Can't Use Helmets in the Sun????

"Hadron Quark" wrote in message
...

You seem intent on spouting ridiculous reports which rely on minutae
data to disprove something simple : a helmet protects the head.

So does a baseball cap. The difference in fact isn't large enough between a
bicycle crash helmet and a baseball cap to make much difference. If you WANT
to wear one that's perfectly OK with me. If you want to insist they work I
suggest you actually learn something. Start at the Snell Memorial
Foundation's web site. They will explain if you can understand fairly simple
mathematics, that their standard is pitifully inadequate for purposes of
simple protection in a dead stop fall-over.

After you finished with that you can look at the CPSC helmet standard and
you will see that standard is significantly BELOW the Snell standard.

Now go tune in to the one of the latest issues of Consumer Reports and
WHEEEEEEE - MOST of the helmets BARELY make the lower standard, a
significant number don't even pass that lower standard and the most
expensive helmets are worse that the cheaper ones.

Funny how education might modify the mind of someone who actually has one.

Tell me : do gloves protect the hand? Or because they dont protect
against a chain saw they are equally useless when doing manual labour?
Your whole course of argument is fatally flawed.

If you're trying to protect your hand from a chainsaw with a glove then the
answer is NO. Go that? The BEST gloves won't protect your hand from a chain
saw. Or is it your suggestion that we redefine a gauntlet as a glove so that
you can feel clever?

If you're suggesting that gloves on a bicyclist are not significant
protection for your hands you are incorrect.

A bicycle helmet in the vast majority of serious or fatal bicycle accidents
has NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER!!!

If you're trying to sell helmets as mediating minor head injuries then
indeed we have something to discuss. Perhaps THAT is the reason that you
wear a helmet? After all we have all seen the Bell and Giro ads - "Bicycle
Helmets Help Reduce Minor Injuries".

Someone is holding a big stick covered in tar and gravel : now, would
you prefer them to hit your bald head or your helemted head with it?

I can honestly say that in my 45 years of riding motorcycles all over the
US, road racing, desert racing, cross country, touring, Safety Director for
the American Federation of Motorcyclists, bicycling for the last 20 years,
off road, on road, road racing etc. I have NEVER heard of nor seen a single
head injury caused by a big stick covered in tar and gravel.

And I would be really interested in your discription of this accident in
which a helmet apparently saved your life.

"GaryG" wrote in message
...

And you're complaining about others not adequately "studying the
issues"???
The example you cite, and the paragraph above are anecdotal hearsay...at
best.

Well, the San Jose Mercury printed a story many years ago from the Director
of Advertising for Specialized helmets and he was laughing and said that
they had a tiny advertsing budget because the safety freaks were more than
happy to spend all their own money to promote helmets.

"Cathy Kearns" writes:

I unbelievingly often get called out for not wearing a helmet while pedaling
to my daugher's school. Note that I run this same route, on the same roads
(there are no sidewalks), at the same speed more often, yet not one person
has mentioned I should be wearing a helmet when I go running.

Why would you wear a helmet when running? You arms dont get tangled in
handlebars/cables, you are very unlikely to be "clipped" by a wing
mirror, you are probably running into the traffic as opposed to with it
so know exactly whats approaching. Its totally different risk factors
with totally different accident results.

Hadron Quark wrote:
"Cathy Kearns" writes:

I unbelievingly often get called out for not wearing a helmet while pedaling
to my daugher's school. Note that I run this same route, on the same roads
(there are no sidewalks), at the same speed more often, yet not one person
has mentioned I should be wearing a helmet when I go running.

Why would you wear a helmet when running?

For the same reason you'd use one when cycling, since it's a similar
level of risk with similar outcomes in case of accidents. Of course,
since we have a more reasonable comprehension of the risks of running
and know it would be absurd and that's all right, just as not wearing
one for cycling was all right up until cycle helmets were invented and
then pushed as a solution in search of a problem.

You arms dont get tangled in handlebars/cables

Speaking as a cyclist of some experience I can never recall my arms
getting tangles in cables or bars while cycling. My mum's been cycling
almost daily for most of her 73 years and has never found that to be a
problem either. I'd be surprised if Cathy does. Maybe you do?

you are very unlikely to be "clipped" by a wing
mirror

About as likely if it's the same route on the same roads. And since
mirrors aren't typically at head height, how is that relevant?

