A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Helmet News



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old June 20th 18, 02:56 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Helmet News

On 6/20/2018 12:41 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/19/2018 3:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 10:11:48 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, aside from the crash caused by the tandem fork suddenly breaking
off, my only other moving on-road fall happened like this:

It was winter. I was riding home from work down a short steep downtown
hill. (The grade is over 15%, the hill is only 200 feet long, and the
road's since been closed to traffic.) There was lots of road salt on the
surface so I was descending very slowly, less than 10 mph.

I suddenly noticed that the patch of stuff just in front of me wasn't
road salt. Instead it was broken glass. I swerved rightward to avoid it.
My front tire slipped on the road salt and I fell. I scratched my knee
and tore my windbreaker.

I didn't say "That was an act of God." I didn't say "Nobody could have
avoided that." Instead I said "Damn; I screwed up."

I try hard to not screw up.

I hit a submerged pot hole, went OTB, separated my shoulder, knocked myself out and cut my face -- but not my head or anywhere under my helmet, which was wrecked. I did not blame myself for being unable to see through standing water at night in a rainstorm. I suppose I could have walked home. I don't think Garmin makes sonar. I'll look into that.


Good plan. You gotta be safe!

BTW, low-side crashes (like my crash in the West Hills) can just happen and may or may not result in a head strike -- usually not, but they can.


Yes, they can. Lots of things _can_ cause head strikes. Most have
nothing at all to do with bicycles. But only for bicycles and
motorcycles does "It can happen" translate to "so you really should wear
a helmet."

I'm not talking about a situation where you screw up, try to correct and then go down. You just go down due to loss of traction, often when traction was previously good.


Yep. That's what happened to me in that incident I described. It felt
like a judo throw.

FWIW, it's also happened to me mountain biking off road, including at
least once due to ice. Back in those days, I figured falling was a
normal part of mountain biking, because I was trying to see what I could
get away with on the bike. Sometimes that involved riding at "eleven
tenths," as they say.

But oddly, while I often wore a helmet mountain biking, I never hit one
on anything other than twigs.

Culprits can be invisible like oil or even a change in pavement surface, crack seal, black ice, etc. There is no warning, no nothing.


I suspect I'm a much more conservative rider than you are. I suspect I
was much more careful even back when I was your age.


What would more careful look like? Using a walker?


My "more careful" still includes 40 mph downhills, riding in groups,
drafting, riding in city and suburban traffic, and a bit of riding in
the woods, on gravel, etc.

But for me, it includes lots and lots of "what if" anticipation and
attention to the road surface. What if there's gravel around that
downhill bend? What if that motorist tries to push into the roundabout
while I'm in the circle? What if that puddle is really a deep pothole?
What if the meeting goes late and I have to ride home in the dark? What
if that squirrely rider suddenly weaves into my path? What if that mud
across the bike trail is really slippery?

I'm sure you do more miles than I do. (A recent health issue has all but
stopped my riding for a while.) I'm positive you ride more miles in the
rain than I ever will. But I still suspect that if I could match you
mile for mile, I'd arrive a bit later than you, but with fewer crash tales.

We used to have a dude here who bragged about riding drunk, about
getting big air entering an intersection from a sidewalk, about riding
wrong-way or riding at night without lights, etc. He claimed I didn't
know as much as he did about riding because he had crashed a lot more. I
think that logic is perfectly backwards.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #62  
Old June 20th 18, 03:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Helmet News

jbeattie writes:

On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:


[...]

I believe in risk compensation.


Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping
out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? Basically
all of my riding would be considered risk compensation.


Exactly right. Not only all of your riding, but just about all of your
waking activity involves risk compensation, which isn't a mental
pathology, but just a fancy way of describing normal human behavior.

Risk compensation becomes a problem only when our mental estimates of
risk lose their base in reality. I suspect that neither you nor Frank
have risk estimators that are too far out of whack -- the differences lie
on the reward side.

--
  #63  
Old June 20th 18, 04:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Helmet News

On 6/18/2018 12:32 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:

In fact, recent data showed an _increase_ of
over 60% in bike-related concussions during
the time when American helmet use
greatly increased.


