#201
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 1:34:52 PM UTC-7, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote: Similarly, I've given talks to bike clubs and community groups on the topic of bike safety. I've asked "What percentage of America's brain injury deaths do you think are caused by bike crashes?" I've had an entire room full of people agree that its about 30 percent. The actual figure is about 0.6%. Every injury to the head following an accident which involves a bike should be analyzed and booked with some rough scale of graveness say from 1-10 where 1 is a scratch and 4 is a dislocated jaw and 10 is death (just examples, the system would have to be agreed upon by a group of experts). Then the data would be analyzed. Also the helmet should be analyzed, or what is left of it, to get an estimate if it helped or not. All this parameterized into a computer to do graphs and charts. Don't tell me - you live in a large city. You think that most of the hospitals in this country are on the web so that they can release personal information from a virus attack. |
Ads |
#202
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:55:50 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/16/2017 5:20 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 12:43:21 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/16/2017 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote: IMO, the fact that helmets are proven to prevent certain injuries does not justify mandating helmet use. It does justify the personal choice to wear a helmet, particularly for those people who ride dirt trails, wet descents, in snow, etc. And for those who don't believe in risk compensation: The subtext in Jay's sentence is that if you're going to ride in snow, wet descents or dirt trails, a helmet is justifiable. Would you ride those conditions without a helmet? Yes, if I forgot my helmet and had to get to or from work. I wouldn't choose not to wear a helmet. I might walk a trail section rather than riding it without a helmet, but who knows. I'm not a skilled trail rider. Think about what you said. You might walk it if you forgot your helmet. But you ride it because you have a helmet. That is classic risk compensation: You're willing to take on more risk because you feel there's some protection. Isn't that obvious? Yes, and that's how one gains confidence and skill, by taking calculated risk while using appropriate protective equipment. You call it "risk compensation" like it was some dreaded disease. I call it it risk avoidance during the learning phase. It's not as though a wearing a helmet is going to prompt me to drop down vertical rock chutes with abandon. I still worry about my other appendages, but I am going to feel that I have a modicum of protection while picking my way along root pots and rocks on descending single track. I don't get why it is a bad thing to mitigate the effects of an inevitable fall. Yes, I fall on tight descending trail, usually into a bunch of sword ferns, but sometimes harder stuff. I'm never going fast or doing anything remotely crazy. I'm just learning a skill, and in fact, a skill that translates into better road bike handling, including the ability to deal with unexpected low traction and other conditions. On the road, I'm less of risk-taker with a helmet than I was in my pre-helmet days, when I had the motor to do stupid things and no metal plates, rods, etc. -- Jay Beattie. |
#204
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On 5/17/2017 6:05 AM, Duane wrote:
wrote: On Tue, 16 May 2017 15:45:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/16/2017 1:06 PM, Duane wrote: On 16/05/2017 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote: IMO, the fact that helmets are proven to prevent certain injuries does not justify mandating helmet use. It does justify the personal choice to wear a helmet, particularly for those people who ride dirt trails, wet descents, in snow, etc. Or apparently those who ride with a group containing a member trying to channel Chris Froome. As I've written in articles for our club's newsletter, I think it's important to stay well away from certain riders. I've seen bad riders take out good riders. I'm sure you've seen what you would have considered good riders, up untill the incident, take out other good and not so good riders too. Right. Only bad riders have accidents. Like Chris Froome. Ridiculous. What I've written about is avoiding riders who don't hold a steady line; or riders who pass close without warning, especially on one's blind side; or riders who take unnecessary risks, like taking corners at extreme speeds; or riders who flout traffic laws. Having said that, we had one r.b.tech denizen who claimed one could not be a good rider unless he crashed a lot. I think that's total nonsense. I claim that almost every crash is an indication of a rider mistake. To me, "There was gravel in that corner!" translates as "I didn't think to look for gravel in that corner." To me, "That driver right hooked me" translates as "I was going straight, but I put myself to the right of a right turning car." To me, "She opened her car door right in front of me!" translates as "I was dumb enough to ride in the door zone." I can visualize a few motorist moves that a cyclist could not prevent. I can visualize a few crash types caused by unpredictable component failure. But I think almost every bike crash indicates a mistake at some point by the bike rider. But who am I to talk? I have so little experience with crashing. I've had only two moving on-road falls since beginning adult riding in 1972. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#205
