#101
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On 5/15/2017 8:29 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 5/15/2017 7:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/15/2017 4:35 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:05:27 PM UTC-4, wrote: Snipped A helmet doesn't make you bullet-proof or immortal. I still take all other sensible precautions when using tools too - not depending on safety glasses to protect me from stupidity, but giving my eyes a fighting chance in case carefull use of the tools still sends something flying towards my eyes. Don't know about you, but I can only blink SO fast - - - Might as well give it up now. In this newsgroup those who oppose helmet use do so vehemently and will NEVER be persuaded that a helmet can help. :-) And by the same token, most of the people who religiously believe in the great TBI risk of bicycling and the great protective value of bike helmets will never give up those beliefs. I think most of them are convinced that if they hadn't worn helmets all their lives, bicycling would have killed them. Which is really odd, considering that bike helmets weren't available until the mid-1970s. Jean Robic wore a helmet religiously in the 1940s and 1950s. You can't ask his opinion. He's dead. I see he died in a car crash. I'll bet he wasn't wearing it then. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On 5/15/2017 8:39 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 8:29:32 PM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: On 5/15/2017 7:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/15/2017 4:35 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:05:27 PM UTC-4, wrote: Snipped A helmet doesn't make you bullet-proof or immortal. I still take all other sensible precautions when using tools too - not depending on safety glasses to protect me from stupidity, but giving my eyes a fighting chance in case carefull use of the tools still sends something flying towards my eyes. Don't know about you, but I can only blink SO fast - - - Might as well give it up now. In this newsgroup those who oppose helmet use do so vehemently and will NEVER be persuaded that a helmet can help. :-) And by the same token, most of the people who religiously believe in the great TBI risk of bicycling and the great protective value of bike helmets will never give up those beliefs. I think most of them are convinced that if they hadn't worn helmets all their lives, bicycling would have killed them. Which is really odd, considering that bike helmets weren't available until the mid-1970s. Jean Robic wore a helmet religiously in the 1940s and 1950s. You can't ask his opinion. He's dead. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 The ONE time my helmeted head slammed into the pavememt I was VERY happy that I was wearing that helmet then. I don't care if anyone else wears or doesn't wear a helmet. It's their choice. I do know that in some cses a helmet can really help even if it just means you get up and continue your ride instead of going to the hospital for stiches, wound scrubbing or concusion, after wiping out. I don't care aboutthe statistics that many can trot out. I care about what happened that time to ME. That's what Aunt Hattie said about the stump water that cured her lumbago - for a while. (It's also good for warts, I hear.) -- - Frank Krygowski |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Mon, 15 May 2017 14:48:09 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:44:46 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote: Snipped That would do. I think Joerg is a special case and could use a tool and some master links because he breaks chains. If you don't break chains . . . I've broken a couple of chains because I messed up reassembly or, in one case, I had an odd shift on to the big ring and up-shift, and the quick-link snapped open. I probably side-loaded the chain in some odd way. I had no chain tool, but I was close enough to home that I could scooter until my wife came to pick me up. I broke one chain in the middle of nowhere, but I was on tour and had a chain tool. Another mis-assembled chain broke on the way to work, but I was close enough to work to scooter the last bit, and then I bought a cheap chain tool at lunch. The bad part was dealing with a greasy chain in my backpack. -- Jay Beattie. Indeed does Joerg appear to be a special case. However, if I experienced the number of problems/reakages that he does then I'd be carrying a pretty comprehensive repar kit with tools and parts that I'd most likely need. MAybe what Joerg needs to do is fix up a method of towing another bike behind the one that he rides and that way when one bike breaks something major he can then rather than having to walk 20+ miles back to civilization he could just ride the extra bike back and tow the werecked one behind it. Cheers Perhaps he just needs a better bike. Sounds like he's riding a "flying pigeon". Those things would break if you looked at them wrong from 50 feet. