|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
.... Dr Dorothy Robinson's concern, instead, is bicycle safety. She has
just published a study in the Health Promotion Journal of Australia that is likely to send shock waves through Australian cycling communities with its claim that mandatory bicycle helmet laws increase rather than decrease the likelihood of injuries to cyclists. http://melbourne.citysearch.com.au/profile?id=53571 Personally I'd still use a helmet in winter 'cause it's a handy place to put lights :-) Summer I'd leave the lid behind and wear a sun hat. -- Cheers | ~~ __@ Euan | ~~ _-\, Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*) |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
By the same genius stroke of logic, higher fuel prices will also resul in safer cyclists BUT IN A TWOFOLD APPROACH. MORE +++ BETTER++ 1) less car on the road because people cant afford the fuel 2) more cyclists, because people cant afford to drive I think we should all petition out local member for $2/l for unleaded and $3/1 for premium. Should we crosspost this one to aus.cars to retur the recent favours^H^H^Htrolls til -- till! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
"Euan" wrote in message ... ... Dr Dorothy Robinson's concern, instead, is bicycle safety. She has just published a study in the Health Promotion Journal of Australia that is likely to send shock waves through Australian cycling communities with its claim that mandatory bicycle helmet laws increase rather than decrease the likelihood of injuries to cyclists. http://melbourne.citysearch.com.au/profile?id=53571 Personally I'd still use a helmet in winter 'cause it's a handy place to put lights :-) Summer I'd leave the lid behind and wear a sun hat. -- Cheers | ~~ __@ Euan | ~~ _-\, Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*) That article is a load of ****. * start with some stats (uncited) and draw a reasonable correlation between cyclist numbers and injuries "the more cyclists there are, the more motorists are aware of them and the more carefully they drive" * and then drive to a conclusion that helmet legislation is the cause (shouldn't it be the motorists not being careful enough) The only link is that mandatory wearing of helmets, at one point in time, discouraged cyclists, reducing cyclist numbers. I think everyone is over that by now - does it really discourage anyone anymore? Wearing helmets, or not, has nothing to do directly with the actual incidence of accidents, according to the research it is the number of cyclists. But wearing helmets can impact outcomes. These however would not be identifiable in statistics because the number of deaths, while being too high already, is to low in Australia to draw real conclusions. The follow up claim on helmet effectiveness is apparently not supported with any particular research, it is only an opinion: "bike helmets are designed for bicycle-ground and bicycle-bicycle collisions rather than motor vehicle accidents, and are therefore ineffective in preventing serious brain injuries in such cases". More effective than skin and bones alone. Everyone do what they want, legally or otherwise, I will continue to wear a helmet that may save my life. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
Bob wrote:
That article is a load of ****. * start with some stats (uncited) and draw a reasonable correlation between cyclist numbers and injuries "the more cyclists there are, the more motorists are aware of them and the more carefully they drive" * and then drive to a conclusion that helmet legislation is the cause (shouldn't it be the motorists not being careful enough) The only link is that mandatory wearing of helmets, at one point in time, discouraged cyclists, reducing cyclist numbers. I think everyone is over that by now - does it really discourage anyone anymore? I've been wearing a helmet since about 1979 but I did notice a considerable drop in cycling numbers in Mackay after the mandatory use was enforced. Prior to enforcement of the law, around one in ten cyclists here wore a helmet (initially in Queensland it was a legal requirement to wear a helmet but there was no fine if you didn't). To me, that indicates reluctance from most cyclists. I still haven't seen the number of cyclists return to pre-helmet proportions. The law has been enforced very strongly in Mackay, in fact there is no traffic law that is more heavily enforced here. One issue that has come up recently here is that schools are banning kids from wearing caps under their helmets. Aparently they don't want kids bringing caps to school. So under the North Qld sun (which is intense), wearing a helmet rather than a shady hat can be very uncomfortable. P -- Peter McCallum Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
"Bob" == Bob writes:
