• @eyebrows comments on http://www.cyclehelmets.org deserve comment:

    Outdated (last update was 2012) and substantially biased.

    as a self funded project it was very difficult to sustain. It's purpose is to examine the validity of research whose authors or promoters claimed a proof of the need for helmet legislation. That limited scope could be described as bias but it never claimed to have the resources to provide the definitive answers.

    I think one of the greatest success of http://www.cyclehelmets.org was helping have the first version (2000) of the Cochrane helmet review removed. The revised version no longer had the false reprensentation of opposing academic views. They also cut the introduction, leaving out the bit that explained that none of the studies included met the basic requirements for a Cochrane study at that time because none of them were based on blind or double blind research.

About

Avatar for Charlie_L @Charlie_L started