Risk compensation is behaving differently because you're wearing safety gear.
How can you possibly know that's not going on?
I'm no scientist but above say 10-12 mph, a helmet is purely cosmetic. If you slipped on ice on the way to the bus stop and fell on your head then I'm sure a helmet would provide viable protection. Hit a tree at 22mph on a trail then it's no better than a lottery.
If you're not a scientist, why make a scientific statement?
[i]How can you possibly know that's not going on?[/i]
Look where mandatory safety measures have been introduced and see whether they have impacted KSi's. If they do then people are not risk compensating.
A good way is looking at behaviours over time.
Say, seat belts. You could argue that once seat belts were made mandatory, people would automatically risk compensate and drive worse but there's no evidence to suggest that's happened. In fact the opposite is more evident. People have become safer drivers because they're more risk aware by the very introduction of the law.
Obviously this is all my opinion. I suspect there's no real evidence one way or the other. I know that I don't ride/ski any different whether I wear a helmet or not. I expect Schumaker is a very risk aware individual and doesn't change his behaviour either (although I'll accept his risk tolerance is probably a lot higher than mine).
although the report referenced here suggests people are risk compensating.
[url] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/sports/on-slopes-rise-in-helmet-use-but-no-decline-in-brain-injuries.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0 [/url]
I'm no scientist but above say 10-12 mph, a helmet is purely cosmetic. If you slipped on ice on the way to the bus stop and fell on your head then I'm sure a helmet would provide viable protection. Hit a tree at 22mph on a trail then it's no better than a lottery.
Well since the 11mph impact is the design fall speed helmets are tests at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EN_1078
and a 22mph crash has 4 times the energy to cope with how good can a helmet be?
As for risk compensation the classic study is the Munich Taxi Driver Study.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/road_safetyrisk_compensation/#cite_note-0
Say, seat belts. You could argue that once seat belts were made mandatory, people would automatically risk compensate and drive worse but there's no evidence to suggest that's happened. In fact the opposite is more evident. People have become safer drivers because they're more risk aware by the very introduction of the law.
The UK 1983 seatbelt law didn't save any lives overall. Drivers lives saved cancelled by more cyclists and pedestrians killed.
"Figure 1, all road accident deaths (excluding motor cyclists), shows that a well-established downward trend was interrupted (by the seat belt law?) and replaced by a slightly rising plateau. After the seat belt law (arrow) total deaths did not fall below the 1983 level until 1991."
http://www.john-adams.co.uk/2009/11/05/seat-belts-another-look-at-the-data/
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/a-different-helmet-debate
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/wiggo-on-helmets
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/how-do-you-deal-with-folk-not-wearing-a-helmet
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/bike-helmet-for-kids
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-helmet-debate-rumbles-on-in-the-mainstream-media
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/would-you-helmet-nazi-content#post-3139927
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/thank-god-for-helmets#post-3071801
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/so-i-decided-to-write-off-my-helmet-today#post-3015561
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/will-the-uk-every-be-like-this#post-3001646
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/no-helmet#post-2983986
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/helmets-2#post-2941835
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/this-really-makes-you-want-to-wear-a-lid#post-2919841
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/good-or-bad-advert#post-2894537
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/james-cracknell-wear-a-helmet-video#post-2783611
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/bmxers-idiots#post-2758996
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/helmet-compulsion-again
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/wear-a-helmet-kids#post-2705179
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/psa-helmet-debate-on-radio-2-now#post-2584202
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/if-helmets-were-to-be-made-compulsory#post-2573922
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/helmet-on-your-child-always#post-2482018
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/some-very-sad-news#post-2476001
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-great-helmet-debate#post-2432920
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/compulsory-helmet-law-in-ni#post-2236497
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/how-smug-will-tj-be
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/helmets-possibly-the-last-word
f you're not a scientist, why make a scientific statement?
How cynical-al!
A whole new debate - what constitutes a scientific statement....?
You have to love the knee jerkers. Louis Hamilton in now "arrogant" and "insensitive" because he was XC skiing without a helmet and posted pictures of himself. The world is going mad!!!!
although the report referenced here suggests people are risk compensating.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/sports/on-slopes-rise-in-helmet-use-but-no-decline-in-brain-injuries.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
I read it more as equipment is getting better, so people can ski or board way outside their limits. This in turn is coupled with the energy drink culture. Hence more head injuries. It's not just helmets.
It does also say that head injuries that don't involve bringing your brain to a sudden decelerative stop have declined due to helmet use.
I have also read an article this morning that the people out skiing with MS have said it was an innocuous fall. He wasn't doing anything crazy, he had stopped to help someone get up, skied off, and got tripped up in such a way that he cartwheeled on to his head.