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On 5/17/2017 10:08 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:55:50 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/16/2017 5:20 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 12:43:21 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 5/16/2017 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote: IMO, the fact that helmets are proven to prevent certain injuries does not justify mandating helmet use. It does justify the personal choice to wear a helmet, particularly for those people who ride dirt trails, wet descents, in snow, etc. And for those who don't believe in risk compensation: The subtext in Jay's sentence is that if you're going to ride in snow, wet descents or dirt trails, a helmet is justifiable. Would you ride those conditions without a helmet? Yes, if I forgot my helmet and had to get to or from work. I wouldn't choose not to wear a helmet. I might walk a trail section rather than riding it without a helmet, but who knows. I'm not a skilled trail rider. Think about what you said. You might walk it if you forgot your helmet. But you ride it because you have a helmet. That is classic risk compensation: You're willing to take on more risk because you feel there's some protection. Isn't that obvious? Yes, and that's how one gains confidence and skill, by taking calculated risk while using appropriate protective equipment. You call it "risk compensation" like it was some dreaded disease. I call it it risk avoidance during the learning phase. It's not as though a wearing a helmet is going to prompt me to drop down vertical rock chutes with abandon. I still worry about my other appendages, but I am going to feel that I have a modicum of protection while picking my way along root pots and rocks on descending single track. I don't get why it is a bad thing to mitigate the effects of an inevitable fall. Yes, I fall on tight descending trail, usually into a bunch of sword ferns, but sometimes harder stuff. I'm never going fast or doing anything remotely crazy. I'm just learning a skill, and in fact, a skill that translates into better road bike handling, including the ability to deal with unexpected low traction and other conditions. On the road, I'm less of risk-taker with a helmet than I was in my pre-helmet days, when I had the motor to do stupid things and no metal plates, rods, etc. I'm not saying risk compensation is a bad thing. I'm saying it's a thing; it's normal human behavior. This is in contrast to Mr. Clare who says only an incredibly stupid person would exhibit such behavior. But risk _over_ compensation is a bad thing. For more detail: The degree of risk compensation doubtlessly depends heavily on the person's awareness of the protective measure and assessment of the level of protection. People don't compensate at all if a measure isn't known, and they compensate more (i.e. take more risk) if the measure is prominent in their attention. People will compensate more if they believe the measure is tremendously, almost 100%, effective. What we get with a bike helmet is protection that is almost impossible to ignore, and that has been touted for 25 years as being almost 100% effective. ("85% reduction!") It's a situation prime for _over_ compensation. So in your case, I'm not saying don't ride your mountain bike on rough trails. I'm saying keep in mind that your helmet is certified against only a perfectly linear impact at about 14 mph. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#206
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 9:40:00 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
So in your case, I'm not saying don't ride your mountain bike on rough trails. I'm saying keep in mind that your helmet is certified against only a perfectly linear impact at about 14 mph. And that impact is above the level that can cause a concussion. |
#207
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
Exactly how do you do that? 98% of bicycle
accidents are never reported since they have no severe injuries. If an accident isn't reported and involve no severe injuries it might as well be cancelled out of the investigation. For such accidents the helmet shouldn't really play a role anyway. hospitals have enough to do without worrying about keeping statistics for someone else. Don't you have universities and Ph.D. students who produce research on sport safety, traffic safety, who test and compare safety gear, not to mention university hospitals that do research on all kind of trauma to the body and the head? But yes, no matter who deiced and/or financed the undertaking it would have to be done with the approval of the hospitals. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#208
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
Frank Krygowski wrote:
Wonderful. But it's never going to happen. Why? Because contrary to the current myth, there are simply not enough bicycle TBI cases to make it worthwhile. Remember, in the U.S. about 99.4% of TBI fatalities have nothing to do with bicycling. About 99% of all hospital treated TBIs have nothing to do with bicycling. 0.6% of TBI fatalities is *plenty enough*. Besides, how many TBIs are non-fatal? There are research on stuff considerably more goofy/arcane and detached than that. And such a study wouldn't even be expensive or difficult. Any small group of Ph.D. students in their 20s and 30s should be able to carry it out and compile the result. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#209
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
John B. wrote:
But that isn't what happens. Every study I've seen is based on visits to a medical facility. Yes, and why is that a problem? Stats from the wild will never be perfect. If two tendencies are compared, the sample/compile method and thus the stats will always favor one of the two, unfairly. It won't be perfect, but the better the method, the closer it gets. And if one tendency is much stronger, the stats will favor it no matter the imperfection. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
#210
|
|||
|
|||
Shimano Headset
Don't tell me - you live in a large city.
You think that most of the hospitals in this country are on the web so that they can release personal information from a virus attack. Say what? I haven't worked in a hospital but my impression is they are understaffed. However this kind of study does not require hundreds of people or tons of number-crunching machines. But even if it did - so what? It appears to be a relevant field of study, don't you think? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
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 |