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:36:03 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 5/15/2017 2:31 PM, wrote: On Mon, 15 May 2017 12:05:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/14/2017 11:34 PM, wrote: On Sun, 14 May 2017 19:46:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 12:01:06 PM UTC-7, wrote: On Sun, 14 May 2017 07:42:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 8:43:29 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Sat, 13 May 2017 13:05:08 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 9:57:35 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Fri, 12 May 2017 08:23:02 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Thursday, May 11, 2017 at 10:06:04 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote: Snipped But then, to one who habitually uses a nail and a rock as a chain tool the use of proper tools is probably a mystery. Try to differentiate between an outdoors emergency situation and the workshop in the garage. It's not that difficult. - Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ Which is hy mose of us carry a small tool repair kit that includes a chain-breaker. That way a broken chain isn't an ememrgency and a repair only takes a few seconds. After all seconds count when you're beig stalked by mountain lions or other hungry critters doesn't it? For someone who either breaks chains a lot or often comes across people with a broken chain (bother very rare where I ride even on the technical trails) it ONLY makes sense to have a chain breaker and spare link(s)and quick-link WITH YOU. To be honest using a rock and rusty nail to repair a chain in the field sounds like something an armchair bicyclist would think up. Such a repaired chain would most likely fail again after only a short distance. Believe it or not there's good reasons why chain breakers are used to fix a chain. Cheers Out of curiosity I weighed and measured the chain tool that I carry in my bike tool kit. It is 2-1/2 inches in length and 2-1/8 inches in height. 1/2 inch thick, at its thickest, and weighs 2.6 ounces. It works with chains up to and including 10 speed chains (I don't own an 11 speed). Frankly, as a broken chain immobilizes the bicycle I can see no logic in not carrying it. Since I have never once had a broken chain nor seen one I cannot see any requirement to carry such a tool. Yesterday I did 55 miles and 2500 feet of climbing with some of it pretty steep ~12%. There were fore of us there and the dirt encrusted on the bikes showed a certain lack of careful maintenance. No one had any problems. I have been carrying all these tools around for the last 6 years and the only one's I've used are the tire repair tools. Equally, I have had two crashes severe enough to break bones and in neither did my head strike the ground. Thus, based on your logic, there is no reason what so ever to wear a helmet. There is almost no reason to wear a helmet under any conditions. If a helmet was just barely able to protect me in a fall literally from 18" what makes you think that a helmet can do anything other than protect you from getting scratches on your head in a sideways fall at a dead stop? My oldest daughter hit her head on a concrete retaining wall hard enough to crack the hardshell bike helmet and came away without a scratch (on her head - she did get a bit of "road rash" elsewhere)- and most certainly would have suffered a concussion without it. The foam lining and hard plastic shell absorbed a LOT of impact. I would suggest that you don't understand the nature and causes of concussion. And that you don't understand the mechanics of impact. Where did you get a hardshell bicycle helmet? I don't know the age or weight of your child or what "retaining wall" means. Colliding and hitting your head in the forward lunge is NOT the same as falling off of your bike and taking the brunt of the collision with the ground on your head. Sorry, but you would be wrong. I understand that concussions are caused by the head decellerating too quickly, causing the brain to bruise or twist inside the skull. I also know that compressing an inch of foam can increase the time taken to slow the head to a stop - in actual testing, about an extra 6ms - which changes the effective impact significantly - reducing the peak impact force by more than half. It spreads the force over a longer time - reducing the decelleration. When I say Hard shell, I don't mean fiberglass - this was a fairly tough polypropelene shell - they were pretty common here in Ontario Canada 20 years ago. She was riding down a hill when the pedal broke and she lost control, veering into a retaining wall made of bags of cement which was used to stabilize a steep bank beside the road (the road is in a "cut") She came off the bike sideways, hitting her head on the wall, and also hitting her shoulder. Helmets protect against impacts whether caused by the acceleration of gravity in a fall, are due to forward velocity (which CAN be much higher than a strictly gravitational fall from about 4 feet) Lots of information that does not support the interpretation of increased injuries due to helmet use here. http://www.helmets.org/stats.htm Also you need to talk to paramedics and emergency room physicians. You will get a different story than Frank's. I've talked to a woman in our bike club whose full time job was TBI rehabilitation. This was back in the 1990s. She admitted that