Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......

"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote in message
...
"Caroline" wrote in message
news:LaxHi.1967$oc2.1651@trnddc04...
"Crescentius Vespasianus" wrote in message
...
Saul's new book "Tour de Life", is structured so he'll be the new Lance.
Over coming traumatic brain injury. But really shouldn't the book be
about how in the world did his helmet fail. If the helmet would have
done it's job, he wouldn't have ended up in a coma. In football they
are also going through a re-evaluation of the reliability of their
helmets. There is an opinion that maybe they should be a third larger,
but the critics say it would change the appearance of the players
dramatically. So are people to sustain traumatic brain injuries because
the helmets are not fashionable? Shouldn't we have helmets that do the
job, they claim they can do?


Do you have any idea how long and difficcult the battle was to get pro
cyclists to wear helmets? Football is probably not much different.
Athletes seem to prefer the gear that was in style when they were kids,
regardless of safety issues. They want to dress like their heroes.

I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow
MUST add to someone's safety.

That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount
of head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has
been recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
collisions even those which penetrate the skull.

What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the
large vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due
to the compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to
pass the drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that
doesn't measure local forces, only total deceleration.

If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying
to force your idiotic beliefs on others.



You are amazing, Mr. Kunich. You read what I wrote, then -- out of thin
air -- added a whole bunch of stuff I never said. Thank you. To reiterate,
I said nothing about helmets promoting or diminishing cycling safety. I
simply said that it was a very difficult battle trying to get pro-cyclists
to wear helmets. Period. And so it was.

Now, to expound my own opinions for myself, I do think there is a certain
safety value in helmets that outweighs the so called negatives you "cite,"
without giving a source for your "information." Do you know that 97.63
percent of statistics are made up by the person citing them on the spot?

Caroline

On Sep 18, 5:27 pm, "Caroline" wrote:
"Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote in ...





"Caroline" wrote in message
news:LaxHi.1967$oc2.1651@trnddc04...
"Crescentius Vespasianus" wrote in message
...
Saul's new book "Tour de Life", is structured so he'll be the new Lance.
Over coming traumatic brain injury. But really shouldn't the book be
about how in the world did his helmet fail. If the helmet would have
done it's job, he wouldn't have ended up in a coma. In football they
are also going through a re-evaluation of the reliability of their
helmets. There is an opinion that maybe they should be a third larger,
but the critics say it would change the appearance of the players
dramatically. So are people to sustain traumatic brain injuries because
the helmets are not fashionable? Shouldn't we have helmets that do the
job, they claim they can do?

Do you have any idea how long and difficcult the battle was to get pro
cyclists to wear helmets? Football is probably not much different.
Athletes seem to prefer the gear that was in style when they were kids,
regardless of safety issues. They want to dress like their heroes.

I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow
MUST add to someone's safety.

That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount
of head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has
been recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
collisions even those which penetrate the skull.

What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the
large vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due
to the compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to
pass the drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that
doesn't measure local forces, only total deceleration.

If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying
to force your idiotic beliefs on others.

You are amazing, Mr. Kunich. You read what I wrote, then -- out of thin
air -- added a whole bunch of stuff I never said. Thank you. To reiterate,
I said nothing about helmets promoting or diminishing cycling safety. I
simply said that it was a very difficult battle trying to get pro-cyclists
to wear helmets. Period. And so it was.

Now, to expound my own opinions for myself, I do think there is a certain
safety value in helmets that outweighs the so called negatives you "cite,"
without giving a source for your "information." Do you know that 97.63
percent of statistics are made up by the person citing them on the spot?

Caroline- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Are you under 20 years old? If not, you don't have enough years left
for the "discussion" you are walking into.

6,830 results for helmet [definition].

and that's only this group.
This really should be added to the FAQ, but very few seem to read
them.
Bill C

"Caroline" wrote in message
news:3pXHi.6210$A72.5717@trnddc08...

You are amazing, Mr. Kunich. You read what I wrote, then -- out of thin
air -- added a whole bunch of stuff I never said. Thank you. To
reiterate, I said nothing about helmets promoting or diminishing cycling
safety. I simply said that it was a very difficult battle trying to get
pro-cyclists to wear helmets. Period. And so it was.

And of course that implies nothing.

Now, to expound my own opinions for myself, I do think there is a certain
safety value in helmets that outweighs the so called negatives you "cite,"
without giving a source for your "information." Do you know that 97.63
percent of statistics are made up by the person citing them on the spot?

Tell me, exactly how many times do you need the data cited? How many times
do you need the papers cited? At what point does it become redundant that
your memory can hold more than "DUHHHHH HELMUT GOOD"?

Tell me, exactly how many times do you need the data cited? How many times
do you need the papers cited?

Ah yes, a true believer of 'repetition makes truth'.
global warming
wmd's
killer bees
etcetcetc


just joining in on the twisting other peoples words around crowd.

In article
,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote:

I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow
MUST add to someone's safety.

That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount
of head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has
been recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
collisions even those which penetrate the skull.

What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the
large vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due
to the compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to
pass the drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that
doesn't measure local forces, only total deceleration.

If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying
to force your idiotic beliefs on others.

I know better than to add to a helmet thread. But I'm feeling stupid today.

Common sense is an odd thing. It cuts multiple ways... some people have it,
some people don't, and the common sense some have can be incredibly tainted
by their ability to rationalize.

For me, helmets pass the common sense test- that being I believe that I'm
better off with one, than without. I know they won't protect me from
everything; indeed, we had a customer who was killed last month on Sand Hill
Road, wearing a helmet. Nobody needed to work up all sorts of weird theories
for how the helmet must have made things worse; the impact and deceleration
were simply too great, and the attendant brain swelling too sudden, to allow
her to live. A full-body airbag probably would have saved her.

So the anti-helmet folk can say that it makes no difference, she died.

There are no anti-helmet folk.
You are using gratuitous, divisive, polarizing, us-against-them talk.

--
Michael Press