A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sad helmet incident



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old January 20th 20, 08:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Sad helmet incident

On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 9:42:50 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 6:55:10 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:

There's no giant conspiracy [to pass a MHL in Oregon] because you already have a helmet law in
Oregon. You're just not part of the group subject to it. But there's
constant social pressure to maintain the meme that "Of _course_ you must
wear a helmet!" And if you ride into Washington State, you may find
yourself in violation of a MHL.


Yes, its true, I'm over the age of 16.


So every parent is now expected to tell their kids "Riding a bike is
really dangerous. You are NOT allowed to ever ride without wearing a
helmet!"


Luckily, I sired a non-stupid child. My son understood that there were rules to follow and did not get hysterical about wearing a helmet or the risks of cycling. There were times when he did not wear a helmet -- like our usual store run when I don't wear a helmet either. He also went through a phase when he didn't wear a helmet sometimes because of high school hair issues.

Ah, the good old days: https://attheu.utah.edu/home-page/be...alt-lake-city/ At Specialized, I think he can get a helmet for like $1. He's seen his friends injured and has had spills of his own racing and riding, so he generally wears a helmet when he rides.


If my local experience is any indication, that means a bunch of parents
will say "Look, why don't you do something else instead?" And a bunch of
kids will say "Screw it, if I have to wear that dorky hat, I'm not riding.."

And this is portrayed as benign?


Hasn't cut down or ridership in Portland. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/trans...article/407660 To you, it is an end-of-world issue. To the cycling population in PDX -- its meaningless. Kids are used to wearing helmets, and people over 16 do what they want.


Well, perhaps you wouldn't, because you wouldn't dare ride without a
helmet.


Yes, because I'm just some frady cat, and you're a bare-head hero!


No, because you've bought into the hype and made it part of your uniform.

Honestly, I'm pretty sure you're braver than I am. I can tell that by
your tales of crashes.


Yes, like falling into a submerged pot hole and going OTB. I should have had Garmin sonar on my bike -- or going down on a patch of invisible black ice in front of my office. I've crashed riding at walking speed over a board-slat MUP bridge that was slimy (which now has indoor-outdoor carpet on it).. This was ordinary riding/commuting and not crazy risk taking.



... I started wearing a helmet full time with the USCF rule change and pestering from my now wife.


Requests (not pestering) from my wife was what got me originally wearing
one. After years of commuting in a small city, we moved here and she
said "If you're going to commute in this [bigger] city I'd like you to
wear a helmet." I agreed to her wishes to lessen her worries.

Since then, I've learned a lot, and she's heard quite a bit of it. She
occasionally wears a helmet "because mine is pretty!" She never asks me to.

It hasn't caused me any emotional distress, unlike some.


Apparently it doesn't cause you intellectual distress either.


Nope. My helmets have paid off. It's the intellectually right move for me. Maybe not for you.


But there are plenty of cyclists who could get prosecuted for
perfectly reasonable behavior.


Prosecuted? You men a ticket (that doesn't go against your license and can't be used for rating your insurnce)?


Are you implying that's no trouble at all, and people shouldn't fuss
about it?


No more than they should fuss about the ten-bazillion other things for which you can get a ticket from a municipality. We were talking about the local Washington MHLs -- which are ordinances and not state laws. We don't have those ordinances here in PDX, but we do have the state MHL for kids under 16, which doesn't seem to be keeping kids off bikes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4FO_9rKLO4 How are you doing there in helmet free Ohio?


This is one of my nearby climbs with a typical Portland driver. You would wear a helmet, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fzwm4m3ZFI


Note at about 1:00 into the video, the driver is wearing a helmet. By
some of the bike helmet promotion logic, every motorist should strap on
a full face helmet before pulling out of the driveway.

"Racers wear a helmet, so you should too!"


Uh, no -- most drivers are not drifting up Rock Point which, in some places, just falls off a cliff.

BTW, that descent on a bike is very helmet worthy, particularly on wet pavement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NPqQptjbF0 I have worse descents just coming home from work, although much shorter -- but over broken concrete that has worn to polished aggregate over the last 100 years. Check out the pavement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJRnwgPa6rM&app=desktop Coming down that is nasty, and its super slippery when wet. We have trails and hills and broken roads and all sorts of things that might be absent in your village. Riding through rain lakes with hidden pot holes is a real thing. https://bikeportland.org/2015/12/07/...ing-you-169786

-- Jay Beattie.