in seven years of full time work, she'd encountered only one bike-related TBI victim, and he was a racer who had been wearing a helmet when he crashed. Look up the numbers of TBI victims sorted by activity. Fatality data I found indicates that bicyclists are only 0.6% of TBI fatalities in the U.S. And again, that's not low because of the helmets. See http://vehicularcyclist.com/fatals.html and http://vehicularcyclist.com/kunich.html Read this: http://ohiobike.org/images/pdfs/CyclingIsSafeTLK.pdf If you hit TBI websites, you'll see that bicycling is usually not even mentioned in ranked lists of causes. Yet the myth of great risk persists. And the myth of great protection is nearly as strong. Like I said, we will agree to dissagree. I have provided links to opposing data - others can make up their own minds. You are in a small minority, even of Cyclists, who oppose helmet wearing. Sorry, that too is false. After decades of fear mongering and intense helmet promotion, something like half of American bicyclists wear helmets. (In my area, it's closer to one third.) But that's just the U.S. If you look at the world's cyclists, helmets are still very uncommon. Most of the world's cyclists have not been subject to the false propaganda. And oddly enough, those who haven't gotten the "Danger!" sales pitch have never noticed the supposed great risk of brain injury. That's because the great risk of brain injury is mythical. There's still hope, though. For a couple decades, major bike magazines had a policy - sometimes explicitly stated, sometimes not - of showing no cyclists not wearing helmets. (Oh, except for Africans, Asians or others who were once called "white man's burden.") But lately there's been a trickle of photos of bareheaded white folk. This weird fashion/paranoia may one day pass. It's like I've said about motorcycle helmets. Anyone who rides without a "brain bucket" hasn't got anything to worry about. You can take that any way you want to. Nothing worth saving. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Mon, 15 May 2017 20:08:50 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 5/15/2017 4:35 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:05:27 PM UTC-4, wrote: Snipped A helmet doesn't make you bullet-proof or immortal. I still take all other sensible precautions when using tools too - not depending on safety glasses to protect me from stupidity, but giving my eyes a fighting chance in case carefull use of the tools still sends something flying towards my eyes. Don't know about you, but I can only blink SO fast - - - Might as well give it up now. In this newsgroup those who oppose helmet use do so vehemently and will NEVER be persuaded that a helmet can help. :-) And by the same token, most of the people who religiously believe in the great TBI risk of bicycling and the great protective value of bike helmets will never give up those beliefs. I think most of them are convinced that if they hadn't worn helmets all their lives, bicycling would have killed them. Which is really odd, considering that bike helmets weren't available until the mid-1970s. Your lagic totally escapes me. From your previous post. Sat the risk of being involved in a serious accident where a seat belt may help is 1 in 10,000 on a given day under normal legal driving conditions (in really bad traffic). You are wearing a seat belt, so you think you are safer, so drive 20% over the speed limit, pass on solid lines, text and drink coffee on the way, and perhaps even have a nip before heading home just because seat belts are supposed to reduce the severity of injuries by 30%. 30% of 1 in 10,000. But your new "safer" driving habits increase your risk of a serious accident by, say 50%. Are you safer because you are wearing a seat belt? Certainly not, and only a mentally deficient would think so. I thiunk you overestimate the stupidity of the average person (perhaps based on personal experience)? |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Tue, 16 May 2017 02:19:20 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote: Frank Krygowski wrote: I think most of them are convinced that if they hadn't worn helmets all their lives, bicycling would have killed them. Which is really odd, considering that bike helmets weren't available until the mid-1970s. When the case is made helmets do not help, does one mean the number of accidents with head trauma hasn't decreased despite helmets being sold or what exactly is the case? Because obviously the helmet helps if one hits it with a hammer... Also, are we talking racing, MTB or any other sport version, or are we talking utility/commuting? Frankly, I don't think Frank knows what he's talking about.I know several very serious cyclists - BMX, Flat track, touring, and mountain bike, and they ALL wear helmets - both in competition (where it is mandated) and on recreational rides. A friend has a steel plate in his head which he would not have had helmets been available, and had he worn one, as s teenager. Will he develop parkinsons because of the injury, or would he not develop parkinsons if he had NOT had the injury? (diagnosis is not definite, but it's looking like parkinsons) |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Mon, 15 