The other OG thread got me to thinking about this, and google got me into trouble (as usual):
The first study:
They attempt to answer if being older provides any reduced chances of accidents:
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/1/32
They find a large benefit occurs if you are over 25, it doesn't continue on as you gain more years.
They compared a bunch of other factors and some I already knew, but some were a surprise:
- no evidence that increasing experience on a moto (beyond the first few years) reduces crash incidence, so 5 yrs vs 20 yrs experience is the same.
- familiarity with the motorcycle was the strongest correlation, after 10,000 km the risk dropped to about half compared to less than 1,000 km. We learned this in the BRC the first 6 months on a new moto (even for an experienced rider) are much more crash prone.
- no gender correlation was found, not sure if that was a surprise or not, but it was interesting.
- no correlation to other kinds of experience such as off-road riding or cars, this was a surprise to me and contradicts some accepted BARF wisdom.
I am struggling with the idea that a noob going from 0-10,000 km has about the same gradually decreasing risk profile as an experienced rider on a new moto, also going from 0-10,000 km, but that's what their data showed.
The second study:
https://www.consumerreports.org/cro...rcycle-riders-risk-greater-injuries/index.htm
Shows that older riders (over 40) tend to crash a lot less, but due to aging are much more likely to sustain severe injuries when they do, in their words, "getting old sucks."
They suggested chest protection for aging riders since chest injuries became much more pronounced in older riders. I have had a chest protector for about 7 years now, so I guess I am 'with it', for an OG.
You may notice the two studies don't actually agree with each other WRT to being over age 25. One says crash incidence decreases until well after age 40, and the other one says little benefit over age 25. What to do? I don't know. I'm done googling for the day. Have fun with it.
The first study:
They attempt to answer if being older provides any reduced chances of accidents:
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/1/32
They find a large benefit occurs if you are over 25, it doesn't continue on as you gain more years.
They compared a bunch of other factors and some I already knew, but some were a surprise:
- no evidence that increasing experience on a moto (beyond the first few years) reduces crash incidence, so 5 yrs vs 20 yrs experience is the same.
- familiarity with the motorcycle was the strongest correlation, after 10,000 km the risk dropped to about half compared to less than 1,000 km. We learned this in the BRC the first 6 months on a new moto (even for an experienced rider) are much more crash prone.
- no gender correlation was found, not sure if that was a surprise or not, but it was interesting.
- no correlation to other kinds of experience such as off-road riding or cars, this was a surprise to me and contradicts some accepted BARF wisdom.
I am struggling with the idea that a noob going from 0-10,000 km has about the same gradually decreasing risk profile as an experienced rider on a new moto, also going from 0-10,000 km, but that's what their data showed.
The second study:
https://www.consumerreports.org/cro...rcycle-riders-risk-greater-injuries/index.htm
Shows that older riders (over 40) tend to crash a lot less, but due to aging are much more likely to sustain severe injuries when they do, in their words, "getting old sucks."
They suggested chest protection for aging riders since chest injuries became much more pronounced in older riders. I have had a chest protector for about 7 years now, so I guess I am 'with it', for an OG.
You may notice the two studies don't actually agree with each other WRT to being over age 25. One says crash incidence decreases until well after age 40, and the other one says little benefit over age 25. What to do? I don't know. I'm done googling for the day. Have fun with it.