30 other states in allowing adult riders to go without a helmet, a move welcomed by supporters who said it would draw more motorcycle riders to Michigan and increase tourism revenue. But some say that early crash data shows that changing the law was a mistake.

The law, which went into effect April 13 of last year, allows people age 21 and older to ride without helmets if they have been licensed to operate a motorcycle for at least two years or have passed a safety course. Motorcyclists are required to buy additional insurance — at least $20,000 of first party medical benefits coverage — in case they are injured in an accident.

Carol Flannagan, an assistant research scientist at the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute's Biosciences Group and co-manager of the Transportation Data Center, studied motorcycle crash data from April 13 through the end of last year and compared it to data from that same period in previous years.

The Office of Highway Safety Planning's data shows that motorcycle fatalities were up 18 percent last year, from 109 in 2011 to 129 in 2012.

Flannagan found that of those who crashed in that period last year, 74 percent wore helmets, compared to 98 percent in that same period the previous three years.

She also concluded that the fatality rate was nearly three times higher for those who didn't wear helmets last year than those who did. Her study only takes into account riders who crashed, not the entire riding population.

Vince Consiglio, president of Michigan's American Bikers Aiming Toward Education, said since the changes in the helmet law, motorcycle organizations throughout the country have shown increased interest in Michigan.

He said rider skill and experience are more important than helmets in preventing serious injury and death. He has trained more than 250 motorcycle students in the Detroit area this season, he said.

"We believe in tougher licensing, motorcycle safety programs and driver awareness," he said. "Some people talk about safety and some people do stuff about safety. We have made and done things about safety."

Consiglio said Flannagan's study does not take into account last year's mild weather, which likely meant more people were riding. He said ABATE did its own study in September examining data from January through August 2011 and 2012. It determined that fatalities decreased from 89 in 2011 to 85 in 2012, while the number of registrations increased.

Insurance companies and health care officials opposed changing the law last year, arguing it would cause more serious and long-term injuries that could raise medical and insurance rates for all Michigan residents.

Michael Dabbs, president of the Brain Injury Association of Michigan, said the $20,000 insurance coverage that riders are required to buy "would probably buy you part of the day in the ER and intensive care and not much more."

He said treating a serious brain injury can cost more than $1 million throughout a patient's lifetime. They often end up on Medicaid and that cost then gets pushed onto taxpayers, he said.

But he said it will take a few more years to determine the financial impact the law change has had on Michigan's health care industry.

Nancy Cain, spokeswoman for AAA of Michigan said since June, it has had three personal injury claims from motorcyclists not wearing helmets and in each case the cost will exceed $1 million. They cannot compare the number of claims to previous years because this is the first year they are tracking them by helmet or no helmet use.

Consiglio said that if the state wants to be serious about motorcycle safety, it should institute an awareness program warning drivers to look out for motorcyclists.

"Other states have shown reduction in car-motorcycle accidents that have used public service announcements," he said.

But while some say it is too early to tell what impact it has had in Michigan, supporters of helmet wearing point to data from states, like Florida.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, when Florida repealed its motorcycle helmet law for adults in 2000, motorcycle fatalities jumped from 259 in 2000 to 413 in 2009. More riders under the age of 21, who are still required to wear helmets, were also not wearing them because it is difficult to enforce a law when it applies to only one portion of the riding population, the group said.

Flannagan said the Office of Highway Safety Planning intends to do a survey this summer to get a better idea of how many riders are wearing helmets.

"I think the basic story from the crash data is pretty straight forward," she said. "Wearing a helmet reduces the risk and when the helmet law was repealed fewer people wore their helmet."

I think the jury is still out on this, until more data is collected. Please riders don't become data.

 

[Firecatguy]

had to put this up first best quote i read in the entire 2 write ups.....

"What does that mean? It means that those who do crash are rarely saved by their helmets. Their head injuries are less severe, but they die anyway. In accidents where the rider died, it made no difference if the rider wore a helmet or not. That's not exactly a rock solid argument in favor of helmet wearing. "

 

[Firecatguy]

The Twisting of Data in Helmet Safety Studies
Extensive research has been done on the safety of motorcycle helmets. The most famous study of all, the Hurt Study Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures, shows no question that a helmet protects the head, reducing injury severity. The main question that researchers want to answer is whether the likelihood of neck injury is more significant than the likelihood of a helmet saving the riders life.

Helmets Statistically Reduce Head Injuries, But they Don't Save Lives
The same data that was used in the Hurt Report was also used in another paper by Dr. Jonathan P. Goldstein, Ph.D. His analysis showed some facts that the Hurt Report overlooked. Although the data showed that motorcycle riders wearing helmets suffer from fewer head injuries, it failed to elaborate on what that really means. Helmet use had little significance in saving lives given that an accident had occurred.