Bob That article is a load of ****. It's a magazine article, not an academic study. Take it for what it is. Bob * start with some stats (uncited) and draw a reasonable Bob correlation between cyclist numbers and injuries "the more Bob cyclists there are, the more motorists are aware of them and Bob the more carefully they drive" * and then drive to a conclusion Bob that helmet legislation is the cause (shouldn't it be the Bob motorists not being careful enough) A bit of a long bow. There's nothing new in this article and it can all be traced to peer reviewed scientific papers if you're willing to expend the effort. Bob The only link is that mandatory wearing of helmets, at one Bob point in time, discouraged cyclists, reducing cyclist Bob numbers. I think everyone is over that by now - does it really Bob discourage anyone anymore? Absolutely. It's a hot and smelly inconvenience which is off-putting to the fashion conscious. It's a bit of baggage that you need to lug around and there is no proof that helmets provide any benefit whereas there is substantial proof that helmets are detrimental. Bob Wearing helmets, or not, has nothing to do directly with the Bob actual incidence of accidents, according to the research it is Bob the number of cyclists. And requiring helmets directly impacts on the number of cyclists out there. Of do you think the 30% drop in cycling when helmet compulsion came about is purely incidental? Bob But wearing helmets can impact outcomes. These however would Bob not be identifiable in statistics because the number of deaths, Bob while being too high already, is to low in Australia to draw Bob real conclusions. There is no proof that helmets are beneficial. It is a fact that in every country that has helmet compulsion cycling has decreased significantly which has a far greater impact on cyclist safety. Bob The follow up claim on helmet effectiveness is apparently not Bob supported with any particular research, it is only an opinion: Bob "bike helmets are designed for bicycle-ground and Bob bicycle-bicycle collisions rather than motor vehicle accidents, Bob and are therefore ineffective in preventing serious brain Bob injuries in such cases". More effective than skin and bones Bob alone. No, that is the manufacturing standards that helmets have to comply with. There are no helmet standards for vehicle / bicycle collisions. Bob Everyone do what they want, legally or otherwise, I will Bob continue to wear a helmet that may save my life. That's a very big may. I prefer not to entrust my safety to what is essentially a piece of polystyrene designed to absorb the kinetic energy of a fall from head height. That's all it does. -- Cheers | ~~ __@ Euan | ~~ _-\, Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
Euan wrote: "Bob" == Bob writes: Bob The only link is that mandatory wearing of helmets, at one Bob point in time, discouraged cyclists, reducing cyclist Bob numbers. I think everyone is over that by now - does it really Bob discourage anyone anymore? Absolutely. It's a hot and smelly inconvenience which is off-putting to the fashion conscious. Stackhats went out in, oh, 1980? Modern helmets are light, well ventilated and comfortable. It's a bit of baggage that you need to lug around and there is no proof that helmets provide any benefit whereas there is substantial proof that helmets are detrimental. "any" benefit? If I wasn't wearing mine a few months ago when I crashed into an oncoming bike on a bikepath, I'd probably be a vegetable (more than I am now!). I'd certanily have done significan injury. As it is, I had to buy a new helmet and was a bit dizzy for a couple of days. Bob Wearing helmets, or not, has nothing to do directly with the Bob actual incidence of accidents, according to the research it is Bob the number of cyclists. And requiring helmets directly impacts on the number of cyclists out there. Of do you think the 30% drop in cycling when helmet compulsion came about is purely incidental? 20 years ago (or however long ago it was) it may have stopped some adults riding - but all the kids at my school still rode. We hated stackhats and those awful Bell puddingbowls, but we still rode our bikes everywhere. As to how many people that grew up post-compulsory rules that haven't ridden because they'd have to wear a helmet? How's that going to be measured? Bob But wearing helmets can impact outcomes. These however would Bob not be identifiable in statistics because the number of deaths, Bob while being too high already, is to low in Australia to draw Bob real conclusions. There is no proof that helmets are beneficial. Heh, I refute this thus; I can still read. It is a fact that in every country that has helmet compulsion cycling has decreased significantly which has a far greater impact on cyclist safety. It may have temporarily