Perhaps other things changed during that time
as well? More people riding, traffic getting
even more out of hand, and so on

That's an issue you often see. People ignoring other changes, and not
looking at the big picture. Or citing false data without references, as
Frank did in this case, and has a long history of doing.

Be very wary when you see statements like "Studies show," "some people
say," or "data shows" without any reference to back up those statements.
It's Faux News type journalism at its worst. I see it more often now
with reports designed to promote the passage of a law or ordinance being
full of unverifiable claims designed to promote the idea that there is
some serious problem that must be addressed with the passage of a new
law. I was tremendously impressed to receive a letter from a middle
school class asking that some useless city laws on the books be
repealed, since I'm so used to seeing requests for more laws to make
everything safe for everyone.

The real-world data is overwhelming. For example, in
https://web.archive.org/web/20160507103722/http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/episrv/episrv-bike-report.pdf
(PDF page 18, report page 16) it states:

"Among the fatalities with documented helmet use, 97% of the bicyclists
were not wearing a helmet at the time of the crash. Only 4 bicyclists
who died (3%) were wearing a helmet. All child or teen bicyclists who
died were not wearing helmets. Helmet usage is required by law for all
children under 14 in New York."

  #64  
Old June 20th 18, 04:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Helmet News

On 6/18/2018 11:52 PM, Sepp Ruf wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
People can crash just riding along -- even the mayor.
https://bikeportland.org/2017/11/16/portland-mayor-ted-wheeler-breaks-ribs-in-bicycle-crash-254716


The mayor's statement indicates that his braking action could have been
executed in a more careful manner. Just as a random $89.85 for a "quality"
helmet could have been better spent on tires working well in Portland
November, the 5.885 extra seconds (compared to a wet-weather hat) Mr. Walker
spent adjusting his foam hijab would have been better spent to initiate his
braking earlier. And, as this thread has already been driven deep into ribs
helmet advocacy territory, I'll boldly claim there is a corresponding 85%
chance Mr. Wheeler was not using the area of the road regularly cleaned by
car tires in his maneuver.


Well maybe that happens to your mayor. I have ridden with the Mountain
View mayor Lenny Siegel, and Cupertino mayor Darcy Paul and in neither
case did they crash.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/01/cycling-siegel-to-offer-a-mayors-eye-view-of-mountain-view-streets/
  #65  
Old June 20th 18, 05:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Helmet News

On 6/19/2018 5:05 AM, John B Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jun 2018 13:09:01 +0200, Emanuel Berg
wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Regarding helmet use and brain injury: Rare
as it is, the needle isn't even moving in the
right direction. How many excuses for the
helmet mania can people make?


Again, I'd like to see professionally conducted
studies with tables, charts, and figures...


One of the problems is that it isn't a simple A=B equation. Was the
guy with (or without) the helmet drinking or taking dope? Were the
helmet wearers (non wearers) obeying the traffic code? Was it night
(day), did that make a difference?

This isn't a helmet problem at all, almost every study I've read
eliminated some variables in order to attempt to get a viable answer
to the question of Why?

Or, to be honest, in some cases to the question, "Is this going to
show what I want it to"?


There's also the question of whether you go with data solely based on
crashes and look at the helmet versus no helmet data, which shows an
overwhelming benefit to helmet use, or data that looks at the number of
injuries or fatalities as helmet use has increased.

The latter is more easily manipulated by including or leaving out
contributing factors such as the changes in ridership due to various
factors (weather changes, increases in mass transit availability,
economic factors, etc.).

In my own city we have seen a tremendous increase in unhelmeted cyclists
but it's due to one huge company deploying thousands of bicycles for
employee use. I was talking to someone from that company yesterday about
the bicycles they use and he said that one reason for the single-speed
bicycles was to keep speeds down. Some residents have complained that
the lack of helmets sets a bad example, but when you look at the data
the number of head impact crashes where a helmet would make a difference
is pretty small, it's when you look at the ER data that you see the
overwhelming advantages of a helmet.
  #66  
Old June 20th 18, 05:30 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Helmet News

On 6/19/2018 12:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I hit a submerged pot hole, went OTB, separated my shoulder, knocked myself out and cut my face -- but not my head or anywhere under my helmet, which was wrecked. I did not blame myself for being unable to see through standing water at night in a rainstorm. I suppose I could have walked home. I don't think Garmin makes sonar. I'll look into that.


