|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
On Oct 2, 7:39 pm, "Mike Kruger" wrote:
From the October 2007 Scientific American in print, Do Helmets Attract Cars to Cyclists? and on the web hehttp://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...2-99DF-3594A60... Strange but True: Helmets Attract Cars to Cyclists (note the different headlines!) This is by a reporter, not a scientist, and cites the following: 1. Ian Walker's study showing helmets attract cars to cyclists (anti-helmet) 2. Randy Swart, founder of the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (pro-helmet) 3. Dorothy Robinson's work showing mandatory helmet laws "did not have a significant effect on bicycle accidents resulting in head injuries" (anti-helmet) 4. New York City report showing that of the 225 cyclists dying between 1996 and 2005 on NYC streets, 97% were not wearing helmets. (pro-helmet) It ends in a wishy-washy manner: "Walker, whose much-publicized report may inspire a new generation of bareheaded riders, won't make any specific recommendations to other cyclists (and neither will Scientific American), though he notes that when it comes to riding in traffic, motorists are the real problem. "If people read the research and decide a helmet makes them safer, they should wear one; if they read the research and decide it doesn't, perhaps they don't need to," Walker says, adding the caveat, "But they do need to read the research!" And watch out for cars." It's not apparent in the web version, but this column is called "Fact or Fiction" and designed for "investigations into popular myths". For example, the July column definitely concluded that premium gas is useless for standard cars. This isn't of interest because it provides new information; it's interesting because of the headline switch and the fact that the helmet debate makes it into a general interest publication. OK folks, another helmet thread! How many posts will this one go? 200, 300, 400, more? Hell, Frank and Bill ought to be worth about 30 posts apiece. Smokey |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
Dennis P. Harris wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:39:44 GMT in rec.bicycles.misc, "Mike Kruger" wrote: it's interesting because of the headline switch and the fact that the helmet debate makes it into a general interest publication. Uh... Scientific American *is* a general interest publication. Always has been. It's certainly not a peer reviewed journal. I write it's in Scientific American, meaning the helmet debate made it into a general interest publication. You correct me by noting that Scientific American is a general interest publication. ???? -- Mike Kruger Give no quarter to the paradigm people. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
---Then there are the people who have had a helmet take an impact and
believe they were saved by said helmet. No study will convince me that the truck mirror which cracked my helmet at 20mph would have had no effect on my naked skull. :-) I would say that your's is a case where the helmet probably did help. But then again, you weren't sliding across the pavement with your helmet in contact with a rough surface. (Raising my hand) I did! I did! --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
Gooserider wrote:
[...] If they were available then, I'm sure Einstein would have worn a helmet. A well known quote from him is: "Ein kluger Kopf paßt in keinem Helm" (A intelligent head doesn't fit in any helmet) Even though he probably only meant soldiers helmets with that, maybe you should think about that. Ingo. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
On Oct 3, 12:05 pm, wrote:
On Oct 2, 7:39 pm, "Mike Kruger" wrote: From the October 2007 Scientific American in print, Do Helmets Attract Cars to Cyclists? and on the web hehttp://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?art...2-99DF-3594A60... Strange but True: Helmets Attract Cars to Cyclists (note the different headlines!) This is by a reporter, not a scientist, and cites the following: 1. Ian Walker's study showing helmets attract cars to cyclists (anti-helmet) 2. Randy Swart, founder of the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (pro-helmet) 3. Dorothy Robinson's work showing mandatory helmet laws "did not have a significant effect on bicycle accidents resulting in head injuries" (anti-helmet) 4. New York City report showing that of the 225 cyclists dying between 1996 and 2005 on NYC streets, 97% were not wearing helmets. (pro-helmet) It ends in a wishy-washy manner: "Walker, whose much-publicized report may inspire a new generation of bareheaded riders, won't make any specific recommendations to other cyclists (and neither will Scientific American), though he notes that when it comes to riding in traffic, motorists are the real problem. "If people read the research and decide a helmet makes them safer, they should wear one; if they read the research and decide it doesn't, perhaps they don't need to," Walker says, adding the caveat, "But they do need to read the research!" And watch out for cars." It's not apparent in the web version, but this column is called "Fact or Fiction" and designed for "investigations into popular myths". For example, the July column definitely concluded that premium gas is useless for standard cars. This isn't of interest because it provides new information; it's interesting because of the headline switch and the fact that the helmet debate makes it into a general interest publication. OK folks, another helmet thread! How many posts will this one go? 200, 300, 400, more? Hell, Frank and Bill ought to be worth about 30 posts apiece. Unless some idiot cross posts it to URC, then the band of Limey idiots (Chapman, Raven et al) will chime in with their paranoid rantings. That's another few hundred worthless wastes of space. :-( |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
