|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 9:30:33 AM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Again, the unspoken implication is that riding a bike is SO DANGEROUS that nobody should ever do it without first spending money so that your insurance company might be spared paying for your medical treatment. Except that every study done on the topic has found that bicycling's benefits far outweigh its tiny risks. This "bicycling is dangerous" meme needs to die. https://ig.ft.com/sites/urban-cycling/ - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On 3/20/2019 10:40 PM, news18 wrote:
Ignorng the requirement for that 'certification sticker", just how hard would it be to build your own helmet? A distorted plastic bowl with a set of straps attached, the linen with a thick coat of spray foam. it would probably as good as the ones they sell? Considering that you can buy a certified helmet for as little as $10, the upside of building your own would be questionable. Also, spray foam is not the same as EPS. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 7:57:43 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: On 3/20/2019 2:39 PM, James wrote: On 21/3/19 3:51 am, wrote: I had heard that Trek was going to have a new material for their bike frames. Well, in fact it is a new material for helmets. Styrofoam worked for preventing skull fractures but that is not a source of cycling injuries on the whole - concussions are. The new material will NOT offer the ultimate safety as the Styrofoam did but it is WAY softer in the manner of crushing and will eliminate most of the concussions. While this won't meet the helmet standards I have no doubt that they will make a new standard for this material since it will probably save 70% or more of the NORMAL injuries from bicycle accidents. Looking at statistics from the EU, it seems that about 80% of cycling injuries presented at the ER, are to body regions other than the head.. How can a new helmet material save 70% of the normal injuries from bicycle accidents when 80% of the injured don't have a head injury? There's an article about the new helmet material he https://www.popsci.com/trek-wavecel-bicycle-helmet-science#page-5. The key feature is the improved concussion protection. And as usual, the unspoken assumption behind the article is that cycling produces so many brain injuries that cyclists _need_ protection. Yet any dispassionate examination of the relevant data shows that cycling is not abnormally risky. Cyclists comprise only a tiny percentage of serious brain injury victims, and cycling's benefits far outweigh its tiny risks. Depending on individual experience and assuming: (1) people will not ride if they wear a helmet, viz., that one excludes the other, and (2) that those who will not ride with a helmet will do no other activity, like walk, go to the gym, etc. For those who ride with a helmet, a better design is all upside except for cost and weight. I wear a ski helmet with soft padding and EPS, and I got a massive concussion wearing that -- but I did avoid fracturing my skull or mangling my scalp, which was likely based on my facial injuries. IMO, less rigid materials don't mean no concussion. It seems like a worthy goal, but concussion is possible with no contact between the head and a hard object. Whether cycling is dangerous depends on your environment. With the crazy mix of transportation modes around here, I'm surprised more people aren't getting injured, e.g. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/13999793819 Yes, as a cyclist, you're supposed to ride up that cut into a bunch of people waiting to get on a street car. The morning ride is a scrum through the south waterfront. -- Jay Beattie. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:51:29 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 6:42:19 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: And as usual, the unspoken assumption behind the article is that cycling produces so many brain injuries that cyclists _need_ protection. Yet any dispassionate examination of the relevant data shows that cycling is not abnormally risky. Cyclists comprise only a tiny percentage of serious brain injury victims, and cycling's benefits far outweigh its tiny risks. Depending on individual experience and assuming: (1) people will not ride if they wear a helmet, viz., that one excludes the other, and (2) that those who will not ride with a helmet will do no other activity, like walk, go to the gym, etc. Regarding #1: The point is not whether someone can get the same health benefits from other exercise. Of course that's possible - if they do, indeed, choose some other exercise. But swimming, playing tennis, etc. do not replace bicycling's transportation possibilities. You, Jay, won't swim to work if bicycling were taken away from you. You would drive. And in some of the studies (those with the highest benefit-to-risk findings for bicycling) the benefits estimated included benefits to others, from reducing pollution and crash risks from drivers. Besides, why should we discourage an activity that has net individual and societal benefit by falsely claiming it's so dangerous as to need protective equipment? (Occasionally, some helmeteers claim that helmet mandates or promotion doesn't discourage bicycling. It's a fringe viewpoint akin to claims that the moon landing was faked, that 9/11 was a planned demolition of the twin towers, etc. It ignores logic and data.) For those who ride with a helmet, a better design is all upside except for cost and weight. In my experience, a cloth cycling cap is a far better design. I wear a ski helmet with soft padding and EPS, and I got a massive concussion wearing that -- but I did avoid fracturing my skull or mangling my scalp, which was likely based on my facial injuries. As I've said, our society is schizophrenic about risk. Lots of people glorify objectively risky things like downhill skiing, free climbing, BMX parks or radical ATB riding, skydiving and more. And those participants brag about their wisdom in choosing protective gear. ISTM it's wiser to avoid activities that are thrilling because you might get badly injured, and to not push protective gear for activities that are objectively safer than walking. After all, the biggest risk of death for most Americans is from diseases that are reduced by bicycling. - Frank Krygowski |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:51:29 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