Ads
  #82  
Old January 20th 20, 09:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Sad helmet incident

On 1/20/2020 12:10 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:06 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 09:36:47 UTC-5, Duane wrote:

I have no confidence that a bike helmet with prevent
concussions. Hell
football helmets don't and they're a lot stronger than
bike helmets.
Both may mitigate the damage but I wouldn't depend on it.


Okay I agree with you about helmets and concussions.

When I saw the deep dent on the temple area of my helmet I
sure was glad that I had the helmet on that ride. A fellow
not riding with us, who was behind us, saw me fall and
bounce and was ready to key in 911. He couldn't believe
that I just got up, checked my bicycle, rinsed off my
scrapes on the arms and shoulder and was ready to continue
my ride. At the very least I didn't have scrapes on my
head where scrapes usually bleed quite freely. I'm just
glad that the helmet was there to take the impact instead
of my temple taking that impact.


Let me describe an incident I saw and posted here over ten
years ago.

We had just had dinner with several friends at a nice
restaurant in a big city. We were walking back to our cars.
Ahead, a tour bus was parked at the opposite curb. A car was
in the process of passing the parked tour bus.

Just as the car got to the front end of the bus, a young guy
came zooming across the street directly in front of the car.
There was no way the driver could avoid him. From our
position behind the car, we heard a huge BANG! and saw the
young guy's body fly up into the air, upside down. His head
was higher than the roof of the car. Later we heard that he
landed on his head on the street.

I immediately turned around and sprinted back to the
restaurant to call 911 and report a probable fatality; then
I ran up to the site of the crash, where the driver was
upset and sobbing. The front of her car was badly mangled
and her windshield was broken.

But there was no dead body. Instead, the college kid she hit
was sitting on a low wall at the sidewalk, his head being
held immobile by an off-duty emergency medical technician
who happened to see the crash.

Very soon, an ambulance crew arrived, immobilized the guy on
a stretcher and took him to ER. A cop took statements from
us witnesses.

The young guy? He had a slight cut above his right ear, with
almost no bleeding. It seemed to be from the windshield
wiper. He was the one who said he landed on his head after
the crash. But he was fine. I phoned the next day in case
he had died or something, and my testimony might be needed.
They said he attended classes as usual and had only a minor
headache.

The weird part? He was NOT wearing a helmet. Even weirder,
nobody - not the EMT, not the ambulance guys, not the cop,
none of the witnesses - said he should have been wearing one.

That's because he was a pedestrian, not a bicyclist. He had
jogged out from the front of that bus. And even though
pedestrians have far more serious TBI (in total or per mile
traveled) nobody said he needed a helmet.

But if he had worn one? Why, it would be smashed. It would
have been absolute proof that it "saved his life." It might
have made its way into a newspaper article, or be on display
in a pedestrian protective gear shop - like a couple of bike
helmets I've seen.

(Have people noticed there are not mandatory pedestrian
helmet laws even for kids?)



I don't doubt you. Our local news also periodically covers
minor slips and falls on ice with much less impact but yet
fatal. We all have our favorite anecdotes which, even when
each true and complete, are not dispositive to any larger
trend or principle.

If one mocks 'helmet saved my life', then 'no helmet, didn't
die' is equally unconvincing.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #83  
Old January 20th 20, 10:26 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 173
Default Sad helmet incident

AMuzi wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:10 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:06 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 09:36:47 UTC-5, Duane wrote:

I have no confidence that a bike helmet with prevent
concussions. Hell
football helmets don't and they're a lot stronger than
bike helmets.
Both may mitigate the damage but I wouldn't depend on it.

Okay I agree with you about helmets and concussions.

When I saw the deep dent on the temple area of my helmet I
sure was glad that I had the helmet on that ride. A fellow
not riding with us, who was behind us, saw me fall and
bounce and was ready to key in 911. He couldn't believe
that I just got up, checked my bicycle, rinsed off my
scrapes on the arms and shoulder and was ready to continue
my ride. At the very least I didn't have scrapes on my
head where scrapes usually bleed quite freely. I'm just
glad that the helmet was there to take the impact instead
of my temple taking that impact.


Let me describe an incident I saw and posted here over ten
years ago.

We had just had dinner with several friends at a nice
restaurant in a big city. We were walking back to our cars.
Ahead, a tour bus was parked at the opposite curb. A car was
in the process of passing the parked tour bus.

