Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

General discussion of any issues that vaguely or not so vaguely relate to stuff about things that concern riding.

Moderator: BAM Moderators

Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby DucJohn » Tue Feb 07, 2012 12:38 pm

So what does the "team" think of the recent IAM press release on bike casualties and the responses? Is this influenced by an IAM policy of lobying the government to introduce mandatory post test training as suggested by one respondents?
John Cooper
User avatar
DucJohn
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:54 pm
Location: Eastville, Bristol

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby tfdodo » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:55 pm

well if you expand/page down to the last comment, you get
And now let's read what they ACTUALLY said

The government needs to ensure that education campaigns targeting motorcycling continue and funding is made available for local initiatives. The police and councils must continue to work together to improve high risk routes, encourage post test training and target bad riding behaviour through innovative enforcement techniques.


which is - predictably - more balanced and less sensationalist than 'the motorcycling equivalent of the Daily mail' .

Having read the latest slew of IAM press releases I am left scratching my head a bit about where they're coming from, especially apparently concluding that a Borough of Ealing study of bikes in bus lanes which had no bike-cycle collisions proves how hazardous it can be ? but not enough to justify the frothy-mouthed ranting from [NDA: delete: the BMF] MCN. Plus - a few of the MCN-site comments just go to show why BAM need to go on doing what we're doing, there are some really unhelpful IAM perceptions out there .
Although , ironically, TVAM [for it is undoubtedly they] get criticised for 'going fast' as much as the IAM in generally does for 'going slow' :roll: )
Rubber side down,
Nick A (SO-Team B)

"In a perfect world the future wouldn't make a dent..."

Balance Safety and Joy
User avatar
tfdodo
 
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: Brizzel

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:10 pm

The government needs to ensure that education campaigns targeting motorcycling continue and funding is made available for local initiatives


Trouble is . . . there's very little evidence that 'training' actually makes a difference to casualty rates. And from my - admittedly limited - experience of local initiatives, it tends to be the 'converted' who turn up in drives.
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:20 pm

tfdodo wrote: Having read the latest slew of IAM press releases I am left scratching my head a bit about where they're coming from, especially apparently concluding that a Borough of Ealing study of bikes in bus lanes which had no bike-cycle collisions proves how hazardous it can be ? but not enough to justify the frothy-mouthed ranting from the BMF. Plus - a few of the BMF-site comments just go to show why BAM need to go on doing what we're doing, there are some really unhelpful IAM perceptions out there .
Although , ironically, TVAM [for it is undoubtedly they] get criticised for 'going fast' as much as the IAM in generally does for 'going slow' :roll: )


How is this . . .

bmf wrote:Chris Hodder, Government Relations Executive of the British Motorcyclists Federation, said: “The IAM has unfairly focussed on motorcycles because they've just picked one particular quarter of 2011 that seems to show the opposite trend to the whole year.

“You've got to be very cautious about picking one quarter out. It's better to take an average over a longer period. One quarter can show a rise while the rest shows a significant fall.”


. . . 'frothy-mouthed' ranting?

To look for any sort of meaningful trend, statistics are typically examined over a minimum of three years.

As for the bikes in bus lanes, have a read of the original major report on the on-road trials, it's a free download:
. . .
http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/repor ... lanes_.htm


Bus lanes are implemented to assist buses by-pass traffic queues. They reduce travel times and can improve reliability. Pedal cycles are also generally permitted to use these lanes and motorcyclists are being considered for admission however there are some concerns. Motorcycles are capable of high acceleration and are manoeuvrable. It is therefore possible their rider’s behaviour could result in them coming into conflict with other road users and pedestrians crossing the road who were not expecting motorcycles in bus lanes. One possible conflict is with vehicles turning right into a junction. The motorcyclist travelling in the bus lane could be obscured by stationary traffic in the non-priority lane and come into conflict with the turning vehicle. This study builds upon results from previous research conducted in Bristol and Swindon. It examined motorcycle riders permitted to use eight bus lanes in the City of Westminster, London. A number of survey techniques were combined to assess impacts on bus operations, motorcycle journey times and the safety of motorcyclists and other road users. This report is based upon the findings from a number of sources including conflict analysis and STATS19 accident analysis. The STATS19 analysis was necessarily restricted and further accident analysis is planned.


In fact, there are hundreds of free reports, many are bike-related.
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby tfdodo » Wed Feb 08, 2012 1:37 pm

Horse wrote:...
How is this . . .

bmf wrote:Chris Hodder, Government Relations Executive of the British Motorcyclists Federation, said: “The IAM has unfairly focussed on motorcycles because they've just picked one particular quarter of 2011 that seems to show the opposite trend to the whole year.

“You've got to be very cautious about picking one quarter out. It's better to take an average over a longer period. One quarter can show a rise while the rest shows a significant fall.”


. . . 'frothy-mouthed' ranting?


My bad, now corrected - my "frothy" reference was intended to be to the sensationalist presentation in the rag, not the BMF. I also concur with the BMF that the use of statistics was (probably deliberately) misleading , although the IAM won't be the first or last with that.
Rubber side down,
Nick A (SO-Team B)

"In a perfect world the future wouldn't make a dent..."

