So this bit of research deserves some interpretation as this is what completes research and leads to more research.
- First, this is about deaths only and cannot be extrapolated to debilitating brain injuries in those who live following helmeted and unhelmeted injuries.
- deaths were usually accompanied by other trauma in the helmeted and unhelmeted deaths, so we dont know alot of important things from this. For example, what is the breakdown of other bodily trauma that followed an initial strike to the head that caused the catasrophic accidents.
- ONLY HALF OF THE DEATHS WERE WEARING HELMETS. THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT HALF OF THE CRASHES OR EVEN HALF OF THE HEAD INJURIES. AND THIS IS NOT COMMENTARY ON BRAIN INJURY HELMETED OR UNHELMETED BUT ONLY ON THOSE CRASHES WHICH RESUTED IN DEATH.
How many ways can this be said?
- There is no breakout as to type of activity, park, trees, speed, blue runs, blacks, cliffs,race,age, conditions like fog, rain. All of these things are important due to the relatively small n over the 20 yr data collection.
- There is no breakout for type of helmet.
- ....."no observable effect on the incident of death...." This specifically means that deaths were not effected by either condition of wearing or not wearing helmets even though the incidence of wearing helmets rose by 4-5%. It also does not state where the 4-5% number came from. This would be something that any prudent researcher would be careful to site.
- Half of the deaths were wearing helmets and half were not. How many accidents to the head were saved by a helmet? This not not known from this summary of research.
- This is a summary of research and direct research.
Facts are facts and this is not deserving of a Wiki as the form it is written in does ot meet research standards for clarity. It is simply a list of statements made by other researchers. Valuable but not conclusive especially on the level of brain injury to those that live.