The way to avoid being clipped by mirrors is proper positioning that
encourages proper formal overtaking manoeuvres rather than squeezing by,
nothing to do with helmets (there is anecdotal evidence that wearing
helmets /encourages/ poor overtaking, because the cyclist is perceived
as "safe").

Its totally different risk factors
with totally different accident results.

Very similar accident results, and I don't see shy the risk factors
should be that different. Getting hit by a vehicle running won't be
much different to being hit while cycling, and in either case the
energies involved are way beyond the specification cycle helmets are
built to, which is for a low speed fall to the ground and nothing worse.
I don't notice cyclists tripping (or a cycle equivalent) and falling
(a primary cause of ER head injuries) more than runners.

Helmets are basically just as applicable to pedestrians as cyclists: in
typical roadgoing use, not much at all.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On Wed, 10 May 2006 10:17:48 +0200, Hadron Quark
wrote:

Why would you wear a helmet when running? You arms dont get tangled in
handlebars/cables, you are very unlikely to be "clipped" by a wing
mirror, you are probably running into the traffic as opposed to with it
so know exactly whats approaching. Its totally different risk factors
with totally different accident results.

Totally? People get hit by cars running.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

On Wed, 10 May 2006 10:17:48 +0200, Hadron Quark
wrote:

Why would you wear a helmet when running? You arms dont get tangled in
handlebars/cables, you are very unlikely to be "clipped" by a wing
mirror, you are probably running into the traffic as opposed to with it
so know exactly whats approaching. Its totally different risk factors
with totally different accident results.

Totally? People get hit by cars running.

Err, I know.

But to equate the two is simply ridiculous and attempting to build a
straw man.

Hadron Quark wrote:

But to equate the two is simply ridiculous and attempting to build a
straw man.

"Fully equate" would be silly, but there are certainly degrees of
similarity. What risks does a cyclist face that a runner on the same
road doesn't, and how are accidents caused by such differences in risk
particularly productive of head injuries, and specifically the sort of
head injuries that something built to the EN1078 specification can be
expected to usefully work against?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch writes:

Hadron Quark wrote:

But to equate the two is simply ridiculous and attempting to build a
straw man.

"Fully equate" would be silly, but there are certainly degrees of
similarity. What risks does a cyclist face that a runner on the same
road doesn't, and how are accidents caused by such differences in risk
particularly productive of head injuries, and specifically the sort of
head injuries that something built to the EN1078 specification can be
expected to usefully work against?

1) faster
2) less stable in slippery/hazardous road conditions
3) higher
4) due to speed less likely to be able to avoid sudden hazards
5) more prone to slip stream
6) more prone to cross winds

Enough of this. Its bordering on the silly IMO.

On Wed, 10 May 2006 12:50:17 +0200, Hadron Quark
wrote:

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

On Wed, 10 May 2006 10:17:48 +0200, Hadron Quark
wrote:

Why would you wear a helmet when running? You arms dont get tangled in
handlebars/cables, you are very unlikely to be "clipped" by a wing
mirror, you are probably running into the traffic as opposed to with it
so know exactly whats approaching. Its totally different risk factors
with totally different accident results.

Totally? People get hit by cars running.

Err, I know.

But to equate the two is simply ridiculous

No.

and attempting to build a
straw man.

No -- it's attempting to get people to think about risk more
comprehensively..

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

On Wed, 10 May 2006 13:04:58 +0200, Hadron Quark
wrote:

Peter Clinch writes:

Hadron Quark wrote:
"Cathy Kearns" writes:

I unbelievingly often get called out for not wearing a helmet while pedaling
to my daugher's school. Note that I run this same route, on the same roads
(there are no sidewalks), at the same speed more often, yet not one person
has mentioned I should be wearing a helmet when I go running.
Why would you wear a helmet when running?

For the same reason you'd use one when cycling, since it's a similar
level of risk with similar outcomes in case of accidents. Of course,

eh? Just because the statistics say there are similar injury numbers it
doesnt in any way equate the accident itself. And guess what : Ive never
known a runner injured by anything other than self punishment (sprains
etc) - Ive known lots of cyclists clipped by cars, hedges, spilled by
drainage grates and gravel etc.

I won't comment on runners specifically, but in my country tens of
thousands of pedestrians of all sorts are hit by cars and many
thousands are killed each year. And many people are afraid to walk
along suburban and rural roads because of the danger of cars hitting
them. Some cyclists feel the same way too. So, in terms of general
safety regarding cars, there are a lot of related issues regarding
people on foot and on bikes. To claim they are completely unrelated
is bizarre.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************