May 2017 21:15:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 5/15/2017 8:13 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote: Frank Krygowski wrote: But that's just the U.S. If you look at the world's cyclists, helmets are still very uncommon. Here, helmets are not exactly uncommon but proportionally usage is low - without any data, I'd say somewhere around one out of twenty. However that is the huge mass of "utility" bikers. Of the people with sport bikes that also has the "style police" outfit and all the gear to go with it, with those I'd say the proportion is the other way around (or close to 100% helmet actually). But those are much, much fewer in numbers. That's what I've seen when in Europe. Helmets go with lycra, usually. But it didn't necessarily connect with going fast. Even the people we encountered who were part of guided tour groups, pottering at 15kph on bike paths, often had "sporty" lycra stretched over their bellies, and oh-so-safe helmets on their heads. But who knows? Many of them were probably Americans. OTOH, the elderly ladies riding normal city streets and doing their shopping on bikes were dressed like - well, like normal people! Must be a real bitch to worry that much about how you look riding a bike - - - - - - That you'll look like less of a man if you wear a helmet. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On 5/15/2017 8:19 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote: I think most of them are convinced that if they hadn't worn helmets all their lives, bicycling would have killed them. Which is really odd, considering that bike helmets weren't available until the mid-1970s. When the case is made helmets do not help, does one mean the number of accidents with head trauma hasn't decreased despite helmets being sold or what exactly is the case? Because obviously the helmet helps if one hits it with a hammer... Most of the "doesn't help" data involves looking at total injury or fatality counts for entire countries, states or territories. As linked upthread, Canadian and American bike and pedestrian deaths have dropped over time, probably due to better emergency medical procedures; but pedestrian deaths have actually dropped a bit faster. If cyclists were getting protection from all the helmets, it seems cyclist deaths would have dropped faster. Australia imposed all-ages helmet laws in the early 1990s. Bicycling immediately dropped something like 30% (although Mr. Scharf refuses to believe that), but head injuries did not drop as much as bicycling. That means the remaining bicyclists were actually at greater risk for head injuries. And back to America, bicyclist concussions have actually _increased_ greatly during the time when helmet use took off. There have been various reasons proposed for this lack of observed benefit. Some have noted that a helmet is a larger target than a bare head, so in at least some crashes, a bare head might experience a near miss, while a helmeted head would get an impact. Some have noted that most brain injury comes from rotational, not linear, impact; and a grazing blow on a helmet could impart sudden rotation to the brain. (And most helmets aren't designed or certified against rotation impact. Even MIPS helmets allow only a couple millimeters of rotational motion.) Some have pointed to Risk Compensation; and there have been studies that show that helmeted cyclists do take a bit more risks. Also, are we talking racing, MTB or any other sport version, or are we talking utility/commuting? In this country, anyway, you're told to _always_ wear a helmet whenever you ride your bike. I recall one promotion that said that you can fall over and die even while standing over your bike in your own driveway. Sanctioned races all require helmets. Athletic mountain bikers always wear helmets - and they do take risks that they would not take without them. As already mentioned, "sport" cyclists dress like their heroes, and their heroes are now required to wear helmets in races. There are very few helmet laws for adults in North America. (One city, Seattle, does have such a law. Its bike share system just failed. I wonder why?) Many states require kids to wear helmets. Those laws are obeyed most often by upper-middle-class kids in nice neighborhoods, especially when their parents use the car to take them to a nice safe bike path. In my area, at least, most kids don't wear them otherwise. That's true even over the state line (5 miles from my house) where there is a kids' helmet law. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On 5/15/2017 9:46 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 15 May 2017 19:30:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/15/2017 2:27 PM, wrote: On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:31:47 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/14/2017 11:41 PM, wrote: On Sun, 14 May 2017 22:47:00 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/14/2017 10:04 PM, wrote: On Mon, 15 May 2017 08:54:22 +0700, John B. Any safety equipment that is not overly intrusive is worth using ??? Really?? OK, do you wear a bike helmet when driving to the start of a bike ride? I wear my bike helmet whenever I ride my bike(s) If you mean when in my car, don't be stupid. I guess I have to stipulate any "appropriate" safety equipment. You're deciding what's "appropriate" based on fashion driven by propaganda. You've been told it's appropriate to wear a helmet when riding a bike - but why? Is it because bicycling is a major source of traumatic brain injury? No, it's only about 1% of the TBI problem in America. Motoring and walking cause far more. Is it because the risk of serious or fatal TBI per mile traveled is so high on a bike? No, it's roughly 1/3 that of walking, per mile. Is it because the cost to society of bike TBI is so high? No, it's dwarfed by the cost to society from auto TBI, not to mention just walking-around-the-house TBI. Is it because your collapsible steering wheel, air bags and seat belts remove the risk of motoring TBI? No, despite those features, riding in a car causes huge amounts of TBI. I'm not making this stuff up. Car helmets have been very seriously proposed, and those proposing them have pointed out that they'd be much more cost effective than many other measures, like air bags. They could be far more pleasant to wear than bike helmets, too, partly because of the non-exertion and climate control. Don't distract us about welding without goggles or grinding without safety glasses. Your ability to name two appropriate bits of safety equipment doesn't make all safety promotions rational. If you want to argue for bike helmets, first look at relative risk levels for individuals and at relative costs to society; because it makes little sense to put huge focus on a nearly non-existent problem. Then look at actual effectiveness, or lack of same, in the real world, not in tiny and confounded "case control" studies. (For example, you might try to explain why pedestrian fatalities have fallen faster than bike fatalities for the past 20 years, given that pedestrians stubbornly refuse to wear helmets.) Then you might deal with the benefits vs. detriments of bike helmets and of the "dangerizing" of bicycling. Every study done on the topic has found the benefits of bicycling FAR outweigh its tiny risks. Why would you scare people away from riding by pretending it's safe only with a weird plastic hat? Like I said, we will have to agree to dissagree. Read the data I sent you. Not saying cycling is inherently dangerous, but it does have it's risks - which can be significantly reduced by wearing a suitable helmet. It sounds like you're gaining perspective. Now consider: What you just wrote is also true of dozens of normal activities, like driving, crossing a street in a crosswalk, hiking, ice skating, climbing ladders, descending stairs, etc. Why is it that bicycling is the only one of those activities to suffer helmet mania? (See if you can find the annual number of serious or fatal TBI cases caused by descending stairs. Compare with bicycling.) You are not looking very far. If you set foot on a construction site - whether there is anything above you or not, you MUST wear a helmet and safety goggles. If you are "working at hight" you MUST wear a safety harness, and heaven help your sorry ass if it is not teathered properly. If you are working in most factories and on ANY construction site, tou MUST wear approved safety footwear. In an auto repair shop too - and again, heaven help your sorry ass if you are caught without them. And don't get caught in a commercial paint booth without the proper mask or respirator for the paint in use.No repaired extention cords on a job-site either. I was listing activities in which TBI is at least as much a problem as bicycling, by various measures. I'm not saying all safety equipment is worthless. Hell, I taught a machine shop class, and if a kid didn't use eye protection he'd be out the door. I've worked in places where I needed and wore steel toed shoes. I've done welding, and I'd never do it without a proper face mask or goggles. That does nothing to justify a helmet on every bicyclist. But about the hard hat: When they were doing night paving on the major 5-lane street by my house, I rode over at midnight to watch. I was amused to see a worker drive by and park a contractor's pickup truck. He got out of the driver's seat to walk up the road a bit, and as he did so he put on a hard hat he'd taken off the truck's seat. So: Why? There was nothing overhead above the entire street, at least up to 30,000 feet where the airliners fly. And why would he not wear it inside the truck? His risk of TBI was higher when he was driving. BTW, when I was a plant engineer the contractors installing machinery inside the plant wore hard hats. The production workers standing ten feet away running their machines did not. Go figure. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shimano headset with hose clamp (for Frank) | Joerg[_2_] | Techniques | 34 | June 8th 16 03:04 PM |
FA: NOS Shimano Dura Ace 1" HP-7410 threaded headset | retrofan | Marketplace | 0 | August 14th 08 04:41 AM |
WTB: Mavic 305 or Shimano Dura Ace 1" threaded headset | LawBoy01 | Marketplace | 2 | August 14th 08 12:02 AM |
Installing shimano 105 headset | Neil Smith | UK | 1 | November 7th 07 06:49 PM |
FA: Pinarello frame, fork, Shimano Dura Ace headset | retrofan | Marketplace | 0 | July 6th 07 11:14 PM |