Fair enough, I incorrectly assumed you were citing the one released last week, not 3 years ago. Either way, increased collisions (or one type of collision) doesn't necessarily mean decreased safety.
I don't know if I consider "fair enough" and a backhanded insult to really be an apology for unfairly assuming maliciousness on my part, but okay.
I would perhaps phrase that as "citing the study released by an impartial third-party, not by the people who are engaging in the moral hazard and trying to justify their behavior" instead.
I would perhaps phrase that as "citing the study released by an impartial third-party, not by the people who are engaging in the moral hazard and trying to justify their behavior" instead.