Just as the car got to the front end of the bus, a young guy
came zooming across the street directly in front of the car.
There was no way the driver could avoid him. From our
position behind the car, we heard a huge BANG! and saw the
young guy's body fly up into the air, upside down. His head
was higher than the roof of the car. Later we heard that he
landed on his head on the street.

I immediately turned around and sprinted back to the
restaurant to call 911 and report a probable fatality; then
I ran up to the site of the crash, where the driver was
upset and sobbing. The front of her car was badly mangled
and her windshield was broken.

But there was no dead body. Instead, the college kid she hit
was sitting on a low wall at the sidewalk, his head being
held immobile by an off-duty emergency medical technician
who happened to see the crash.

Very soon, an ambulance crew arrived, immobilized the guy on
a stretcher and took him to ER. A cop took statements from
us witnesses.

The young guy? He had a slight cut above his right ear, with
almost no bleeding. It seemed to be from the windshield
wiper. He was the one who said he landed on his head after
the crash. But he was fine. I phoned the next day in case
he had died or something, and my testimony might be needed.
They said he attended classes as usual and had only a minor
headache.

The weird part? He was NOT wearing a helmet. Even weirder,
nobody - not the EMT, not the ambulance guys, not the cop,
none of the witnesses - said he should have been wearing one.

That's because he was a pedestrian, not a bicyclist. He had
jogged out from the front of that bus. And even though
pedestrians have far more serious TBI (in total or per mile
traveled) nobody said he needed a helmet.

But if he had worn one? Why, it would be smashed. It would
have been absolute proof that it "saved his life." It might
have made its way into a newspaper article, or be on display
in a pedestrian protective gear shop - like a couple of bike
helmets I've seen.

(Have people noticed there are not mandatory pedestrian
helmet laws even for kids?)



I don't doubt you. Our local news also periodically covers
minor slips and falls on ice with much less impact but yet
fatal. We all have our favorite anecdotes which, even when
each true and complete, are not dispositive to any larger
trend or principle.

If one mocks 'helmet saved my life', then 'no helmet, didn't
die' is equally unconvincing.


+1



  #84  
Old January 20th 20, 11:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Sad helmet incident

On 1/20/2020 2:00 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 12:47:09 UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2020 5:00 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

A number of years ago I wiped out with such force that my helmeted head bounced off the pavement twice and had a very nice dent in the temple area. Frank's response to my post about that incident was if I had not been wearing the helmet my head would not have struck the pavement. It's amazing what Frank can see from thousands of miles or thousands of kilometers away from every incident.


No, Sir, you're falsely portraying what I said. My phrasing on these
matters is very careful.

Dig out a direct quote, instead of paraphrasing it for your straw man
purposes - or more charitably, paraphrasing it due to your imperfect memory.

--
- Frank Krygowski


Okay, you stated: "More briefly, many helmet hits would be near misses
with bare heads, and many hard helmet hits would be gentle hits of a
bare head."

and:

And you may be correct. That is, you may be the unusual person who
correctly assessed the severity of the impact your helmet sustained;
and you may also be the unusual person who can correctly tell that the
impact of your bare head would have caused serious injury.

and:

"It seems much more likely that most dented helmets are not proof a
serious head would have occurred. Instead, it's proof that if you put
something oversized and fragile on your head, you're likely to bump it
eventually. You can probably demonstrate the same thing by wearing
your helmet 24 hours a day. My bet is you'll dent it getting in and
out of your car, looking for cooking pots in your kitchen cabinets,
working in your garage, carrying your ladder, hiking in the woods,
etc"

and so on but I have better things to do than argue with you when you start ranting about people choosing to wear a helmet.


Thank you for your honesty, in posting direct quotes that disproved what
you said about me earlier.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #85  
Old January 20th 20, 11:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Sad helmet incident

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 13:25:42 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/19/2020 10:39 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 22:25:40 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 1/19/2020 2:45 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but it is very unlikely that
bicycle helmets will disappear or be outlawed in the foreseeable
future. Even if some neutral organization could be found to sponsor a
long term study proving that bicycle helmets cause some accidents, are
unsafe, and generally fail to deliver on advertised promises, bicycle
helmets will not disappear from the market or from general use.

That's because the PERCEPTION of safety is what sells bicycle helmets.
To the GUM (great unwashed masses), one is simply not riding safely
without a bicycle helmet.

I admit, I'm hoping for a sudden epidemic of acute rationality. Heck,
I'd be satisfied with slowly increasing chronic rationality.