The helmet just mitigated a problem which you should have addressed in
other ways. What is the PCI in the city in which you hit the pot hole?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavement_Condition_Index.

You should check the PCI of any city you expect to ride in. In fact
Garmin should program in the PCI for everyplace in the world for which
that data is available. It's often available for individual streets as
well, and they should program that in too
http://www.cupertino.org/home/showdocument?id=20763. It would also be
a good crowd-sourced app for smart phones where a database of problem
areas are maintained. If you've used Waze, it warns of potholes based on
crowd-sourced data.

I was recently on a ride with our Public Works director, and it went
into San Jose from Cupertino. You immediately could tell which city is
spending the money to bring their PCI up. San Jose is at 63, while
Cupertino is at 78, but the average doesn't tell the whole story. The
major bicycle route to downtown San Jose has some sections that are
clearly below 50. Two years ago I could not even spell PCI and now I
think about it often.

  #67  
Old June 20th 18, 05:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Helmet News

On 6/19/2018 1:35 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
John B Slocomb wrote:

One of the problems is that it isn't a simple
A=B equation. Was the guy with (or without)
the helmet drinking or taking dope? Were the
helmet wearers (non wearers) obeying the
traffic code? Was it night (day), did that
make a difference?

This isn't a helmet problem at all, almost
every study I've read eliminated some
variables in order to attempt to get a viable
answer to the question of Why?

Or, to be honest, in some cases to the
question, "Is this going to show what I want
it to"?


Nah, I think it is possible to conduct
investigations that aren't biased and give
a good enough indication. I think there are
plenty enough of good researchers around the
globe to carry that off.


OMG, there have been endless studies, all that show a benefit to helmet
usage to some degree. The problem is not a lack of studies, it's that
those that are opposed to helmet usage will ALWAYS nitpick some aspect
of even the most rigorous study, and proclaim that the results are invalid.

  #68  
Old June 20th 18, 07:40 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Emanuel Berg[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,035
Default Helmet News

sms wrote:

OMG, there have been endless studies, all
that show a benefit to helmet usage to some
degree. The problem is not a lack of studies,
it's that those that are opposed to helmet
usage will ALWAYS nitpick some aspect of even
the most rigorous study, and proclaim that
the results are invalid.


What is the hangup with claiming helmets do not
help? Why isn't it enough just to not use
a helmet oneself and ignore whatever anyone
else is doing?

--
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
  #69  
Old June 20th 18, 07:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Helmet News

On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 6:56:08 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/20/2018 12:41 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 8:03:53 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/19/2018 3:54 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, June 19, 2018 at 10:11:48 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:

OK, aside from the crash caused by the tandem fork suddenly breaking
off, my only other moving on-road fall happened like this:

It was winter. I was riding home from work down a short steep downtown
hill. (The grade is over 15%, the hill is only 200 feet long, and the
road's since been closed to traffic.) There was lots of road salt on the
surface so I was descending very slowly, less than 10 mph.

I suddenly noticed that the patch of stuff just in front of me wasn't
road salt. Instead it was broken glass. I swerved rightward to avoid it.
My front tire slipped on the road salt and I fell. I scratched my knee
and tore my windbreaker.

I didn't say "That was an act of God." I didn't say "Nobody could have
avoided that." Instead I said "Damn; I screwed up."

I try hard to not screw up.

I hit a submerged pot hole, went OTB, separated my shoulder, knocked myself out and cut my face -- but not my head or anywhere under my helmet, which was wrecked. I did not blame myself for being unable to see through standing water at night in a rainstorm. I suppose I could have walked home. I don't think Garmin makes sonar. I'll look into that.

Good plan. You gotta be safe!

BTW, low-side crashes (like my crash in the West Hills) can just happen and may or may not result in a head strike -- usually not, but they can.

Yes, they can. Lots of things _can_ cause head strikes. Most have
nothing at all to do with bicycles. But only for bicycles and
motorcycles does "It can happen" translate to "so you really should wear
a helmet."

I'm not talking about a situation where you screw up, try to correct and then go down. You just go down due to loss of traction, often when traction was previously good.

Yep. That's what happened to me in that incident I described. It felt
like a judo throw.

