published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, (Bill Z.)
wrote in message :

He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
disparages it.

No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.

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 Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:37:51 -0400, Mitch Haley
wrote:

I read in my local paper (The Lansing State Journal) that riding without
a helmet makes you 14 times more likely to get killed.

Assuming that's true, what does that matter if the odds of being
killed are extremely small.?

JT

"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote...

Assuming that's true, what does that matter if the odds of being
killed are extremely small.?

I have a hard time believing you don't wear a helmet, John Forrest.

Jim "academically speaking" Flom

It seems clear that a) the emergency medical people have gotten
gradually better at their job (probably in large part due to
technology), and b) helmets aren't making a significant difference in
cyclists' fatalities. If they were, the cyclist plot would drop
relative to the ped. plot.


This whole helmet discussion reminds of my pesticide chemistry
class when my prof. would tell the class "but the LD50 is ...
blah, blah, blah.", but never took into account that while maybe
it takes a lot of whatever chemical to kill you, no one really
knows how much it takes to cause cancer, nerve damage,
brain damage, loss of eyesight, etc....

The same thing holds true for this discussion. You're looking
at FATALITIES. What about the accidents where a helmet
prevented brain injury? It's not something that can be answered
or tested easily....

And I'll wear mine thank you, I've hit enough low hanging
tree branches while MTB riding to know they help.

Tim McNamara writes:

(Bill Z.) writes:

You should note Krygowski's tactics.

Yours are exactly the same tactics. Hmmm.

Liar.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Just zis Guy, you know?" writes:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, (Bill Z.)
wrote in message :

He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
disparages it.

No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.


Randy is no more biased than Avery (who did the one Frank liked.)
But note the assymetrical treatment in Frank's post.

Bill

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

On 17 Jun 2004 22:05:25 -0700, (CowPunk) wrote:

What about the accidents where a helmet
prevented brain injury? It's not something that can be answered
or tested easily....

And I'll wear mine thank you, I've hit enough low hanging
tree branches while MTB riding to know they help.

Are you saying you received minor brain injuries riding your MTB w/o a
helmet on? If not, how do you know helmets help prevent that?

JT

Are you saying you received minor brain injuries riding your MTB w/o a
helmet on? If not, how do you know helmets help prevent that?

JT


It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that
cracked plastic and dented styrofoam is better than
cracked skin and a dented skull.

(CowPunk) wrote in message . com...

The same thing holds true for this discussion. You're looking
at FATALITIES. What about the accidents where a helmet
prevented brain injury? It's not something that can be answered
or tested easily....

That's a fair question. But ask yourself - how many brain injuries
have occurred to cyclists over the intervening 30 years. The answer is
that there are so few that they aren't even recorded. It isn't that
they don't occur, but that your chances of having similar injuries as
a pedestrian are many times greater on a statistical basis.

The statistics also show that serious head injuries aren't helped by
helmets either since the ratio of serious head injuries to fatalities
hasn't changed in the least either. Although there are some medical
sources that claim that using complicated statistical methods they can
JUST detect some help.

And I'll wear mine thank you, I've hit enough low hanging
tree branches while MTB riding to know they help.

You can do anything you like. Though I would think that if you are
hitting low hanging branches your helmet must be interfering with your
field of vision. The only time I ever hit my head on something
overhanging was when I was riding past a structure and the helmet
blocked vision of a rafter at head height.

It is my OPINION that helmets make minor injuries even more minor or
even non-existant. That is a reason for ME to wear a helmet. That is
not a reason for laws that force helmets on children since it
coincidentally causes children to to ride a great deal less, causing
parents to drive their children to school making it more dangerous for
all children in the vicinity of schools.

(Bill Z.) writes:

Tim McNamara writes:

(Bill Z.) writes:

You should note Krygowski's tactics.

Yours are exactly the same tactics. Hmmm.

Liar.

Read your own post.