I'm hoping that gradually, people will begin saying "Wait a minute, the
data shows there's just not much head injury risk in riding a bike." And
perhaps "It looks like bike helmets really aren't doing much good."

It's not impossible. The idealists who want to promote bicycling so
people stop driving cars are beginning to say "Helmet laws are
counterproductive" and sometimes even saying "Helmets aren't needed."
They're pointing out facts like tens of millions of American bike share
trips, with a total of only one fatality ever. They're actively
countering some of the worst nonsense.

I don't agree with everything these people say, but I think they're
right about MHLs.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2020/01/...-laws-are-bad/


I've always been of the opinion that making laws to ensure people act
safe is the wrong way to approach the subject. I would rather see
something that obviously penalized the individual such as "if you
aren't wearing a helmet your hospitalization is null and void".


I guess you mean "your hospitalization insurance"? If so, I'd agree ONLY
if that were applied to absolutely everyone who appeared at a hospital
with a head injury. Not just bicyclists.

I'll note that statements like yours are not uncommon in helmet rants on
the internet, especially when non-cyclists post in comments on news
articles. But those non-cyclists always aim that prejudiced proposal
ONLY at bicyclists. Never at motorists and never at pedestrians,
although their count of head (or brain) injuries absolutely eclipses
that of bicyclists.


You are adapt at ignoring the point of the argument, aren't you. The
discussion is about bicycle helmets, not pedestrian helmets, auto
helmets, helmets for sleeping in, etc. Thus I was speaking of bicycle
helmets and posing a different solution, which I suggest is more fair
than, or at least offers more individual choice than, an all
encompassing "helmet law".
--
cheers,

John B.

  #86  
Old January 20th 20, 11:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Sad helmet incident

On 1/20/2020 2:14 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 9:42:50 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:18 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 6:55:10 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:

There's no giant conspiracy [to pass a MHL in Oregon] because you already have a helmet law in
Oregon. You're just not part of the group subject to it. But there's
constant social pressure to maintain the meme that "Of _course_ you must
wear a helmet!" And if you ride into Washington State, you may find
yourself in violation of a MHL.

Yes, its true, I'm over the age of 16.


So every parent is now expected to tell their kids "Riding a bike is
really dangerous. You are NOT allowed to ever ride without wearing a
helmet!"


Luckily, I sired a non-stupid child. My son understood that there were rules to follow and did not get hysterical about wearing a helmet or the risks of cycling. There were times when he did not wear a helmet -- like our usual store run when I don't wear a helmet either. He also went through a phase when he didn't wear a helmet sometimes because of high school hair issues.

Ah, the good old days: https://attheu.utah.edu/home-page/be...alt-lake-city/ At Specialized, I think he can get a helmet for like $1. He's seen his friends injured and has had spills of his own racing and riding, so he generally wears a helmet when he rides.


If my local experience is any indication, that means a bunch of parents
will say "Look, why don't you do something else instead?" And a bunch of
kids will say "Screw it, if I have to wear that dorky hat, I'm not riding."

And this is portrayed as benign?


Hasn't cut down or ridership in Portland. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/trans...article/407660 To you, it is an end-of-world issue. To the cycling population in PDX -- its meaningless. Kids are used to wearing helmets, and people over 16 do what they want.


Sorry, but "it hasn't cut down on ridership in Portland" is pure
speculation. I recognize that Portland has much more bicycling than
almost all U.S. cities. But that in itself is not proof that helmet laws
or promotions don't deter riding.

Logically, we know there are at least some kids who will choose not to
ride if forced to wear a helmet. Both our kids had that opinion at one
time or another, and I knew other kids with the same attitude. For the
policy to have no net effect, there would have to be other kids who say
"I never liked riding a bike, but now that I'm forced to wear a helmet,
I"m going to begin riding." I don't know any person who ever said that.

Honestly, I'm pretty sure you're braver than I am. I can tell that by
your tales of crashes.


Yes, like falling into a submerged pot hole and going OTB. I should have had Garmin sonar on my bike -- or going down on a patch of invisible black ice in front of my office. I've crashed riding at walking speed over a board-slat MUP bridge that was slimy (which now has indoor-outdoor carpet on it). This was ordinary riding/commuting and not crazy risk taking.


Jay, do you think I've never ridden below freezing? Do you think I never
rode on bridges or causeways with slippery wood surfaces? Do you think
we don't have potholes?

