Quote:
|
The number of cyclists observed per day dropped from nearly 90 in 1995/96 to 34 in 1997 and 52 in 1998/99.
|
With such a low sample size and that much variation between years, I wouldn't consider those findings to be statistically significant and certainly wouldn't draw any conclusions from them. A decline in ridership of nearly 66% between 1996 and 1997 but then a 50% increase in ridership the following year? Yeah, that's almost certainly a statistical aberration.
Quote:
|
Anecdotally, people form Vancouver discuss lower cycling use since BC's implementation of the law. The helmet law is also a major reason why the bike share program has been delayed in Vancouver. Australia's helmet law is also believed to be a major reason for the failure of it's nations bike share programs compared to those found in Europe.
|
Even if we grant that helmet laws do, in fact, reduce the number of cyclists (which is a dubious claim at best given we've both provided conflicting data), why would that be? Are people who buy cycles that cost several hundred dollars too cheap to spend $20-30 on a helmet? Or do they think it's "uncool" to wear a helmet, so they choose not to ride?