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

"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.

Caroline

On Sep 17, 1:06 pm, Crescentius Vespasianus
wrote:

snip...

So are people to sustain traumatic
brain injuries because the helmets are
not fashionable?

Yes. That along with comfort and performance. Show me a bicycle
helpmet that will protect the head (the whole head - including the
face) in any kind of possible bicycle accident and I'll show you a
helmet that would never sell a single unit. It would be expensive,
big, hot, heavy, and fugly.

Fashion Kills.
--
Marty

On Sep 17, 9:37 am, "Caroline" wrote:
"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.

Caroline

I don't know, my first 'cycling hero' (if I have such a thing) was
Lemond. Damn'd if I'm gonna wear a La Vie Claire jersey and those
fuggly Oakleys that were all the rage back then!

Scott wrote:
I don't know, my first 'cycling hero' (if I have such a thing) was
Lemond. Damn'd if I'm gonna wear a La Vie Claire jersey and those
fuggly Oakleys that were all the rage back then!

Consider yourself lucky Hincapie isn't your hero.

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?

On Sep 17, 11:53 am, Donald Munro wrote:
Scott wrote:
I don't know, my first 'cycling hero' (if I have such a thing) was
Lemond. Damn'd if I'm gonna wear a La Vie Claire jersey and those
fuggly Oakleys that were all the rage back then!

Consider yourself lucky Hincapie isn't your hero.

Oh, I do. It's not just the glasses, but the socks, too. Can you
believe that Pearl Izumi now makes a mid-calf sock (called the "tour"
sock) for cycling. Oh, boy, now we can wear socks just like the pros
wear.

"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.

"Donald Munro" wrote in message
. com...
Scott wrote:
I don't know, my first 'cycling hero' (if I have such a thing) was
Lemond. Damn'd if I'm gonna wear a La Vie Claire jersey and those
fuggly Oakleys that were all the rage back then!

Consider yourself lucky Hincapie isn't your hero.

or Laurent Fignon.... you thought those Oakleys were the pit of fashion?

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.

But I've road-tested helmets three times now. Twice, who knows, I came out
fine, the helmet cracked, maybe I would have been fine anyway. But one time
the helmet was worthwhile, even though it almost-certainly didn't save my
life. It was one of those freak things where a little girl runs out of a
campground into the road, I'm descending quickly, and to avoid her I end up
going down. On my side. And I can remember sliding along the ground and
hearing this awful loud noise, and wondering what it was.

After I picked myself up and surveyed the damage (not much, thankfully!), I
for some reason removed my helmet and looked at it. One side of it was
heavily scraped, from where it was sliding on the ground. That was the
noise. As I said, it wouldn't have been killed me, but it wouldn't have been
much fun losing all that skin either. That's good enough for me to wear one.

But... while I have no issues with clubs & ride requiring helmets, I don't
think there should be state or federally-mandated helmet laws, even for
kids. I think the safety benefits of cycling (being in shape, avoiding all
manner of diseases & conditions, sparing the planet of exhaust fumes etc)
outweigh the supposed dangers of cycling. And for kids, anything that might
keep them from riding a bike is, in my opinion, a very bad thing. I just
can't look at a kid out riding without a helmet and think he or she's an
outlaw. Rather, I think he or she is doing something cool... riding a bike.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"Mike Jacoubowsky" wrote in message
t...

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.

Indeed. What's more the national statistics have shown NO changes in the
numbers of serious and fatal injuries sustained on bicycles since the
introduction of helmets until now when helmets are almost universal. That
ought to tell you something.

But I've road-tested helmets three times now. Twice, who knows, I came out
fine, the helmet cracked, maybe I would have been fine anyway. But one
time the helmet was worthwhile, even though it almost-certainly didn't
save my life. It was one of those freak things where a little girl runs
out of a campground into the road, I'm descending quickly, and to avoid
her I end up going down. On my side. And I can remember sliding along the
ground and hearing this awful loud noise, and wondering what it was.

My brother also fell off and swears by his helmet. That doesn't mean that
the injuries you sustained would have been significantly worse without a
helmet. Do you suppose that had your head touched the ground that you
wouldn't have lifted it off? I mean, I crashed motorcycles at great speeds
off-road racing and road racing and never touched my helmet to the ground
until one time I thought, "Gee, the helmet is there and can protect me."

After I picked myself up and surveyed the damage (not much, thankfully!),
I for some reason removed my helmet and looked at it. One side of it was
heavily scraped, from where it was sliding on the ground. That was the
noise. As I said, it wouldn't have been killed me, but it wouldn't have
been much fun losing all that skin either. That's good enough for me to
wear one.

And that's why people who feel the need to wear one should be able to. But
the constant barrage of helmet saved my life stories are so preposterous
that it helps a bit to realize that there are more of those stories than
there ever were serious injuries.

BTW a "serious" injury is one in which you need to stay at least overnight
in the hospital. So a concussion may be thought a serious injury in some
hospitals and not others.

But... while I have no issues with clubs & ride requiring helmets, I don't
think there should be state or federally-mandated helmet laws, even for
kids. I think the safety benefits of cycling (being in shape, avoiding all
manner of diseases & conditions, sparing the planet of exhaust fumes etc)
outweigh the supposed dangers of cycling. And for kids, anything that
might keep them from riding a bike is, in my opinion, a very bad thing. I
just can't look at a kid out riding without a helmet and think he or she's
an outlaw. Rather, I think he or she is doing something cool... riding a
bike.

Bicycling adds more years to your life by a factor of 50 or so than bicycle
accidents with or without a helmet take away.

Bicycle helmets are little more than a good luck charm and have almost the
same efficacy.