FWIW, it's also happened to me mountain biking off road, including at
least once due to ice. Back in those days, I figured falling was a
normal part of mountain biking, because I was trying to see what I could
get away with on the bike. Sometimes that involved riding at "eleven
tenths," as they say.

But oddly, while I often wore a helmet mountain biking, I never hit one
on anything other than twigs.

Culprits can be invisible like oil or even a change in pavement surface, crack seal, black ice, etc. There is no warning, no nothing.

I suspect I'm a much more conservative rider than you are. I suspect I
was much more careful even back when I was your age.


What would more careful look like? Using a walker?


My "more careful" still includes 40 mph downhills, riding in groups,
drafting, riding in city and suburban traffic, and a bit of riding in
the woods, on gravel, etc.

But for me, it includes lots and lots of "what if" anticipation and
attention to the road surface. What if there's gravel around that
downhill bend? What if that motorist tries to push into the roundabout
while I'm in the circle? What if that puddle is really a deep pothole?
What if the meeting goes late and I have to ride home in the dark? What
if that squirrely rider suddenly weaves into my path? What if that mud
across the bike trail is really slippery?


Except for those who ride blindfolded, most of us DO plan ahead. BTW, I probably see more squirrely riders in a day than you do in a week or a month. I live among the squirrels. The number of cyclists on the cycletrack yesterday was positively Amsterdamish.

I'm sure you do more miles than I do. (A recent health issue has all but
stopped my riding for a while.) I'm positive you ride more miles in the
rain than I ever will. But I still suspect that if I could match you
mile for mile, I'd arrive a bit later than you, but with fewer crash tales.


More miles in the rain and at night -- 35 years in PDX with different lights, most of which were (or are, i.e. my Luxos) useless on rain soaked streets. With glasses, it's like Braille riding. I suppose the conservative thing to do would be to drive.

BTW, you equate low speed with safety, which is not always the case. This was my commute this morning -- https://tinyurl.com/ybfcd69h, spin around and look down the hill. This is an arterial. When its raining hard, you can brake to a stop on the polished aggregate near the top and continue sliding down the hill, particularly if its oily after a dry spell. I accommodate by carrying a little speed until the pavement improves, which some may view as "risk taking." The same goes with some trail spots on the way home or out on a ride where I avoid disaster by carrying a little speed over obstacles. Being overly timid can lead to disaster, particularly riding in a group..

-- Jay Beattie.
  #70  
Old June 20th 18, 08:39 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Helmet News

On 6/20/2018 11:40 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
sms wrote:

OMG, there have been endless studies, all
that show a benefit to helmet usage to some
degree. The problem is not a lack of studies,
it's that those that are opposed to helmet
usage will ALWAYS nitpick some aspect of even
the most rigorous study, and proclaim that
the results are invalid.


What is the hangup with claiming helmets do not
help? Why isn't it enough just to not use
a helmet oneself and ignore whatever anyone
else is doing?


It's because if others choose to use a helmet it implies that there is a
benefit, and part of choosing to not wear a helmet is to promote the
narrative that there is no benefit. Yet even some individuals that have
spoken out passionately against the uselessness of helmets actually wear
them!

I also think that part of the narrative is to promote the unsupported
claim that helmet use, either mandated or encouraged, leads to reduced
cycle use. Even that is rather amusing because there is no data to
support that claim.

The fallback retort to data showing the benefits of helmet use is to
claim that the rate of increase in cycling has been lower than the
population increase in countries with all-ages mandatory helmet use.
This claim is true, at least in some countries, though it's a stretch to
claim that the reason that the population increased at a greater rate
than the cycling rate is because of a mandatory helmet law. With or
without helmet laws or helmet promotion, cycling rates vary for multiple
reasons.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HELMET NEWS datakoll Techniques 0 May 7th 13 12:34 PM
Cyclists' helmet cameras (BBC 1 News, 1pm) brass monkey UK 0 February 2nd 11 01:29 AM
Great news on the helmet front! Squashme UK 0 May 15th 09 09:13 PM
In the News: Sizing up the sports helmet market Jason Spaceman Techniques 3 July 28th 08 12:35 AM
The anti Helmet on this news group gareth price UK 17 August 19th 06 04:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.