Balance Safety and Joy
User avatar
tfdodo
 
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: Brizzel

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:35 am

OK :)

I'm no apologist* for the bmf, but it had me confused!

* Albeit all riders should belong to either bmf or MAG.
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby tfdodo » Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:00 am

Horse wrote:
The government needs to ensure that education campaigns targeting motorcycling continue and funding is made available for local initiatives


Trouble is . . . there's very little evidence that 'training' actually makes a difference to casualty rates.
there's very little evidence that training doesn't improve casualty rates, don't fall into the fashionable trap of "theres little evidence so it isn't so"...

And from my - admittedly limited - experience of local initiatives, it tends to be the 'converted' who turn up in drives.


yes and no ... the IAM probably suffers more from 'self-selecting customers' than Bikesafe does, and we still get a steady trickle of referrals from Bikesafe/Ride to Arrive who are outside our anti-target "BMW pipe & slippers brigade" - and whilst they're not, in the main, the 20-year-old (or 30-year-old "born again") hooligans we would all most like to attract, they still leave us more skilled than they arrive, and I believe safer.

And those are just the ones who take Bikesafe and then come on to us. That suggests there are probably a higher number, all outwith the "safe rider" group, who benefit from Bikesafe etc but don't get around to taking their advanced riding further [plus another bunch who will do bikesafe then commercial instruction].

The safe brigade will always (by definition) fill spaces on riding courses (of course if you stopped that, maybe you'd stop them being as safe! :shock: ) but that's as an overhead of hitting the audience you're really aiming at.
Rubber side down,
Nick A (SO-Team B)

"In a perfect world the future wouldn't make a dent..."

Balance Safety and Joy
User avatar
tfdodo
 
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: Brizzel

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Fri Feb 10, 2012 8:50 pm

Actually, there's plenty of evidence - from studies over many years covering a wide range of training formats - that training makes little or no difference to accident rates.

However, 'we' do it - me included - because we think otherwise :)
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby wunwinglow » Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:03 pm

Horse wrote:Actually, there's plenty of evidence - from studies over many years covering a wide range of training formats - that training makes little or no difference to accident rates.

However, 'we' do it - me included - because we think otherwise :)


I'm intrigued that there is evidence that shows this. Makes one wonder why we bother then, doesn't it?. Does this also apply to airline pilots and brain surgeons?

Tim
Two things happen as you get older and I can't remember either of them.
User avatar
wunwinglow
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Stoke Gifford

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby tfdodo » Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:06 pm

Horse wrote:Actually, there's plenty of evidence


pointers please ?

[wow, this must be my shortest post ever :twisted: ]
Rubber side down,
Nick A (SO-Team B)

"In a perfect world the future wouldn't make a dent..."

Balance Safety and Joy
User avatar
tfdodo
 
Posts: 1186
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:51 pm
Location: Brizzel

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:22 pm

tfdodo wrote:
Horse wrote:Actually, there's plenty of evidence
b

pointers please ?

[wow, this must be my shortest post ever :twisted: ]



Sorry, your shortest post but longest wait - I'm going off-line for a while 8)

In the mean time, search for my posts on trc about scandinavian (poss norwegian) research.
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:44 pm

tfdodo wrote:
Horse wrote:Actually, there's plenty of evidence


pointers please ?


Deep breath . . . and post!

OK, I haven't read all of this stuff, perhaps just a few of the abstracts etc., but it all comes from a few moments searching on Google. The point, as far as I'm concerned, is that if 'training' was really 'effective', wouldn't, shouldn't there be a more dramatic, 'significant' (to use the stato term) effect? And, yes, I may have cherry-picked from conclusions etc.

My 2p: Good training is effective but - even from the same syllabus - 'bad' training isn't. However, training could often engcourage 'poor' riders - who might otherwise have given up riding - to continue, so increasing their exposure to risk as 'riders'. Also, 'skills'-based training can cause over-estimation of ability and over-confidence in those skills.


https://uhra.herts.ac.uk/dspace/bitstre ... 100527.pdf

P L A I N L A N G U A G E S U M M A R Y
Strong evidence that advanced and remedial driver education does not reduce road traffic crashes or injuries
Road traffic crashes are a major cause of death and injury worldwide. As drivers’ errors are a factor often contributing to traffic crashes,
driver education is often used in the belief that thismakes drivers safer.Driver education for licensed drivers can be remedial programmes
for those with poor driving records, or advanced courses for drivers generally. They can be offered by correspondence, in groups or
with individualised training. The review of trials found strong evidence that no type of driver education for licensed drivers leads to a
reduction in traffic crashes or injuries.