What does that mean? It means that those who do crash are rarely saved by their helmets. Their head injuries are less severe, but they die anyway. In accidents where the rider died, it made no difference if the rider wore a helmet or not. That's not exactly a rock solid argument in favor of helmet wearing.

The truth is that speeding and alcohol use are the biggest cause of motorcycle crashes. Those taking part in these risky behaviors are less likely to wear helmets in the first place. Helmet wearers tend to have fewer crashes and less severe head injuries because they take fewer risks. This accounts for the reduced number of fatalities among helmet wearers.

Neck Injuries Probably More Likely
In light of the shaky evidence in favor of helmets, we must look at the evidence against them. Although motorcycle helmets protect the head, they tend to do so at the expense of the neck. The Hurt Report concluded that neck injuries were lessened by helmet use. How is it that Dr. Goldstein came to the opposite conclusion? Why does he say that helmets can lead to moderate or even severe neck injuries for the rider wearing the helmet? The reason for the discrepancy is not clear.

Riders report that the weight, shape and composition of the helmet all put undue force on the neck. The physics of the helmet itself can cause neck fractures during a crash. This makes Dr. Goldsteinís findings more in line with the real world experiences of many riders.

Accident Speed is Important
The speed of the helmet striking the ground makes a difference in the occurrence of neck injury. Statistics show that a helmet has to be moving at least 17 mph in order to cause a significant injury. Since most motorcycle accidents happen at just over 20 mph, there is a good chance that the helmet can cause neck damage in most accidents. Thicker helmets can cause more severe neck damage than thinner helmets because they are heavier and bounce back harder than the lighter helmets. Add to that the fact that even the best helmets are only rated up to 13 mph and a serious question becomes apparent. Is a helmet strong enough protection to make up for the increased risk of neck injury?

The Real Danger
Even the Hurt Report shows that aside from risky behaviors like speeding and alcohol use, rider inexperience causes most motorcycle accidents. Riding safety instructors drill it into riders' heads: Motorcycle riding is dangerous. Not only could it kill you, it probably will. Only when riders understand the severity of the danger will they be as alert and defensive as they should in their riding practices.

Dr. John Adams at London University did a study that showed a strange increase of fatalities in states that enacted helmet laws. He theorizes that helmeted riders took bigger risks because the helmets made them feel safer. They believed they were protected by the helmet. Sadly, that would only true in low-speed collisions. Until rider education succeeds in making every motorcyclist terrified of dying on the road, motorcycle deaths will continue to be common.

Helmet Makers Worsen the Risk
In his paper, Public safety legislation and the risk compensation hypothesis: the example of motorcycle helmet legislation, Dr. Adams noted the extensive propaganda surrounding motorcycle helmet sales. Ads encourage riders to feel safer when wearing a helmet. The problem is that people tend to be less cautious when then feel safe, leaving them more vulnerable to danger. Motorcycle riders should never feel safe. Riding is a dangerous activity that requires a consistently high level of attention and apprehension.

Helmet Laws Don't Work
Dr. Adams' paper had some more interesting statistics to offer. The report revealed one anticipated outcome: when states repealed motorcycle helmet laws, fatalities rose. Unexpectedly, however, fatalities rose by an even greater degree in states where helmet laws remained intact. It's not clear why those fatalities rose so much. However, it is clear that a lack of helmet legislation made riding a motorcycle less dangerous.

Motorcycle Insurers Encourage Helmet Use
Insurance companies tend to side with the helmet makers, because those who wear helmets tend to have fewer crashes. Insurance companies see that correlation as a factor in rating policies. Motorcycle insurance companies donít pay for rider injuries anyway, so they put the focus on where it belongs...preventing crashes in the first place.

It's Up to You
Barring a helmet law, helmet use is a personal choice. Statistics show that if you are a responsible rider, you probably are wearing a helmet. Whether that helmet will save your life is anyone's guess. Whether it will instead cause a debilitating neck injury cannot be known. Whether you choose to ride with a helmet or without, be sure to take a safety course first, don't speed and don't drink while riding. Those actions will clearly keep you safer...the helmet? Who knows?

Jessica Bosari writes for CarInsuranceQuotesComparison.com. Her articles focus mainly on safety education and insurance tips for consumers. She believes that informed consumers are likely to get bet insurance rates when they compare car insurance companies.

 

[dothedoo]

this is from The COC about ABATE and the helmet laws. a good read.



