Study finds black bikers more likely to die in crashes
A study by Johns Hopkins researchers shows that African-Americans who were involved in motorcycle crashes were 50 percent more likely to die from their injuries than white riders even though black bikers were more likely to be wearing helmets.
The study of 68,840 people involved in such crashes between 2002 and 2006, led by Dr. Adil Haider of the School of Medicine, found the higher death rate among blacks even though African-Americans were 30 percent more likely to be wearing helmets when they crashed than white riders. The study found that whites who weren't wearing helmets were less likely to be killed in crashes than blacks who wore protective headgear.
Haider, co-director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Surgiical Trials and Outcomes Research, said the study shows that helmet laws such as Maryland's may not be enough to protect all riders equally.
The researcher, an assistant professor of surgery, said he suspects several factors may account for the disparity between black and white deaths on motorcycles. He pointed to a lack of health insurance, reduced access to health care and pre-existing illnesses or injuries as possible reasons for the gap.
Haider said it is possible that there may be differences between the races in the types of motorcycles they driive and way they use them. He said more research may be needed to answer these questions.
In other studies, helmets have been shown to reduce traumatic brain injuries and reduce the cost of hospital stays brought on by motorcycle crashes. However, the study appears likely to be used to raise questions about the efficacy of state motorcycle helmet laws.
The answer might lie in the demographics of the motorcycle-riding populations and their respective behaviors. For instance, future research could ask whether one group or the other is more likely to operate the lower-weight, higher-speed bikes known as "crotch rockets." Such vehicles could be getting into higher-speed crashes. Another question could involve the relative length of experience aboard motorcycles.
Comments
I would be interested in finding out if the study included the following:
1) types of bikes.
2) if the motorcyclist held the proper motorcycle endorsement.
3) estimated speed of crash.
4) amount of experience the victim had on a motorcycle.
5) if the fault was that of the car (if one was involved) or the motorcyclists.
Without more details it is difficult to use this study for anything more than information. I also do not understand what healthcare insurance has to do with anything, by law a motorcylist must be taken while admitted to the ER.
Hospitable also often do not view motorcyclists with the same care as a car crash victim. At Howard General I once heard in the ER the receptionist behind the desk say "another motorcycle donor". I was pretty upset because the motorcyclist was clearly still alive. Often times motorcyclists are scared to put "organ donor" on their drivers licenses for fear that when they do crash steps will not be taken to save them and they'll simply become a body to harvest organs from.
I can see how having proper riding gear can cause a rider to feel safer than what they really are. The safer a rider feels could cause the rider to ride at faster speeds giving them less reaction time.
I once was told by a sales person that Suzuki Hayabusa had an average life span of less than 60 hours before it was totaled. This is the fastest bike Suzuki makes and right off the show room floor can hit speeds in excess of 180mph. New riders often think that the bigger faster bike is better, and thus, lead to a greater potential of placing a new rider into an unwelcoming situation.
Another fact is that cars often do not see motorcyclists. I normally have an bright orange construction worker type vest on to increase my viability. Today on my way to work I had a pedestrian stop right out in front of me who I missed by only inches while traveling at the speed limit. In the last three weeks alone I have had several cars being very aggressive to the point where I took very defensive actions to protect my safety.
At the end of the day we will come to the age old debate of "helmet" or "no helmet". I will always use a helmet and I would also like to see the helmet law apply to mopeds as well. If the helmet law is removed, then so be it, I'll still have my helmet on.
Posted by: Phillip | September 23, 2010 4:28 PM
Helmets are not all they're cracked up to be. But statistics will never result in repeal of the helmet law. Only when motorcyclists shift their strategy from debating to campaign volunteering will they earn back their right to decide. Until then, the gasbag nanny-crats will prevail.
Posted by: RIDE2REPEAL.COM | September 23, 2010 8:57 PM
I been riding for over 20 years, ridden all types of bikes and road with many bikers of all types. The simple answer is the truth, anyone who survives as long as me know the following: 1. Sport bikes perform like expensive exotic sports cars for cheap. 2. Sport bike culture leads many to reckless riding habbits. 3. regardly of race, biker on cruising bikes ride different because they don't have a choice, cruiser just can't perform like sport bikes. 4. Most African Americans ride sportbikes. 5. Save your money on studies, i wrote the answer^^
Posted by: Roadwarrior | September 29, 2010 6:21 PM