On Oct 4, 7:00 am, "Gooserider" wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... On Oct 3, 3:03 am, (Dennis P. Harris) wrote: IMHO folks who don't wear helmets don't have much to protect. Hmm. That included Albert Einstein, according to the photo hanging in my office. http://www.einsteinsbicycle.com/ - Frank Krygowski If they were available then, I'm sure Einstein would have worn a helmet. Doubtful. He hadn't been exposed to the false propaganda claiming that bicyclists are at significant risk for serious head injuries. And if he had been exposed to the propaganda, he would have had enough mathematical sense to realize it was hype. Besides, he lived in a culture where cycling was (and is) considered a normal way to get around. It was not treated as a fancy equipment, special clothing, extreme sport. Switzerland is still that way. So is this place: http://www.domela.com/photos_people/...eview_2006.pdf Or this place: http://www.denniscox.com/BeijingBicycles.jpg Prissy Americans with their seldom-used toys think they know more than cultures that actually _ride_ bicycles. It's a little laughable. - Frank Krygowski |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
"Gooserider" wrote in message ... "Roger Zoul" wrote in message ... "Gooserider" wrote ---Then there are the people who have had a helmet take an impact and believe they were saved by said helmet. No study will convince me that the truck mirror which cracked my helmet at 20mph would have had no effect on my naked skull. :-) I would say that your's is a case where the helmet probably did help. But then again, you weren't sliding across the pavement with your helmet in contact with a rough surface. That situation is less clear cut. Probably? How about conceding that taking a truck mirror impact to my naked skull would DEFINTELY caused me injury? I'm guessing he went for probably because it's also slightly possible that withouth the extra 2 inches around your head the truck mirror would have missed entirely. I stoke on a tandem. My helmet is very useful for the times my captain ducks without telling me, and a branch hits my helmet. I'm thinking otherwise the branch would grab my hair, and yeah, that would hurt. (And I happen to love the captain, so occasionally uncalled branches are just part of life.) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
"Ein kluger Kopf paßt in keinem Helm"
(A intelligent head doesn't fit in any helmet) Even though he probably only meant soldiers helmets with that, maybe you should think about that. Let's paraphrase the quote: "Only stupid people are capable of wearing helmets" And by extension: "Anyone who wears a helmet is stupid" Should we really be taking advice from a guy who rides his bike in a wool sweater, pants, and shiny shoes? I'd say his saddle looks a bit low for maximum pedalling efficiency too. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
On Oct 4, 12:43 pm, David Bonnell wrote:
"Ein kluger Kopf paßt in keinem Helm" (A intelligent head doesn't fit in any helmet) Even though he probably only meant soldiers helmets with that, maybe you should think about that. Let's paraphrase the quote: "Only stupid people are capable of wearing helmets" And by extension: "Anyone who wears a helmet is stupid" Should we really be taking advice from a guy who rides his bike in a wool sweater, pants, and shiny shoes? I'd say his saddle looks a bit low for maximum pedalling efficiency too. :-) Well, as we all know in America, a person is not really a "cyclist" unless they wear skintight lycra shorts, a special jersey covered with manufacturer's advertisements, special shoes that one can't walk in, special gloves, aerodynamic sunglasses, socks with logos, and so on. Right? ;-) IOW, there's only one cyclist in all these photographs: http://www.domela.com/photos_people/...eview_2006.pdf - Frank Krygowski |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Scientific American does bicycle helmets
"Gooserider" wrote in message ... "Cathy Kearns" wrote in message . .. "Gooserider" wrote in message ... "Roger Zoul" wrote in message ... "Gooserider" wrote ---Then there are the people who have had a helmet take an impact and believe they were saved by said helmet. No study will convince me that the truck mirror which cracked my helmet at 20mph would have had no effect on my naked skull. :-) I would say that your's is a case where the helmet probably did help. But then again, you weren't sliding across the pavement with your helmet in contact with a rough surface. That situation is less clear cut. Probably? How about conceding that taking a truck mirror impact to my naked skull would DEFINTELY caused me injury? I'm guessing he went for probably because it's also slightly possible that withouth the extra 2 inches around your head the truck mirror would have missed entirely. I stoke on a tandem. My helmet is very useful for the times my captain ducks without telling me, and a branch hits my helmet. I'm thinking otherwise the branch would grab my hair, and yeah, that would hurt. (And I happen to love the captain, so occasionally uncalled branches are just part of life.) He hit me at the 6 o'clock position on the helmet. Right above the brain stem. Your assumption isn't correct. Ahh, additional information is always helpful. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Scientific American on Landis and Testosterone | Feld | Racing | 43 | September 6th 07 09:01 AM |
Ian Walker hits Scientific American | Marc Brett | UK | 0 | May 14th 07 11:42 AM |
Bicycle touring website: A NORTH AMERICAN BICYCLE JOURNEY | [email protected] | General | 3 | August 27th 06 03:16 PM |
Large Bicycle Helmets | Brian Millson | UK | 1 | August 15th 05 07:33 PM |
Large bicycle helmets | Michael | Australia | 6 | October 18th 03 11:25 AM |