ABATE releases multi-year motorcycle fatality analysis...

"The year also saw an increase in motorcycle tourism since the enactment of the rider choice law on April 12, 2012 allowing adults to choose whether or not they want to wear a helmet."

I tend to dismiss the rest of the article after that statement.

"Fatalities in 2012 were 129, which fall within the normal range of variation and proves conclusively that the helmet-law amendment has had no adverse effect on motorcycle safety."

Come on....one year and the evidence is conclusive? Good Lord.

I personally don't care if people wear a helmet or not. As long as they don't try to insult my intelligence by saying it's not safer to wear a helmet.

 

[anonomoose]

The Twisting of Data in Helmet Safety Studies
Extensive research has been done on the safety of motorcycle helmets. The most famous study of all, the Hurt Study Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures, shows no question that a helmet protects the head, reducing injury severity. The main question that researchers want to answer is whether the likelihood of neck injury is more significant than the likelihood of a helmet saving the riders life.

Helmets Statistically Reduce Head Injuries, But they Don't Save Lives
The same data that was used in the Hurt Report was also used in another paper by Dr. Jonathan P. Goldstein, Ph.D. His analysis showed some facts that the Hurt Report overlooked. Although the data showed that motorcycle riders wearing helmets suffer from fewer head injuries, it failed to elaborate on what that really means. Helmet use had little significance in saving lives given that an accident had occurred.

What does that mean? It means that those who do crash are rarely saved by their helmets. Their head injuries are less severe, but they die anyway. In accidents where the rider died, it made no difference if the rider wore a helmet or not. That's not exactly a rock solid argument in favor of helmet wearing.

The truth is that speeding and alcohol use are the biggest cause of motorcycle crashes. Those taking part in these risky behaviors are less likely to wear helmets in the first place. Helmet wearers tend to have fewer crashes and less severe head injuries because they take fewer risks. This accounts for the reduced number of fatalities among helmet wearers.

Neck Injuries Probably More Likely
In light of the shaky evidence in favor of helmets, we must look at the evidence against them. Although motorcycle helmets protect the head, they tend to do so at the expense of the neck. The Hurt Report concluded that neck injuries were lessened by helmet use. How is it that Dr. Goldstein came to the opposite conclusion? Why does he say that helmets can lead to moderate or even severe neck injuries for the rider wearing the helmet? The reason for the discrepancy is not clear.

Riders report that the weight, shape and composition of the helmet all put undue force on the neck. The physics of the helmet itself can cause neck fractures during a crash. This makes Dr. Goldsteinís findings more in line with the real world experiences of many riders.

Accident Speed is Important
The speed of the helmet striking the ground makes a difference in the occurrence of neck injury. Statistics show that a helmet has to be moving at least 17 mph in order to cause a significant injury. Since most motorcycle accidents happen at just over 20 mph, there is a good chance that the helmet can cause neck damage in most accidents. Thicker helmets can cause more severe neck damage than thinner helmets because they are heavier and bounce back harder than the lighter helmets. Add to that the fact that even the best helmets are only rated up to 13 mph and a serious question becomes apparent. Is a helmet strong enough protection to make up for the increased risk of neck injury?

The Real Danger
Even the Hurt Report shows that aside from risky behaviors like speeding and alcohol use, rider inexperience causes most motorcycle accidents. Riding safety instructors drill it into riders' heads: Motorcycle riding is dangerous. Not only could it kill you, it probably will. Only when riders understand the severity of the danger will they be as alert and defensive as they should in their riding practices.

Dr. John Adams at London University did a study that showed a strange increase of fatalities in states that enacted helmet laws. He theorizes that helmeted riders took bigger risks because the helmets made them feel safer. They believed they were protected by the helmet. Sadly, that would only true in low-speed collisions. Until rider education succeeds in making every motorcyclist terrified of dying on the road, motorcycle deaths will continue to be common.

Helmet Makers Worsen the Risk
In his paper, Public safety legislation and the risk compensation hypothesis: the example of motorcycle helmet legislation, Dr. Adams noted the extensive propaganda surrounding motorcycle helmet sales. Ads encourage riders to feel safer when wearing a helmet. The problem is that people tend to be less cautious when then feel safe, leaving them more vulnerable to danger. Motorcycle riders should never feel safe. Riding is a dangerous activity that requires a consistently high level of attention and apprehension.

Helmet Laws Don't Work
Dr. Adams' paper had some more interesting statistics to offer. The report revealed one anticipated outcome: when states repealed motorcycle helmet laws, fatalities rose. Unexpectedly, however, fatalities rose by an even greater degree in states where helmet laws remained intact. It's not clear why those fatalities rose so much. However, it is clear that a lack of helmet legislation made riding a motorcycle less dangerous.