Fun fact: About three years ago the mayor of our village was lobbying
for a new village levy, to be devoted entirely to road paving, because
so many village streets were in terrible shape. Guess which street he
chose to pose on, for the newspaper photo?

He chose my street, which he apparently considered the most dramatic
photo of potholes and patches. And it worked! The levy passed.

Now guess which was the first street to get paved.

OK, that's not fair, so I'll tell you. It was the street the mayor lives
on. My street was not the second. Nor the third, fourth, fifth or sixth.
I don't know where the count is now, but our street still looks exactly
the same. And until about three weeks ago, it included a pothole about
one foot by 18 inches, and maybe five inches deep. I had to avoid it
every time I turned into our street, either by car or by bike, whether
wet or dry.

In any case, I deal with these things, and somehow I don't fall. Perhaps
I'm more afraid of falling than you are.
It hasn't caused me any emotional distress, unlike some.


Apparently it doesn't cause you intellectual distress either.


Nope. My helmets have paid off. It's the intellectually right move for me. Maybe not for you.


Apparently it's not the right move for me, since I've never needed one
in over 45 years of avid adult riding.

My intellectual distress is with the propaganda that always accompanies
helmet promotion. It's always either implied or stated that you NEED one
of these things, because riding a bike is a big injury risk. I remain
astonished that so many people, including so many avid cyclists, are so
taken in by the propaganda, and so ignorant of the relevant data.

But there are plenty of cyclists who could get prosecuted for
perfectly reasonable behavior.

Prosecuted? You men a ticket (that doesn't go against your license and can't be used for rating your insurnce)?


Are you implying that's no trouble at all, and people shouldn't fuss
about it?


No more than they should fuss about the ten-bazillion other things for which you can get a ticket from a municipality. We were talking about the local Washington MHLs -- which are ordinances and not state laws.


Whatever. It does bother me that an activity that is beneficial to the
individual and beneficial to society is ladened with senseless laws,
ordinances, or whatever you call the regulations.

If there were ordinances saying you can't have your porch light on
during daylight, or your car must be red, or you're not allowed to put a
sign in your yard, I'd think those were stupid too. But bicycling is
rather more important to me; hence I give more attention to stupid
bicycle regulations. (We can talk about AFRAP laws again if you like.)

We don't have those ordinances here in PDX, but we do have the state MHL for kids under 16, which doesn't seem to be keeping kids off bikes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4FO_9rKLO4 How are you doing there in helmet free Ohio?


You've got great promotion of bicycling. I think it's partly because of
a court case that mandated spending a certain percentage of
transportation funds on non-motorized transportation, no? ;-)

OTOH, there are other places that have bike mode shares that dwarf
Portland's. And they don't promote helmets at all, let alone mandate
them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVhYcJH_m5o See what Portland
could be if not for helmets?

OK, more seriously: There are many things that affect ridership.
Fashion, local culture, city density, traffic levels, trip distances,
climate, terrain, economy, privileges or penalties for motorists, etc.
But there's no way that helmet promotion or mandates are a positive
influence.

This is one of my nearby climbs with a typical Portland driver. You would wear a helmet, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Fzwm4m3ZFI


Note at about 1:00 into the video, the driver is wearing a helmet. By
some of the bike helmet promotion logic, every motorist should strap on
a full face helmet before pulling out of the driveway.

"Racers wear a helmet, so you should too!"


Uh, no -- most drivers are not drifting up Rock Point which, in some places, just falls off a cliff.


But that _has_ been said about bicyclists! I've rebutted it in this
discussion group with references to NASCAR.

BTW, that descent on a bike is very helmet worthy, particularly on wet pavement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NPqQptjbF0


And I'm sure I would descend much more slowly and cautiously than you.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #87  
Old January 20th 20, 11:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Sad helmet incident

On 1/20/2020 7:32 AM, wrote:

snip

Personally I agree with Frank that helmets should not made mandatory.


I don't think anyone on r.b.t. has ever advocated for making helmets
mandatory. But those that dismiss the overwhelming scientific and
statistical evidence just to try to justify their personal choices, are
not helping to prevent MHLs, it's the exact opposite.

Imagine a government hearing on an MHL. On one side you have ER doctors,
EMTs, RNs, etc., explaining the benefits of helmets and showing
statistical evidence comparing injury and fatality rates of helmeted
versus non-helmeted cyclists. On the other side you have someone talking
about foam hats and gardening helmets, and asking why driving helmets
should not also be made mandatory. The legislators have to decide who to
believe. The people in the middle, who say that while helmets are a good
idea, the actual absolute number of injuries and fatalities that they
prevent does not make compulsion is the best approach, and hence
education is a better approach, are ignored.

