First Helmet : jury is out.

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message ...
Given all the riding I plan to
do my options seem limited. 1) come away dead, 2) come away extremely messed
up, 3) come away with some skin removed and some stuff broken. So if my
helmet helps with situation 3, I'll be happy. In either of the other two
options, the helmet thing will be a moot point.

??

There's certainly another option. Ride competently. Don't crash.

It's worked for me for several decades now.

-- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" wrote in message
:: ...
::: Given all the riding I plan to
::: do my options seem limited. 1) come away dead, 2) come away
::: extremely messed
::: up, 3) come away with some skin removed and some stuff broken. So
::: if my
::: helmet helps with situation 3, I'll be happy. In either of the
::: other two
::: options, the helmet thing will be a moot point.
::
:: ??
::
:: There's certainly another option. Ride competently. Don't crash.
::
:: It's worked for me for several decades now.

That's good to know, actually, and I plan to do exactly that!

Q. wrote:

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message
...
snip

:: The added noise and irritation that the helment causes more than
:: offsets the "possible" help it gives in case of a spill by deducting
:: from my usual spacial awareness.

What noise and irritation? Regardless of any merits about safety, I find

my

helmet comfortable. If I ride without it, I feel as though I'm not

wearing

my seatbelt.


Interesting ... I've heard similar statements before. I wonder if there is
a "security blanket" effect associated with helmets. I can see how wearing
a "magic foam hat" fundamentally wouldn't be any different than a cave man
wearing a talisman around his neck while going into battle.

C.Q.C.


You mean like ancient Celts wearing only tattoos, torque (around the
neck) and sandals?

On Mon, 10 May 2004 21:52:58 GMT, "curt" wrote in
message :

I don't even know if helmets are a law in Pennsylvania, but I wear one. I
don't know why, but if I were to ride a motorcycle, I probably wouldn't, but
my bicycle I wear one.

Wierd! Motorcycle helmets actually provide meaningful protection,
unlike cycle helmets (although neither appears to improve the safety
of the users, according to population-level statistics). In traffic a
cycle helmet is pretty much worthless, unless it's wet or icy and you
might fall off. That's what they are designed for: falling off. I
have fallen off once this year, on a wet road with a diesel spill, but
I was riding the 'bent so hit the ground arse first :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Wed, 12 May 2004 19:26:07 +0100, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2004 21:52:58 GMT, "curt" wrote in
message :

I don't even know if helmets are a law in Pennsylvania, but I wear one. I
don't know why, but if I were to ride a motorcycle, I probably wouldn't, but
my bicycle I wear one.

Wierd! Motorcycle helmets actually provide meaningful protection,
unlike cycle helmets (although neither appears to improve the safety
of the users, according to population-level statistics). In traffic a
cycle helmet is pretty much worthless, unless it's wet or icy and you
might fall off. That's what they are designed for: falling off. I
have fallen off once this year, on a wet road with a diesel spill, but
I was riding the 'bent so hit the ground arse first :-)

Guy

I'm not sure about that.
Snell's standard
http://www.smf.org/standards/m2000std.html#TESTING
seems to pass a helmet if it can reduce acceleration to a headform to
300G after a 3m drop, approx. equal to 30-40kph. So motorcycle helmets
don't give that much protection neither!
Peter

--
This transmission is certified free of viruses as no Microsoft products
were used in its preparation or propagation.

In article ,
Peter Keller wrote:

On Wed, 12 May 2004 19:26:07 +0100, Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2004 21:52:58 GMT, "curt" wrote in
message :

I don't even know if helmets are a law in Pennsylvania, but I wear one. I
don't know why, but if I were to ride a motorcycle, I probably wouldn't, but
my bicycle I wear one.

Wierd! Motorcycle helmets actually provide meaningful protection,
unlike cycle helmets (although neither appears to improve the safety
of the users, according to population-level statistics).

I'm not sure about that.
Snell's standard
http://www.smf.org/standards/m2000std.html#TESTING
seems to pass a helmet if it can reduce acceleration to a headform to
300G after a 3m drop, approx. equal to 30-40kph. So motorcycle helmets
don't give that much protection neither!

The purpose of any helmet is not to save you from the unfortunate
circumstances in which your head actually gets hit by a car. There's not
much you can do.

But at least in theory, the big killer is those falls off the seat of
your bike to the ground. The helmet offers protection from that impact,
plus abrasion protection.

Without making any rash claims, I had one motorcycle accident that made
me very happy to be wearing a helmet,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

Ryan Cousineau wrote in message ...

The purpose of any helmet is not to save you from the unfortunate
circumstances in which your head actually gets hit by a car. There's not
much you can do.

For the record, car crashes cause over 90% of bike fatalities.


But at least in theory, the big killer is those falls off the seat of
your bike to the ground. The helmet offers protection from that impact,
plus abrasion protection.

:-)

So "the big killer" is the kind of fall we all had dozens of, when we
were kids buzzing around the block on bikes?

It's odd, isn't it, that nobody ever noticed that terrible carnage.
Until, that is, Bell had a new product to sell to the new adult "bike
boom" population of the 1970s. Then, suddenly, what every kid had
been doing all his life became "the big killer."

Why, until that time, mothers all across North America cheerfully sent
their children out to risk death! Their only protection from "the big
killer" was motherly advice: "Now be careful!"

How do you suppose they suppressed the tales of carnage? Where do you
suppose they hid the bodies? ;-)

Without making any rash claims, I had one motorcycle accident that made
me very happy to be wearing a helmet,

Maybe so. But motorcycle helmets' protection statistics aren't much
better than bike helmets. The only thing you can realistically say is
that motorcycling is fairly dangerous. Unlike bicycling.

-- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 12 May 2004 20:40:02 -0700, Ryan Cousineau
wrote in message :

But at least in theory, the big killer is those falls off the seat of
your bike to the ground. The helmet offers protection from that impact,
plus abrasion protection.

Er, except that the big killer is motor vehicles. Crashes with no
motor vehicle involved are substantially less likely to result in
serious injury or death.

In umpteen years of cycling I have fallen from my bike to the ground
exactly twice: once when something got lodged in the front wheel,
which sent me headfirst into the ground (no helmet, survived OK); the
other was when I hit a diesel slick on the 'bent and went down on my
arse (missing my head by 3ft). I only ride 4,000-5,000 miles per
year, of course, and rarely average more than 20mph on any ride, so I
can quite see how some people might be at more risk.

I have, on the other hand, come very close to death thanks to a
clueless driver. Luckily my knitted acrylic balaclava Saved My Life
[tm].

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On 13 May 2004 11:10:30 -0700, (Frank Krygowski)
wrote:

How do you suppose they suppressed the tales of carnage? Where do you
suppose they hid the bodies? ;-)

More farms. Cheap fertilizer.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

In article ,
(Frank Krygowski) wrote:

Ryan Cousineau wrote in message
...

The purpose of any helmet is not to save you from the unfortunate
circumstances in which your head actually gets hit by a car. There's not
much you can do.

For the record, car crashes cause over 90% of bike fatalities.


But at least in theory, the big killer is those falls off the seat of
your bike to the ground. The helmet offers protection from that impact,
plus abrasion protection.

:-)

So "the big killer" is the kind of fall we all had dozens of, when we
were kids buzzing around the block on bikes?

Okay, a few points.

1) "IN THEORY, the big killer...." In other words, I was explaining what
helmet standards were aimed at preventing, not arguing for the efficacy
of helmets. I don't know about you, but while I fell off my bike a few
times, I never pranged my head full on (my father did, with a helmet,
and suffered nerve damage nonetheless).

No wait, it was just the one point,
--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club