Whether cycling is dangerous depends on your environment. Of course. The same can be said of walking, driving, swimming, etc. Yet nobody calls for helmets for all walkers or drivers. Nobody calls for water wings for all swimmers, even though it's per-hour fatality rate dwarfs that of cycling. With the crazy mix of transportation modes around here, I'm surprised more people aren't getting injured, e.g. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/13999793819 Yes, as a cyclist, you're supposed to ride up that cut into a bunch of people waiting to get on a street car. The morning ride is a scrum through the south waterfront. And the motivation for such hideous segregated bike facilities? The motivation is the false idea that riding on normal roads is terribly dangerous. - Frank Krygowski |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 2:16:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:51:29 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Whether cycling is dangerous depends on your environment. Of course. The same can be said of walking, driving, swimming, etc. Yet nobody calls for helmets for all walkers or drivers. Nobody calls for water wings for all swimmers, even though it's per-hour fatality rate dwarfs that of cycling. With the crazy mix of transportation modes around here, I'm surprised more people aren't getting injured, e.g. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/13999793819 Yes, as a cyclist, you're supposed to ride up that cut into a bunch of people waiting to get on a street car. The morning ride is a scrum through the south waterfront. And the motivation for such hideous segregated bike facilities? The motivation is the false idea that riding on normal roads is terribly dangerous. - Frank Krygowski |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:13:26 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 2:16:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:51:29 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Whether cycling is dangerous depends on your environment. Of course. The same can be said of walking, driving, swimming, etc. Yet nobody calls for helmets for all walkers or drivers. Nobody calls for water wings for all swimmers, even though it's per-hour fatality rate dwarfs that of cycling. With the crazy mix of transportation modes around here, I'm surprised more people aren't getting injured, e.g. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/13999793819 Yes, as a cyclist, you're supposed to ride up that cut into a bunch of people waiting to get on a street car. The morning ride is a scrum through the south waterfront. And the motivation for such hideous segregated bike facilities? The motivation is the false idea that riding on normal roads is terribly dangerous. - Frank Krygowski Ooops. What I was going to say is that those curb cuts occur to accommodate an island created for the street car. You could continue straight, but the bike lane ends, and a lot of people are afraid of crossing parallel train tracks to take the lane. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikepo...n/photostream/ This is the beginning of my commute out of downtown -- a few blocks from my office. It is often hard to find open pavement. https://www.pdx.edu/transportation/s...?itok=OQmqRyBs That is an example of one of those street car islands. I get on to the sidewalk, go up and over the island and then drop down in front of a turning street car. It's great! Transit malls are a nightmare. -- Jay Beattie. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 07:39:03 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 9:30:33 AM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: Again, the unspoken implication is that riding a bike is SO DANGEROUS that nobody should ever do it without first spending money so that your insurance company might be spared paying for your medical treatment. Except that every study done on the topic has found that bicycling's benefits far outweigh its tiny risks. This "bicycling is dangerous" meme needs to die. https://ig.ft.com/sites/urban-cycling/ - Frank Krygowski I believe that bicycling IS dangerous if you make left turns from the right lane in front of a truck and studies, probably the most compressive was the CHP study done in L.A. County, have show that the majority of bicycle accidents were the fault of the cyclist. Thinking back of the accidents reported here nearly all of them seem to be essentially the fault of the rider... or perhaps "wouldn't have happened if the rider had used common sense"would be a more polite way to say it. For years now I have been riding in a country that has (usually) the second highest highway deaths in the world and the two "accidents" I have had that were severe enough to break bones were solely my own fault and in both instances I was wearing a helmet that apparently never touched the ground as there was no marks on it. Just think, according to the CHP study simply obeying the traffic laws would reduce bicycle-auto collisions by 60%. Isn't it strange that the emphasis is on wearing a helmet to protect you when you hit the car and noting is said about riding safely so that do not hit the car? -- Cheers, John B. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 06:30:31 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 4:44:34 AM UTC-4, Sir Ridesalot wrote: I often wonder just how effective a bicycle helmet is. I have had a nasty fall where the helmet protected my head enough that I was able to continue my ride. Then again, I had a helmet that fell off the handlebar of my bicycle whilst the bicycle was motionless in my apartment and a good size chunk of the helmet broke off from the lower left side edge of the helmet. That makes me wonder. Then there is this site that I came across just recently. After reading it, it seems that helmets don't meet many expectations. Full URL because many here don't like Tiny URLS. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tanyamo.../#4f36b4ee44e6 There have always been helmets that are more protective and helmets that are less protective. In the U.S., the magazine _Consumer Reports_ has tested a selection of helmets every few years and given them CR's cryptic ratings for impact protection. (CR uses five different colored dots or other icons, rather than assigning a certain number of stars.) It's been very consistent that the cheapest helmets get the best rating. But those cheap helmets are thicker and heavier. Helmet companies slap lots of foam into cheap ones so they pass government standards without lots of design time. They spend lots of design time on expensive helmets to shave weight, allow more holes for cooling etc. while still (barely) passing the government standard test. But look at the motivation for their push to improve bike helmets - that is, aside from their desire to get people to spend money in hopes that the insurance companies won't have to: "More than 800 cyclists were killed in crashes with motor vehicles in 2016 – the highest number since 1991. More than half weren’t wearing helmets." What's the parallel statement for pedestrians? "More than 3500 pedestrians were killed. 99.9% weren't wearing helmets." Or for motorists: "More than 30,000 were killed. 99.9% weren't wearing helmets." Again, the unspoken implication is that riding a bike is SO DANGEROUS that nobody should ever do it without first spending money so that your insurance company might be spared paying for your medical treatment. Except that every study done on the topic has found that bicycling's benefits far outweigh its tiny risks. This "bicycling is dangerous" meme needs to die. - Frank Krygowski Ah but if cycling was safer how could they sell helmets. In addition there is "armor" available for cyclists see https://www.chainreactioncycles.com/th/en/body-armour But apparently it looks sort of Icky so it doesn't sell well. But helmets, well helmets are now seen to be "cool". -- Cheers, John B. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
New Bontager Helmet Material
On 3/21/2019 5:24 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:13:26 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 2:16:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Thursday, March 21, 2019 at 3:51:29 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Whether cycling is dangerous depends on your environment. Of course. The same can be said of walking, driving, swimming, etc. Yet nobody calls for helmets for all walkers or drivers. Nobody calls for water wings for all swimmers, even though it's per-hour fatality rate dwarfs that of cycling. With the crazy mix of transportation modes around here, I'm surprised more people aren't getting injured, e.g. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikeportland/13999793819 Yes, as a cyclist, you're supposed to ride up that cut into a bunch of people waiting to get on a street car. The morning ride is a scrum through the south waterfront. And the motivation for such hideous segregated bike facilities? The motivation is the false idea that riding on normal roads is terribly dangerous. - Frank Krygowski Ooops. What I was going to say is that those curb cuts occur to accommodate an island created for the street car. You could continue straight, but the bike lane ends, and a lot of people are afraid of crossing parallel train tracks to take the lane. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bikepo...n/photostream/ This is the beginning of my commute out of downtown -- a few blocks from my office. It is often hard to find open pavement. https://www.pdx.edu/transportation/s...?itok=OQmqRyBs That is an example of one of those street car islands. I get on to the sidewalk, go up and over the island and then drop down in front of a turning street car. It's great! Transit malls are a nightmare. -- Jay Beattie. In the same way that jihadi masterminds use children with suicide bombs, the solution to mass transit may well be teenagers: https://nypost.com/video/3-teens-dea...shes-into-bus/ -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rotor material? | Joerg[_2_] | Techniques | 22 | October 9th 17 05:23 AM |
REFLECTIVE MATERIAL | kolldata | Techniques | 6 | September 27th 10 03:55 PM |
? lacing a slotted Bontager style hub ? | [email protected] | Techniques | 1 | July 13th 08 12:07 AM |
Polystyrene: The Wonder Material | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 15 | May 18th 04 03:07 PM |
Best material for frame! | Zilla | Mountain Biking | 7 | October 20th 03 02:07 PM |