Some politicians want to pass more laws to make everything safe for
everyone, and to exert control over every aspect of people's lives. I
don't think that that is a good approach. It's especially annoying when
we're presented with ordinances that address non-existent problems and
that if there was a problem there are already laws that address it.

So as long as helmet wear is not made mandatory I see no point in getting so upset as Frank does.


+1.

  #88  
Old January 20th 20, 11:46 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Sad helmet incident

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:06:43 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Monday, 20 January 2020 09:36:47 UTC-5, Duane wrote:
On 1/20/2020 6:17 AM, wrote:
On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 11:00:17 AM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 03:55:02 UTC-5, wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 11:40:34 PM UTC+1, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 11:39:07 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/19/2020 12:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Even on this group, we've
had people who used to say helmets saved lives or prevent brain
injuries. Now they piously say they wear a helmet only to prevent minor
injuries.

But they never ride without it.

. . . because they would prefer to avoid scalp injury, skull fracture, maybe even mitigate concussion. Sounds like a reasonable thing to do. I'm going out in a bit -- wet pavement, poor traction, rough roads. Seems like an appropriate time for a helmet. Why not? Wearing a helmet does not crush my soul, enslave my head, embolden Big Helmet or pose any other existential threat -- at least to me. I also wear gloves for hand protection.

You're allowed to wear it, Jay. You can justify it to yourself however
you like. Ditto the gloves.

But two points:

First, I also ride roads that are famous - or rather, notorious - for
roughness. (I can explain why in terms of state funding for county
roads, if you like.) I'm sure I ride far fewer miles on wet roads than
you, but I still ride them, the last time being about five days ago.
It's certainly possible to do these things without hitting one's head.
Since becoming an adult, the only time my head ever touched earth
(lightly) from a bike crash was about 12 years ago, when our tandem's
forks suddenly snapped off.

I think I'm more cautious than you. Maybe that's because I don't feel
protected by a helmet?

Second point: The people I'm talking about say they _never_ ride without
a helmet. I also know people who never ride without gloves. Really? Is
_every_ ride so dangerous that protective gear is needed?

I strongly suspect that most of those people will jump in a car to ride
two blocks to buy a magazine. And indeed, I recall the day when I had
ridden my bike less than half a mile to a store, where a guy I know said
"Where's your helmet??"

This mania for protection - but ONLY when traveling by bicycle - can't
help but dissuade a lot of bike use.

Speaking of manias, you've made helmets your own white whale or bete noire -- pick your color. If you don't want to wear a helmet, fine. Helmets have prevented me from having more extensive injuries, so I wear one. I don't see the same deep, deep downside as you. And no, there is no giant conspiracy to pass a MHL in Oregon, so I'm not going to agonize over looming helmet laws and the possible enslavement of my hair.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay what would Frank do with his time when everyone agreed with his views. Like you I make my own judgement and distrust any data of any study about helmet use. Saves me a lot of time which we can spend on actual riding our bike(s).

Lou

A number of years ago I wiped out with such force that my helmeted head bounced off the pavement twice and had a very nice dent in the temple area. Frank's response to my post about that incident was if I had not been wearing the helmet my head would not have struck the pavement. It's amazing what Frank can see from thousands of miles or thousands of kilometers away from every incident.

Cheers

I think annoying is that if someone report a crash or fall and claims that he benefited from wearing a helmet (not save our life) he often says because it never happened to Frank to him that:
- he/she took too much risk/misjudged the situation,
- he/she could prevented it by riding more carefully or should have taken a course or read a book,
- wearing a helmet didn't make a difference,
- wearing a helmet make us guilty of the fear mongering.

And the most annying is that after this he says: 'you can do/wear/buy' whatever you want.

Lou

+1

You forgot about the bit where you say you cracked your helmet and get
back "you only hit your head because of the added thickness of the
helmet." Like SRA says, it's not possible to make such conclusions with
no clue of the circumstances.

I'm with Jay and Andre. I wear a helmet because road rash on my head
hurts like hell and scalp wounds bleed a lot and though my ears are
larger than necessary I don't want to scrape them down in size.

I have no confidence that a bike helmet with prevent concussions. Hell
football helmets don't and they're a lot stronger than bike helmets.
Both may mitigate the damage but I wouldn't depend on it.


