Studies supporting Blakespear's fatal cycle tracks were flawed?

Facebook:

The Federal Highway Administration study and marketing claiming that cycle tracks reduce bicycle crashes by 53% is based only on vehicle-bicycle crashes that occur more than 250 feet from intersections--with most of the data coming from San Francisco, and some from Seattle and Cambridge, Massachusetts. No crashes that did not involve motor vehicles were included in the study, and the safety findings found with vehicle-involved crashes failed when intersections or the full corridors were studied.

I was finally able to find a series of published studies showing how police reports/vehicle-bicycle-only crashes vastly under-report bicyclist crashes and injuries/hospital visits/admissions. One of them that included data from the main trauma center in San Francisco shows: (1) 41.5% of injuries were cyclist-only (did not involve a motor vehicle), (2) cyclist-only injuries were four times more likely to require hospital admission than vehicle-bicycle injuries, and (3) there was no police report associated with 54.5% of all bicyclist injuries. This raises even more questions about the FHWA study claims.

Also, it seems that the right-hook problem at cycle-track junctions has also been a problem in Cambridge (two fatalities) and Seattle (traumatic brain injury)--all in 2024. The circumstances are eerily similar to the fatality on Leucadia Boulevard--truck or large vehicle turning right at junctions where the cycle-track vertical components are installed right up to the turning area. Then there are subsequent lawsuits for poor design due to lack of sight distance.

https://mass.streetsblog.org/.../truck-drivers-have...

https://komonews.com/.../cyclist-green-lake-neighborhood...