CDC study finds universal motorcycle helmet laws saved U.S. $3 billion

[RIDEMYST]

CDC study finds universal motorcycle helmet laws saved U.S. $3 billion
Publish date: Jun 14, 2012

Universal helmet laws are the most effective strategy for increasing helmet use and protecting motorcycle riders and their passengers, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC). More than that, helmet use saves the country money, and lots of it, the organization contends.
Annual cost savings in states with universal motorcycle helmet laws were nearly four times greater per registered motorcycle than in states without comprehensive laws, according to a Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report study released June 14 by the organization.
Annual savings in medical, productivity and other expenses in states with helmet laws ranged from a high of $394 million in California (which has a universal helmet law) to a low of $2.6 million in New Mexico (which has a partial law), the CDC reported.
Universal helmet laws result in cost savings, the CDC noted, by increasing helmet use among riders and passengers, which thus reduces crash-related injuries and deaths. According to a CDC analysis of fatal crash data from 2008 to 2010, 12 percent of motorcyclists in states with universal helmet laws were not wearing helmets. In comparison, 64 percent of riders were not wearing helmets in states with partial helmet laws, and 79 percent of riders were not wearing helmets in states with no helmet laws.
"Increasing motorcycle helmet use can save lives and money," said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, CDC director. "In 2010, more than $3 billion in economic costs were saved due to helmet use in the United States. Another $1.4 billion could have been saved if all motorcyclists had worn helmets."
Helmets prevent 37 percent of crash deaths among riders and 41 percent among passengers, CDC reported, and prevent 13 percent of serious injuries and 8 percent of minor injuries to riders and passengers.
CDC researchers analyzed 2008-2010 Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data and 2010 data on economic costs saved by motorcycle helmet use, both obtained from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatal crash data from FARS provide an accurate means of determining in each state whether riders wore helmets at the time of these severe crashes, CDC researchers noted.
Cost savings estimates included medical and emergency services expenses, work-related and household productivity losses, insurance administration costs, and legal fees resulting from deaths and injuries from motorcycle crashes, the agency reported.
Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have universal helmet laws, 28 states have partial helmet laws, and three states have no helmet law.

[DirtFlier]

I have to agree 100% that partial laws (helmets only required for new riders or those under 21) don't work at all. Policemen are not going to stop a rider because he/she looks too young or looks too inexperienced. The partial laws are always compromises made between the "Rights Groups" and lawmakers who'll do almost anything to get a vote.

[stevegrab]

I found this piece of the reported data very interesting...

According to a CDC analysis of fatal crash data from 2008 to 2010, 12 percent of motorcyclists in states with universal helmet laws were not wearing helmets. In comparison, 64 percent of riders were not wearing helmets in states with partial helmet laws, and 79 percent of riders were not wearing helmets in states with no helmet laws.

That is a huge difference between states with and without helmet laws.

Then there is this..
Helmets prevent 37 percent of crash deaths among riders and 41 percent among passengers, CDC reported, and prevent 13 percent of serious injuries and 8 percent of minor injuries to riders and passengers.

I'd like to know how they determine that. How do you decide who died but wouldn't have if they were wearing a helmet (or the opposite who didn't die with a helmet that would have died without one)?

[OldButNotDead]

Numbers are always subject to interpretation. I know there would be one of those little crosses beside US52 on Big Walker Mountain if didn't have my helmet on. I'd also bet 100% of those dead guys who crashed without a helmet wished they had one on.

[TN2Wheeler]

I don't need numbers to support common sense. Full coverage helmets reduce injuries in the vast majority of motorcycle crashes. Just like seatbelts in cars. If people had been willing to wear seatbelts 15 years ago we wouldn't be spending an extra $2K per car for "passive restraints" now.

Helmet laws (or lack of them) is not about safety; it's about people being unwilling to accept common sense rules regardless of the "facts".

Jim Randall

[stevegrab]

Just to be clear I do know (common sense) that helmets reduce injury and death. But when you quantify it, you need to have some way to do that and be able to have some degree of certainty that your claim is correct.

Let's say 100 motorcyclists die in a given period, and 40 were not wearing helmets. Do we just automatically assume those 40 survive if they're wearing helmets? Or are we looking at the injuries in each case and making an edecuated medical analysis that indicates whether or not they survive.

If there is one thing I learned in statistics it is that you can often make the numbers say whatever you want. And when you have a government agency or large corporation involved there is often some manipulation going on.

[DirtFlier]

[...I don't need numbers to support common sense....Just like seatbelts in cars...Jim]

At least around here, in almost every case of a fatality as the result of an auto accident the victim was "ejected" from the car which means he/she wasn't wearing their seatbelt. Perhaps fitting loud pipes would have helped?

Tosh

[OldButNotDead]

If there is one thing I learned in statistics it is that you can often make the numbers say whatever you want. And when you have a government agency or large corporation involved there is often some manipulation going on.

Totally agree. If you want stats that are NOT scientific, BUT the outcome is spot on, do a poll of EMS and Emergency Room staff on the value of helmets. Those guys don't call them murder cycles for nothin'.

[NormKern]

Numbers are always subject to interpretation. I know there would be one of those little crosses beside US52 on Big Walker Mountain if didn't have my helmet on. I'd also bet 100% of those dead guys who crashed without a helmet wished they had one on.

Don't bet on it. Some people are so stubborn, they'd rather die than wear a helmet. A Harley rider in our local club crashed when surprised by a deer on his way home from a bar at night. He got over 100 stitches in his head. Made it a big point at the next meeting that there was still no way he would ever wear a helmet.

Norm Kern

[OldButNotDead]

LOL, you are no doubt right. You can heal from some things, but stupidity isn't one of them. The clue in this case is "on his way home from a bar." Jim brought up "common sense". It used to be called an uncommon virtue; however it is getting to be more like on the verge of extinction, LOL.