Okay I agree with you about helmets and concussions.

When I saw the deep dent on the temple area of my helmet I sure was glad that I had the helmet on that ride. A fellow not riding with us, who was behind us, saw me fall and bounce and was ready to key in 911. He couldn't believe that I just got up, checked my bicycle, rinsed off my scrapes on the arms and shoulder and was ready to continue my ride. At the very least I didn't have scrapes on my head where scrapes usually bleed quite freely. I'm just glad that the helmet was there to take the impact instead of my temple taking that impact.

I don NOT repeat NOT like the idea of mandatory helmet laws.

Helmets don't protect nor can they protect from everything. Sheesh, when I was in the army I saw bullets go clean through M1 style steel military helmets. Does that mean no soldier should wear a helmet? LOL VBEG

Cheers


But... military helmets are not designed to be bullet proof, or to
phrase it a bit differently the M-16 was designed to penetrate one
side of a helmet at 500 yards.
--
cheers,

John B.

  #89  
Old January 20th 20, 11:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Sad helmet incident

On 1/20/2020 3:42 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:10 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2020 12:06 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 09:36:47 UTC-5, DuaneÂ* wrote:

I have no confidence that a bike helmet with prevent
concussions.Â* Hell
football helmets don't and they're a lot stronger than
bike helmets.
Both may mitigate the damage but I wouldn't depend on it.

Okay I agree with you about helmets and concussions.

When I saw the deep dent on the temple area of my helmet I
sure was glad that I had the helmet on that ride. A fellow
not riding with us, who was behind us, saw me fall and
bounce and was ready to key in 911. He couldn't believe
that I just got up, checked my bicycle, rinsed off my
scrapes on the arms and shoulder and was ready to continue
my ride. At the very least I didn't have scrapes on my
head where scrapes usually bleed quite freely. I'm just
glad that the helmet was there to take the impact instead
of my temple taking that impact.


Let me describe an incident I saw and posted here over ten
years ago.

We had just had dinner with several friends at a nice
restaurant in a big city. We were walking back to our cars.
Ahead, a tour bus was parked at the opposite curb. A car was
in the process of passing the parked tour bus.

Just as the car got to the front end of the bus, a young guy
came zooming across the street directly in front of the car.
There was no way the driver could avoid him. From our
position behind the car, we heard a huge BANG! and saw the
young guy's body fly up into the air, upside down. His head
was higher than the roof of the car. Later we heard that he
landed on his head on the street.

I immediately turned around and sprinted back to the
restaurant to call 911 and report a probable fatality; then
I ran up to the site of the crash, where the driver was
upset and sobbing. The front of her car was badly mangled
and her windshield was broken.

But there was no dead body. Instead, the college kid she hit
was sitting on a low wall at the sidewalk, his head being
held immobile by an off-duty emergency medical technician
who happened to see the crash.

Very soon, an ambulance crew arrived, immobilized the guy on
a stretcher and took him to ER. A cop took statements from
us witnesses.

The young guy? He had a slight cut above his right ear, with
almost no bleeding. It seemed to be from the windshield
wiper. He was the one who said he landed on his head after
the crash.Â* But he was fine. I phoned the next day in case
he had died or something, and my testimony might be needed.
They said he attended classes as usual and had only a minor
headache.

The weird part? He was NOT wearing a helmet. Even weirder,
nobody - not the EMT, not the ambulance guys, not the cop,
none of the witnesses - said he should have been wearing one.

That's because he was a pedestrian, not a bicyclist. He had
jogged out from the front of that bus. And even though
pedestrians have far more serious TBI (in total or per mile
traveled) nobody said he needed a helmet.

But if he had worn one? Why, it would be smashed. It would
have been absolute proof that it "saved his life." It might
have made its way into a newspaper article, or be on display
in a pedestrian protective gear shop - like a couple of bike
helmets I've seen.

(Have people noticed there are not mandatory pedestrian
helmet laws even for kids?)

I don't doubt you. Our local news also periodically covers minor slips

and falls on ice with much less impact but yet fatal. We all have our
favorite anecdotes which, even when each true and complete, are not
dispositive to any larger trend or principle.


Which is precisely why I repeatedly call for paying attention to
national data, rather than to scary anecdotes.

If one mocks 'helmet saved my life', then 'no helmet, didn't die' is
equally unconvincing.


They are not equivalent! The former case is speculation, unless the
crash is precisely duplicated without a helmet and results in the
person's death - a procedure that's obviously impossible.