reduced numbers, but is there any evidence to suggest that the change lasted a generation? Bob The follow up claim on helmet effectiveness is apparently not Bob supported with any particular research, it is only an opinion: Bob "bike helmets are designed for bicycle-ground and Bob bicycle-bicycle collisions rather than motor vehicle accidents, Bob and are therefore ineffective in preventing serious brain Bob injuries in such cases". More effective than skin and bones Bob alone. No, that is the manufacturing standards that helmets have to comply with. There are no helmet standards for vehicle / bicycle collisions. Bob Everyone do what they want, legally or otherwise, I will Bob continue to wear a helmet that may save my life. That's a very big may. I prefer not to entrust my safety to what is essentially a piece of polystyrene designed to absorb the kinetic energy of a fall from head height. That's all it does. "all" it does? "I refuse to breath because all it does is oxygenate my blood". Mine without doubt saved me from significant head injury. I'm mighty glad that polystyrene saved my bonce from a fall from head-height. I landed head-first (back of head). Helmets work. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
Bleve wrote: I prefer not to entrust my safety to what is essentially a piece of polystyrene designed to absorb the kinetic energy of a fall from head height. That's all it does. "all" it does? "I refuse to breath because all it does is oxygenate my blood". Mine without doubt saved me from significant head injury. I'm mighty glad that polystyrene saved my bonce from a fall from head-height. I landed head-first (back of head). Helmets work. I second that - although Dave swears that my head only hit the concrete path AFTER I'd stopped falling, I KNOW that I hit my head - and I for one am VERY happy with the fact that the helmet absorbed the impact, not my head - and so I had no bruise or scrape or anything - not even a headache :-) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
"Bleve" wrote in message ups.com... Euan wrote: "Bob" == Bob writes: Bob The only link is that mandatory wearing of helmets, at one Bob point in time, discouraged cyclists, reducing cyclist Bob numbers. I think everyone is over that by now - does it really Bob discourage anyone anymore? Absolutely. It's a hot and smelly inconvenience which is off-putting to the fashion conscious. Stackhats went out in, oh, 1980? Modern helmets are light, well ventilated and comfortable. You miss the point. It doesn't matter how good a helmet is to wear, or how safe you feel in one, or how many vents there are or what kind of hairstyle you have. It's all about the choice of whther you WANT to wear a helmet, rather than mandating that you do.... Gemma |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Warning: H*lm*t content
Bob Everyone do what they want, legally or otherwise, I will
Bob continue to wear a helmet that may save my life. That's a very big may. It's no loner a "may save", its a "won't " if you're not wearing one. And I know it is a big may. I prefer not to entrust my safety to what is essentially a piece of polystyrene designed to absorb the kinetic energy of a fall from head height. That's all it does. I don't entrust my safety to anyone or anything but myself. I am no more or less paranoid about cars and trucks around me on the roads with or without a helmet. I just hope it may make a difference if - even for just a minor off on the bike path. Just like I value air bags in a car but don't expect them to save me if I drive face-long into a Mack track hood ornament, hopefully a helmet can make a bit of a difference. Don't underestimate the effect of kinetic energy on your brain - every bit absorbed helps. I think the statement "the more cyclists there are, the more motorists are aware of them and the more carefully they drive" is the conclusion that needs addressing in a more positive way. I do not want to see my kids riding on the footpath or roads without helmets. That would be difficult to encourage if there were no helmet laws ("look at that bad man without a helmet, I wonder if the police will catch him" :-o). And kids tend to have many more falls (and softer skulls) where the helmet can make a big difference. cheers "paternal softening in progress" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RR: On The Road (Warning: GRS Content) | Ride-A-Lot | Mountain Biking | 0 | June 6th 05 02:29 AM |
severe weather warning | joemarshall | Unicycling | 15 | January 14th 05 05:41 AM |
Weather warning ... | elyob | UK | 11 | January 4th 05 11:54 PM |
Warning! OT Political Content!!! | Steven Bornfeld | Racing | 15 | October 31st 04 11:06 PM |
Today (warning: on topic content) | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 3 | April 25th 04 12:40 AM |