Motorcycle Insurers Encourage Helmet Use
Insurance companies tend to side with the helmet makers, because those who wear helmets tend to have fewer crashes. Insurance companies see that correlation as a factor in rating policies. Motorcycle insurance companies donít pay for rider injuries anyway, so they put the focus on where it belongs...preventing crashes in the first place.

It's Up to You
Barring a helmet law, helmet use is a personal choice. Statistics show that if you are a responsible rider, you probably are wearing a helmet. Whether that helmet will save your life is anyone's guess. Whether it will instead cause a debilitating neck injury cannot be known. Whether you choose to ride with a helmet or without, be sure to take a safety course first, don't speed and don't drink while riding. Those actions will clearly keep you safer...the helmet? Who knows?

Jessica Bosari writes for CarInsuranceQuotesComparison.com. Her articles focus mainly on safety education and insurance tips for consumers. She believes that informed consumers are likely to get bet insurance rates when they compare car insurance companies.

It has been awhile since I have read such a pile of garbage as quoted above. No offense intended here but taking on all the variables involved in any SINGLE motorcycle accident never mind all of the accidents that can involve hitting deer to bouncing down a trail and hitting a tree head on is about as useful as trying to find fish poop in a swimming pool.

Helmets are heavy and naturally if you hit something a neck injury is likely but how do you take away the fact that neck injuries aside the guy didn't become brain dead because the helmet saved his cranium from serious damage? If he hit a concrete barrior going 70 means he is toast no matter a helmet or not. A truck that turns in front of a biker who is doing 45 means the biker dies...and it won't matter whether he has a helmet on or not. It is the nature of the beast...you ride, you take that chance every time you strap on the helmet or not...and sometimes if you are in the wrong place at the right time, you better have had your affairs in order...your going to meet your maker.

Anyone with half a brain knows that helmets will save lives...period. Still there are those out there that say it is their choice and like smoking cigs....it is your choice and you should be able to make it PROVIDED that you don't cost ME and others who are not willing to throw caution to the wind in the way of medical insurance and trivial lawsuits that would not have otherwise happened.

Michigan is what you call an Insurance state with huge and powerful lobbies and influences on the legislature. Frankly I am surprised that the legislature passed the no helmet law because of this influence. But it did and probably pressure from other neighboring states and the bar and alcohol lobbies pushed it through... Still there is no doubt that those who chose not to wear will cost the state money...but will it be off-set by the additional tourist money brought into the state by clubs and events that sponsor them and encourage spending of every sort....time will tell on that score.

As for the push to create a department to certify an endorsement to ride is nothing more than bureaucratic establishment of schools and associated fees to quantify their existences. How can you realistically teach AFFECTIVELY how to put a bike down and ride it at 50 mph? Does anyone who is not endorsed really not understand that blowing a stop sign can kill you? If you have a driver's license, you already know that. But hey....let's establish a whole course complete with dubious questions YOU MUST answer the way THEY want you to answer it regardless of what is correct a answer and what is not....and then we can say "...see we did what we needed to to qualify someone to ride a bike..." never mind whether it has any impact on safety, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or other factors such as speed and alcohol consumed to impair.

But there are always those who say "well we got to do something...don't we?" And those folks carry the day. So we have driving school...which btw, I took, found it to be a joke and passed easily because I already knew how to ride a bike. I passed the test....because I figured out what answers the proctors wanted over the others, and I wear a helmet...not because it was or wasn't the law, but because in my own book I can't have too much protection to save my own bacon if I end up with the black side up.

There will always be those who try to analyze the crap out of something as arbitrary as tea leaves...but as someone once said so eloquently....garbage in and garbage out. All the above findings fall directly into that category and therefore have about as much value as a bent up straw on the floor at Wendy's.

 

[Firecatguy]

I was just pointing out you can scew the results of any study to read the way you want it to........
ya I am sick of paying for everyone who drives there car recklessly then I have to pay for their mistakes!!!I think we should mandate helmets in cars the statistics show that car crash can kill you.....and then we would have to pay....sick of paying for prisoners to have good heath care sick of paying for low life's to sit at home and not work sick of paying the heathcare bill for same deadbeats who go and have kid after kid.....so if your going to take a stand at mc and helmets please lets make this a fair playing field and just cut everyone off.....

I pay ins on my bike and if I get run down by a car I will sue them and there ins if that some how effects you sorry bud but that's how it goes.....if your talking about uninsured riders well that is illegal and god knows there no one out there that breaks the law.......