But if a person did crash and did not die, that case is a proven fact.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #90  
Old January 20th 20, 11:53 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
jOHN b.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,421
Default Sad helmet incident

On Mon, 20 Jan 2020 09:36:40 -0500, Duane
wrote:

On 1/20/2020 6:17 AM, wrote:
On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 11:00:17 AM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, 20 January 2020 03:55:02 UTC-5, wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 11:40:34 PM UTC+1, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 11:39:07 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/19/2020 12:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 8:38:52 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Even on this group, we've
had people who used to say helmets saved lives or prevent brain
injuries. Now they piously say they wear a helmet only to prevent minor
injuries.

But they never ride without it.

. . . because they would prefer to avoid scalp injury, skull fracture, maybe even mitigate concussion. Sounds like a reasonable thing to do. I'm going out in a bit -- wet pavement, poor traction, rough roads. Seems like an appropriate time for a helmet. Why not? Wearing a helmet does not crush my soul, enslave my head, embolden Big Helmet or pose any other existential threat -- at least to me. I also wear gloves for hand protection.

You're allowed to wear it, Jay. You can justify it to yourself however
you like. Ditto the gloves.

But two points:

First, I also ride roads that are famous - or rather, notorious - for
roughness. (I can explain why in terms of state funding for county
roads, if you like.) I'm sure I ride far fewer miles on wet roads than
you, but I still ride them, the last time being about five days ago.
It's certainly possible to do these things without hitting one's head.
Since becoming an adult, the only time my head ever touched earth
(lightly) from a bike crash was about 12 years ago, when our tandem's
forks suddenly snapped off.

I think I'm more cautious than you. Maybe that's because I don't feel
protected by a helmet?

Second point: The people I'm talking about say they _never_ ride without
a helmet. I also know people who never ride without gloves. Really? Is
_every_ ride so dangerous that protective gear is needed?

I strongly suspect that most of those people will jump in a car to ride
two blocks to buy a magazine. And indeed, I recall the day when I had
ridden my bike less than half a mile to a store, where a guy I know said
"Where's your helmet??"

This mania for protection - but ONLY when traveling by bicycle - can't
help but dissuade a lot of bike use.

Speaking of manias, you've made helmets your own white whale or bete noire -- pick your color. If you don't want to wear a helmet, fine. Helmets have prevented me from having more extensive injuries, so I wear one. I don't see the same deep, deep downside as you. And no, there is no giant conspiracy to pass a MHL in Oregon, so I'm not going to agonize over looming helmet laws and the possible enslavement of my hair.

-- Jay Beattie.

Jay what would Frank do with his time when everyone agreed with his views. Like you I make my own judgement and distrust any data of any study about helmet use. Saves me a lot of time which we can spend on actual riding our bike(s).

Lou

A number of years ago I wiped out with such force that my helmeted head bounced off the pavement twice and had a very nice dent in the temple area. Frank's response to my post about that incident was if I had not been wearing the helmet my head would not have struck the pavement. It's amazing what Frank can see from thousands of miles or thousands of kilometers away from every incident.

Cheers


I think annoying is that if someone report a crash or fall and claims that he benefited from wearing a helmet (not save our life) he often says because it never happened to Frank to him that:
- he/she took too much risk/misjudged the situation,
- he/she could prevented it by riding more carefully or should have taken a course or read a book,
- wearing a helmet didn't make a difference,
- wearing a helmet make us guilty of the fear mongering.

And the most annying is that after this he says: 'you can do/wear/buy' whatever you want.

Lou

+1

You forgot about the bit where you say you cracked your helmet and get
back "you only hit your head because of the added thickness of the
helmet." Like SRA says, it's not possible to make such conclusions with
no clue of the circumstances.


Well, I was in a squadron where the commander required all maintenance
personnel to wear a plastic "hard hat" as is commonly used in the
construction trades. I can assure you that in working on airplanes one
did "bump one's head" more frequently than when wearing the normal
cloth cap :-)

I can only assume that a bicycle helmet would be similar.
--
cheers,

John B.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another RLJ incident Simon Mason UK 6 September 30th 11 07:31 AM
An Incident Jorg Lueke General 28 June 17th 08 04:51 PM
First incident in ages Chris Eilbeck UK 12 September 22nd 06 07:52 PM
Strange incident Tom Crispin UK 7 March 3rd 06 06:54 PM
Another incident MikeyOz Australia 18 January 17th 06 09:48 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.