https://www.toi.no/article17812-29.html

Although the risk of being involved in a traffic accident is the same for motorcyclists as compared to other road users, the risk of a motorcyclist being injured in an accident is much higher. On basis of the high injury risk for motorcyclists, is seems most relevant to focus on countermeasures to prevent crashes. It is, however, unrealistic to assume that all motorcycle accidents can be avoided. As a consequence, countermeasures aimed at reducing injury severity are also needed. Different countermeasures of these types are reviewed in the report. There is no evidence showing that voluntary training programs reduces the accident risk, but compulsory licensing programs seems to give a small reduction in accident risk. There is clear evidence for a reduction in injury severity when using protective clothing and a helmet. There is reason to belive that ABS-brakes on motorcycles both will prevent accidents and reduce injury severity. There is no evidence for a relationship between accident risk and motorcycle engine size/effect. However, being unfamiliar or inexperienced with the motorcycle in question seems to increase the risk of being involved in an accident.Studies demonstrate that increased motorcycle/motorcyclist conspicuity (e.g. daytime running lights) reduces the risk of collision with another vehicle. Impact with crash barriers can result in severe injuries for motorcyclists, and there are today several means for improving such barriers/fences.


http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16882/1/16882.pdf

CONCLUSIONS
Many of the published evaluations of rider training as a method for reducing crash occurrence
and severity were undertaken when most trainees were novice riders were young and most
riders were undertaking learner or licence courses. The results of these evaluations may not
be valid for the new profile of riders. The results of this survey show that there are now many
old dogs trying to learn new tricks and that it is hard to measure whether these efforts are
being successful. Several approaches to measuring the effects of training on crash
involvement in this paper all concluded that there was no statistically significant relationship.


http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications ... 7919/24509

However, there was evidence to suggest that some participants may be riding faster in some situations after taking part in Bikesafe. It may be that some participants are engaging in 'risk compensation' - they feel that they have become better riders, and are therefore better equipped to ride at speed.

http://www.me.vt.edu/gabler/publication ... 0-2009.pdf

Motorcycle crash fatalities in the United States have been increasing
since 1997, when the total number of fatalities reached a record low.
Motorcycle training programs were enacted before this rise, and many
studies have aimed to show their effectiveness. The objective of this study
is to review and synthesize the results of existing research on the effectiveness
of motorcycle education courses and different licensing procedures.
The effectiveness of programs is examined through the effect training
has on accident rates, violation rates, and personal protective equipment
use found through past research. Research to date has not consistently
supported the notion that training is either effective or ineffective. Some
studies have demonstrated that accident and traffic violation rates are
lower for trained riders than for untrained riders, whereas others have
demonstrated that they are higher for trained riders. Training increases
the use of personal protective equipment among motorcyclists. Motorcycle
licensing procedures have been shown to have different effects on
accident rates. Lower accident rates have been observed in areas with
stricter regulations for obtaining a license. The studies vary greatly in
both the methods used for comparison and the rigor of their evaluation
methodology. No standards for evaluation exist. The findings of these
previous studies may be more a reflection of the methods used to evaluate
motorcycle training than the effectiveness of training itself.


http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?id=801183

Persistent increases in motorcycle fatalities and injuries in recent years have heightened safety awareness and have focused attention on the role that motorcyclist training and education can play in reducing accident rates. In this study a 2005 sample of Indiana motorcyclists was used to estimate statistical models of the effectiveness of existing training programs in reducing accident probabilities. Statistical models relating to motorcyclist speed choice and helmet usage behavior were also estimated. The findings showed that those individuals who took beginning rider training courses were more likely to be involved in an accident than those who did not and that those who took the beginning course more than once were much more likely to be involved in an accident. Although explanations for these findings can range from the use of ineffective course material to changes in risk perception as a result of taking the course, another explanation is that riders who take the course are inherently less skilled than those who do not. The findings underscore the need for a careful and comprehensive study of rider skills and risk perceptions to maximize the effectiveness of motorcycle training courses.


http://wmoon.wordpress.com/2010/01/08/m ... raining-2/
http://wmoon.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/m ... g-part-ii/
http://wmoon.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/m ... -part-iii/

Quotes 23 studies . . .
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby wunwinglow » Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:30 pm

Nice to know we are providing so many employment opportunities for statasticians.....

I'm wondering if I should bother reading through the links, or just resign from the IAM right now, since my efforts are clearly worthless.

Tim P
Two things happen as you get older and I can't remember either of them.
User avatar
wunwinglow
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Stoke Gifford

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby Horse » Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:45 pm

wunwinglow wrote:Nice to know we are providing so many employment opportunities for statasticians.....

I'm wondering if I should bother reading through the links, or just resign from the IAM right now, since my efforts are clearly worthless.

Tim P


Perhaps it should lead to an honest appraisal of training content and realistic observation of how the principals are actually used e.g. on rideouts. For example, a mate stopped going on rideouts with his Group as 1 in 3 involved an off . . .
I assert my author rights: Copyright Design Patent Act 1988 may be quoted in Chain Link posts, but contacted for written consent before any other use/storage/transmission/recording

Argue with me: http://the-ride-info.blogspot.com
Horse
 
Posts: 410
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 8:28 pm

Re: Dubious IAM statement on bike safety

Postby wunwinglow » Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:54 pm

OK. If all we do is botox, what do we do instead?

Tim
Two things happen as you get older and I can't remember either of them.
User avatar
wunwinglow
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Stoke Gifford

Next

Return to Advanced Riding Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron