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

Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old February 18th 19, 12:22 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 8:37:04 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/17/2019 9:30 AM, wrote:

I do not blame the helmet manufacturer but rather a component failure. Without that failure I would not have been injured. What do you do if your brakes go out or if you get a flat tire cornering perhaps faster than you should in your car?


Cornering faster than one would in their car might be evidence of risk
compensation triggered by overconfidence in a helmet.

Peter Flax mentioned his different approach to risk now that he rides
with no helmet. See
https://cyclingtips.com/2018/11/comm...a-bike-helmet/


Going from a helmet to no helmet does make me more cautious -- for about an hour. Maybe longer or shorter for others. And much of what has caused my head injury had nothing to do with risk taking, except to the extent that riding year round in inclement weather including rain and ice is risk compensating.

BTW, I rarely crashed in races. I did crash in a pile of wet leaves at the October Fest criterium in Mt. Angel one year and got a free lap -- and placed. I won a giant box of Kettle Chips (one of the race sponsors). The prize list for masters races was awesome! No serious injury either.

-- Jay Beattie.
Ads
  #82  
Old February 18th 19, 12:41 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 8:49:53 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/16/2019 8:36 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 2:46:16 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:

... But it's the medical professionals who are the mystery. How do they
develop the cognitive dissonance to portray bicycling as a major source
of serious brain trauma? They see at least 50 such cases from
non-cycling incidents for every bicycle case, but I don't recall any of
them ever campaigning for helmets for the other cases. Well, except
perhaps motorcyclists - whose risk is something like 30 times worse than
bicyclists.

BTW, I've discussed this with various medical professionals, including
the extended family member who recently retired as an ER doctor. Oddly,
all the ones I've talked to were skeptical about the helmet promotion,
or at least agreed that bicycling seemed to be low on the scale of
relative risk of serious brain trauma. But I suspect that this is an
issue that, in the medical community as in the bicycling community, you
state your skepticism at your own peril.


Well, there's more to the issue than "serious brain injury." Head and scalp injury, including depressed skull fracture can be reduced or avoided with a helmet. As an ED doctor, I would like to see that.


Depressed skull fracture is bad. But scalp injuries? They are messy, but
they're no more life-threatening than (say) chin injuries. Yes, I know
that the Thompson & Rivara team briefly proposed full-face helmets for
all cyclists, but we really need to let _some_ injuries stay below the
"Danger! Danger!" radar.

I didn't see a ton of bicycle accidents as an ambulance driver...


Which is my point! Could you take a guess at the percentage of serious
head & brain injuries you saw that were bicyclists?


Well, there weren't a lot of cyclists back then, and undoubtedly not many who required ambulance transportation from an accident -- although I was taken by ambulance from an accident when I got hooked by a car and went airborne. I was flying down off Mt. Hamilton in SJ. I got knocked out. I don't recall if I was wearing a helmet.

Keep in mind that I worked many years in Eastside San Jose -- the barrio. Mostly the type of cyclists you'd seen on a Muzi KTLA post. If they got hit, I'd probably be transporting the motorist with a gun shot wound.


Unless your experience was somehow very different from the national
average, less than 2% of the bad head trauma should have been
bicyclists. (And of those, about a quarter would have been drunk, and
about half would have done things like run red lights, ride facing
traffic, etc.)

but I did see a ton of motorcycle accidents. Yes, different issues, but I saw lots of heads that look like they went through cheese graters. And to be fair, lots of bodies, too. A helmet would have at least allowed for an open casket funeral.


Last I looked, motorcycling's fatality-per-hour figure was over 30 times
that of bicycling. Not even in the same universe.

And nobody has ever said that the health benefits of motorcycling
greatly outweigh motorcycling's risks. But a bunch of studies have said
that's true of bicycling.

That means that dissuading people from riding bikes (by helmet mandates
or scary helmet promotion) probably causes net detriment to public health..


I don't see any helmet promotion, but I do see a lot of people in helmets. I'll quiz the bazillion helmeted cyclists I see every day and see why they wear helmets. Maybe I'll get that 100 mile stare and monotone response "Big Helmet said . . . must wear helmet. I hear and obey."

I wear a helmet because I whacked my head a bunch of times, had my face stitched up twice and believe there is value in wearing a helmet. And yes, de-gloving scalp injuries can be painful and nasty to repair. It is trauma worth avoiding. I wear a helmet voluntarily, so If I were compelled to wear a helmet, I wouldn't stay off my bike. I rode my bike with my legs in ortho boots, with a shoulder sling, broken and plated hand -- and currently with massively arthritic knees. Out of my cold dead hands! I don't understand people who refuse to ride with a helmet. I get the whole "Don't Tread on [my Head]" thing, but I couldn't imagine not riding even if someone made me wear an orange vest.

-- Jay Beattie.

  #83  
Old February 18th 19, 12:51 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 6:37:32 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 2:26:58 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 6:39:15 PM UTC, wrote:
On Friday, February 15, 2019 at 11:11:46 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
Thanks Jay, thanks Jeff. Just checking to see if anyone is awake. Without you guys, I'd be wrong twice a day.

My suggestion still stands.

Andre Jute
Amazing grace

Come on Andre - according to Zen and Newsie you are wrong by definition. These are the two guys that were criticizing my programming skills when neither is a programmer. What is in the minds of people like these?


I've always believed that one cannot know everything, and that asking makes you a new friend. Today there is so much information that one cannot remember everything, even if simply because your entire life would be consumed by filing irrelevances in your memory palace.

according to Zen and Newsie you are wrong by definition.


Zen and Newsie (heh-heh) are both the wannabe writer, copyright thief and plagiarist Peter Howard, who has spent getting on for two decades stalking me and gainsaying everything I say. Apparently he thinks hiding behind multiple net handles -- there are more -- raises his net profile. Not worth wasting much time on such a loser. All the same, I waste no experience, so I got a painting out of all his effort. See
http://web.archive.org/web/201505300.../archives/4913
One wonders if the wretched little man even grasps how rude the other members of RBT will perceive his undeclared use of so many anonymous hiding places.

As for Frank Krygowski, the man is an anti-social thug and liar without the grace to admit when he makes a mistake -- it's common for railroad minds to believe they are always right -- and who refuses to apologise when offered the opportunity. I doubt such a slow learner even understands why I kick him in his smug kisser every time I see him.

These are the two guys that were criticizing my programming skills when neither is a programmer. What is in the minds of people like these?


A great big void of narcissistic Id. This clown Howard, and the rest of the clowns, appear to believe that anyone who can operate a keyboard can be a writer or a programmer. I've been in the applied and fine arts since I was 13, but I have yet to meet such allrounders as these asses believe themselves to be.

Andre Jute
Polymath


I should have guessed as much - the sheer lack of intellect plainly showed them to be of one mind. While the others here lined up to play pattycake with them I certainly was entirely unimpressed with what most of the members here have become.

Frank is Mr. Can't Get It Up which you would think strange from a person who told us he was a teacher. Why would he behave as a petulant child?

Finally Jay came clean that he isn't Dr. Strange anymore but only tries to ride fast to ride with his son. He is a backslider with ultimately leftist politics which I thought I described accurately as someone that lives high on the hill and while driving to work neither looks left nor right. So he doesn't see the absolute failure of leftism and will continue his occasional fits of balderdash such as a majority of voters should have the right to take rights away from other simply by limiting themselves in the same manner.



What on earth are you talking about? I'll admit, though, that I am a backslider. I promised not to eat the cupcakes my wife bought for Valentines Day .. . . and I did! I need to dump the holiday weight. I was struggling to hang with my best cycling buddy yesterday. While I'm talking about yesterday's ride, the two of us could not get away from the droves of sport/racing cyclists on our chosen route. It was like a Mayfly hatch of cyclists -- and it was raining for christsake. When I go on a ride with a friend, I hate getting stuck in a de facto pack.

-- Jay Beattie.
  #84  
Old February 18th 19, 01:28 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 11:41:45 PM UTC, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 8:49:53 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/16/2019 8:36 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 2:46:16 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:

... But it's the medical professionals who are the mystery. How do they
develop the cognitive dissonance to portray bicycling as a major source
of serious brain trauma? They see at least 50 such cases from
non-cycling incidents for every bicycle case, but I don't recall any of
them ever campaigning for helmets for the other cases. Well, except
perhaps motorcyclists - whose risk is something like 30 times worse than
bicyclists.

BTW, I've discussed this with various medical professionals, including
the extended family member who recently retired as an ER doctor. Oddly,
all the ones I've talked to were skeptical about the helmet promotion,
or at least agreed that bicycling seemed to be low on the scale of
relative risk of serious brain trauma. But I suspect that this is an
issue that, in the medical community as in the bicycling community, you
state your skepticism at your own peril.

Well, there's more to the issue than "serious brain injury." Head and scalp injury, including depressed skull fracture can be reduced or avoided with a helmet. As an ED doctor, I would like to see that.


Depressed skull fracture is bad. But scalp injuries? They are messy, but
they're no more life-threatening than (say) chin injuries. Yes, I know
that the Thompson & Rivara team briefly proposed full-face helmets for
all cyclists, but we really need to let _some_ injuries stay below the
"Danger! Danger!" radar.

I didn't see a ton of bicycle accidents as an ambulance driver...


Which is my point! Could you take a guess at the percentage of serious
head & brain injuries you saw that were bicyclists?


Well, there weren't a lot of cyclists back then, and undoubtedly not many who required ambulance transportation from an accident -- although I was taken by ambulance from an accident when I got hooked by a car and went airborne. I was flying down off Mt. Hamilton in SJ. I got knocked out. I don't recall if I was wearing a helmet.

Keep in mind that I worked many years in Eastside San Jose -- the barrio. Mostly the type of cyclists you'd seen on a Muzi KTLA post. If they got hit, I'd probably be transporting the motorist with a gun shot wound.


Unless your experience was somehow very different from the national
average, less than 2% of the bad head trauma should have been
bicyclists. (And of those, about a quarter would have been drunk, and
about half would have done things like run red lights, ride facing
traffic, etc.)

but I did see a ton of motorcycle accidents. Yes, different issues, but I saw lots of heads that look like they went through cheese graters. And to be fair, lots of bodies, too. A helmet would have at least allowed for an open casket funeral.


Last I looked, motorcycling's fatality-per-hour figure was over 30 times
that of bicycling. Not even in the same universe.

And nobody has ever said that the health benefits of motorcycling
greatly outweigh motorcycling's risks. But a bunch of studies have said
that's true of bicycling.

That means that dissuading people from riding bikes (by helmet mandates
or scary helmet promotion) probably causes net detriment to public health.


I don't see any helmet promotion, but I do see a lot of people in helmets.. I'll quiz the bazillion helmeted cyclists I see every day and see why they wear helmets. Maybe I'll get that 100 mile stare and monotone response "Big Helmet said . . . must wear helmet. I hear and obey."

I wear a helmet because I whacked my head a bunch of times, had my face stitched up twice and believe there is value in wearing a helmet. And yes, de-gloving scalp injuries can be painful and nasty to repair. It is trauma worth avoiding. I wear a helmet voluntarily, so If I were compelled to wear a helmet, I wouldn't stay off my bike. I rode my bike with my legs in ortho boots, with a shoulder sling, broken and plated hand -- and currently with massively arthritic knees. Out of my cold dead hands! I don't understand people who refuse to ride with a helmet. I get the whole "Don't Tread on [my Head]" thing, but I couldn't imagine not riding even if someone made me wear an orange vest.

-- Jay Beattie.


Yellow vests here in Ireland. The Guards (police) give them away on request.. I don't have one: my cycling jacket is yellow already.

Andre Jute
The Man in Black
  #85  
Old February 18th 19, 01:31 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 11:51:20 PM UTC, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 6:37:32 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 2:26:58 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
On Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 6:39:15 PM UTC, wrote:
On Friday, February 15, 2019 at 11:11:46 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
Thanks Jay, thanks Jeff. Just checking to see if anyone is awake. Without you guys, I'd be wrong twice a day.

My suggestion still stands.

Andre Jute
Amazing grace

Come on Andre - according to Zen and Newsie you are wrong by definition. These are the two guys that were criticizing my programming skills when neither is a programmer. What is in the minds of people like these?

I've always believed that one cannot know everything, and that asking makes you a new friend. Today there is so much information that one cannot remember everything, even if simply because your entire life would be consumed by filing irrelevances in your memory palace.

according to Zen and Newsie you are wrong by definition.

Zen and Newsie (heh-heh) are both the wannabe writer, copyright thief and plagiarist Peter Howard, who has spent getting on for two decades stalking me and gainsaying everything I say. Apparently he thinks hiding behind multiple net handles -- there are more -- raises his net profile. Not worth wasting much time on such a loser. All the same, I waste no experience, so I got a painting out of all his effort. See
http://web.archive.org/web/201505300.../archives/4913
One wonders if the wretched little man even grasps how rude the other members of RBT will perceive his undeclared use of so many anonymous hiding places.

As for Frank Krygowski, the man is an anti-social thug and liar without the grace to admit when he makes a mistake -- it's common for railroad minds to believe they are always right -- and who refuses to apologise when offered the opportunity. I doubt such a slow learner even understands why I kick him in his smug kisser every time I see him.

These are the two guys that were criticizing my programming skills when neither is a programmer. What is in the minds of people like these?

A great big void of narcissistic Id. This clown Howard, and the rest of the clowns, appear to believe that anyone who can operate a keyboard can be a writer or a programmer. I've been in the applied and fine arts since I was 13, but I have yet to meet such allrounders as these asses believe themselves to be.

Andre Jute
Polymath


I should have guessed as much - the sheer lack of intellect plainly showed them to be of one mind. While the others here lined up to play pattycake with them I certainly was entirely unimpressed with what most of the members here have become.

Frank is Mr. Can't Get It Up which you would think strange from a person who told us he was a teacher. Why would he behave as a petulant child?

Finally Jay came clean that he isn't Dr. Strange anymore but only tries to ride fast to ride with his son. He is a backslider with ultimately leftist politics which I thought I described accurately as someone that lives high on the hill and while driving to work neither looks left nor right. So he doesn't see the absolute failure of leftism and will continue his occasional fits of balderdash such as a majority of voters should have the right to take rights away from other simply by limiting themselves in the same manner.



What on earth are you talking about? I'll admit, though, that I am a backslider. I promised not to eat the cupcakes my wife bought for Valentines Day . . . and I did! I need to dump the holiday weight. I was struggling to hang with my best cycling buddy yesterday. While I'm talking about yesterday's ride, the two of us could not get away from the droves of sport/racing cyclists on our chosen route. It was like a Mayfly hatch of cyclists -- and it was raining for christsake. When I go on a ride with a friend, I hate getting stuck in a de facto pack.

-- Jay Beattie.


Just keeping the record straight.

Andre Jute
Fair to a fault
  #86  
Old February 18th 19, 05:32 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 6:41:45 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 8:49:53 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/16/2019 8:36 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I didn't see a ton of bicycle accidents as an ambulance driver...


Which is my point! Could you take a guess at the percentage of serious
head & brain injuries you saw that were bicyclists?


Well, there weren't a lot of cyclists back then, and undoubtedly not many who required ambulance transportation from an accident...


Nonetheless, it's been very consistent for decades that
of the nation's serious TBI, less than 2% are bicyclists.
The other 98% are not told they should have worn helmets.
And I know, from asking audiences of talks I've given
to various audiences, that it's common for people to
believe that 30% of America's TBI fatalities are
bicyclists. Now how do you suppose that idea popped up?
Hint: It was NOT spontaneous.

But a bunch of studies have said
that's true of bicycling.

That means that dissuading people from riding bikes (by helmet mandates
or scary helmet promotion) probably causes net detriment to public health.


I don't see any helmet promotion, but I do see a lot of people in helmets.. I'll quiz the bazillion helmeted cyclists I see every day and see why they wear helmets.


You don't see any helmet promotion?

OK, I'll grant you that it's a bit less than it has been,
partly because people have spent years pointing out
the lies helmet promoters used. Some people did listen,
for example the bike club that sued to get NHTSA to
stop using T&R's obviously false "85%" claim.

But I think the main reason there's _less_ (but
definitely not NO) helmet promotion is that "big helmet"
as you call it is satisfied. They've got helmets
installed as the default choice among people who think
they're being responsible. They've got cyclists mocking
others who ride without helmets. They've got every
day care in America forbidding kids to use any wheeled
toy without a helmet, even though most are fitted
terribly and totally unnecessary.

That did NOT happen without decades of dedicated,
persistent and dishonest helmet promotion. It's
incredibly naive to think otherwise.

I wear a helmet because I whacked my head a bunch of times, had my face stitched up twice and believe there is value in wearing a helmet. And yes, de-gloving scalp injuries can be painful and nasty to repair. It is trauma worth avoiding. I wear a helmet voluntarily, so If I were compelled to wear a helmet, I wouldn't stay off my bike. I rode my bike with my legs in ortho boots, with a shoulder sling, broken and plated hand -- and currently with massively arthritic knees. Out of my cold dead hands! I don't understand people who refuse to ride with a helmet. I get the whole "Don't Tread on [my Head]" thing, but I couldn't imagine not riding even if someone made me wear an orange vest.


Do you not understand that you're the tail of the bell
curve? You'd probably ride a bike if they passed a law
requiring you bungee twenty pounds of concrete blocks
onto a rear rack. But it's pretty well proven that
many, many people feel differently. And even if they
did not, what is the sense of imposing a law that
mandates a commercial product of very questionable
efficacy, to prevent a problem of tiny proportions,
when other activities demonstrate far greater risk?
It's absolute nonsense.

Really, it doesn't matter to you primarily because
you've bought into the nonsense. It wouldn't bother you
if they said you have to wear a helmet because you
believe a helmet is wonderfully valuable. Maybe for you
it is, but others who don't have your crash history
shouldn't be harangued, and shouldn't have to justify
their choice to ride as everyone rode before 1980 or so.

- Frank Krygowski

  #87  
Old February 18th 19, 06:18 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 20:32:46 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 6:41:45 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 8:49:53 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/16/2019 8:36 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I didn't see a ton of bicycle accidents as an ambulance driver...

Which is my point! Could you take a guess at the percentage of serious
head & brain injuries you saw that were bicyclists?


Well, there weren't a lot of cyclists back then, and undoubtedly not many who required ambulance transportation from an accident...


Nonetheless, it's been very consistent for decades that
of the nation's serious TBI, less than 2% are bicyclists.
The other 98% are not told they should have worn helmets.
And I know, from asking audiences of talks I've given
to various audiences, that it's common for people to
believe that 30% of America's TBI fatalities are
bicyclists. Now how do you suppose that idea popped up?
Hint: It was NOT spontaneous.

But a bunch of studies have said
that's true of bicycling.

That means that dissuading people from riding bikes (by helmet mandates
or scary helmet promotion) probably causes net detriment to public health.


I don't see any helmet promotion, but I do see a lot of people in helmets. I'll quiz the bazillion helmeted cyclists I see every day and see why they wear helmets.


You don't see any helmet promotion?

OK, I'll grant you that it's a bit less than it has been,
partly because people have spent years pointing out
the lies helmet promoters used. Some people did listen,
for example the bike club that sued to get NHTSA to
stop using T&R's obviously false "85%" claim.

But I think the main reason there's _less_ (but
definitely not NO) helmet promotion is that "big helmet"
as you call it is satisfied. They've got helmets
installed as the default choice among people who think
they're being responsible. They've got cyclists mocking
others who ride without helmets. They've got every
day care in America forbidding kids to use any wheeled
toy without a helmet, even though most are fitted
terribly and totally unnecessary.

That did NOT happen without decades of dedicated,
persistent and dishonest helmet promotion. It's
incredibly naive to think otherwise.

I wear a helmet because I whacked my head a bunch of times, had my face stitched up twice and believe there is value in wearing a helmet. And yes, de-gloving scalp injuries can be painful and nasty to repair. It is trauma worth avoiding. I wear a helmet voluntarily, so If I were compelled to wear a helmet, I wouldn't stay off my bike. I rode my bike with my legs in ortho boots, with a shoulder sling, broken and plated hand -- and currently with massively arthritic knees. Out of my cold dead hands! I don't understand people who refuse to ride with a helmet. I get the whole "Don't Tread on [my Head]" thing, but I couldn't imagine not riding even if someone made me wear an orange vest.


Do you not understand that you're the tail of the bell
curve? You'd probably ride a bike if they passed a law
requiring you bungee twenty pounds of concrete blocks
onto a rear rack. But it's pretty well proven that
many, many people feel differently. And even if they
did not, what is the sense of imposing a law that
mandates a commercial product of very questionable
efficacy, to prevent a problem of tiny proportions,
when other activities demonstrate far greater risk?
It's absolute nonsense.

Really, it doesn't matter to you primarily because
you've bought into the nonsense. It wouldn't bother you
if they said you have to wear a helmet because you
believe a helmet is wonderfully valuable. Maybe for you
it is, but others who don't have your crash history
shouldn't be harangued, and shouldn't have to justify
their choice to ride as everyone rode before 1980 or so.

- Frank Krygowski


In the spirit of honest advertising I wonder whether a little decal
shouldn't be placed on each helmet sold stating something like, "This
Helmet was tested at an equivalent speed of 14mph (22.5kph) and speeds
exceeding this figure may prove dangerous.

After the public is entitled to know the limitations of the safety
gear that they are being sold :-)

--
Cheers,
John B.


  #88  
Old February 18th 19, 09:55 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Latest on Australian Mandatory Helmet Law propaganda

On Monday, February 18, 2019 at 4:32:48 AM UTC, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 6:41:45 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, February 17, 2019 at 8:49:53 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/16/2019 8:36 PM, jbeattie wrote:

I didn't see a ton of bicycle accidents as an ambulance driver...

Which is my point! Could you take a guess at the percentage of serious
head & brain injuries you saw that were bicyclists?


Well, there weren't a lot of cyclists back then, and undoubtedly not many who required ambulance transportation from an accident...


Nonetheless, it's been very consistent for decades that
of the nation's serious TBI, less than 2% are bicyclists.
The other 98% are not told they should have worn helmets.
And I know, from asking audiences of talks I've given
to various audiences, that it's common for people to
believe that 30% of America's TBI fatalities are
bicyclists. Now how do you suppose that idea popped up?
Hint: It was NOT spontaneous.

But a bunch of studies have said
that's true of bicycling.

That means that dissuading people from riding bikes (by helmet mandates
or scary helmet promotion) probably causes net detriment to public health.


I don't see any helmet promotion, but I do see a lot of people in helmets. I'll quiz the bazillion helmeted cyclists I see every day and see why they wear helmets.


You don't see any helmet promotion?

OK, I'll grant you that it's a bit less than it has been,
partly because people have spent years pointing out
the lies helmet promoters used. Some people did listen,
for example the bike club that sued to get NHTSA to
stop using T&R's obviously false "85%" claim.

But I think the main reason there's _less_ (but
definitely not NO) helmet promotion is that "big helmet"
as you call it is satisfied. They've got helmets
installed as the default choice among people who think
they're being responsible. They've got cyclists mocking
others who ride without helmets. They've got every
day care in America forbidding kids to use any wheeled
toy without a helmet, even though most are fitted
terribly and totally unnecessary.

That did NOT happen without decades of dedicated,
persistent and dishonest helmet promotion. It's
incredibly naive to think otherwise.

I wear a helmet because I whacked my head a bunch of times, had my face stitched up twice and believe there is value in wearing a helmet. And yes, de-gloving scalp injuries can be painful and nasty to repair. It is trauma worth avoiding. I wear a helmet voluntarily, so If I were compelled to wear a helmet, I wouldn't stay off my bike. I rode my bike with my legs in ortho boots, with a shoulder sling, broken and plated hand -- and currently with massively arthritic knees. Out of my cold dead hands! I don't understand people who refuse to ride with a helmet. I get the whole "Don't Tread on [my Head]" thing, but I couldn't imagine not riding even if someone made me wear an orange vest.


Do you not understand that you're the tail of the bell
curve? You'd probably ride a bike if they passed a law
requiring you bungee twenty pounds of concrete blocks
onto a rear rack. But it's pretty well proven that
many, many people feel differently. And even if they
did not, what is the sense of imposing a law that
mandates a commercial product of very questionable
efficacy, to prevent a problem of tiny proportions,
when other activities demonstrate far greater risk?
It's absolute nonsense.

Really, it doesn't matter to you primarily because
you've bought into the nonsense. It wouldn't bother you
if they said you have to wear a helmet because you
believe a helmet is wonderfully valuable. Maybe for you
it is, but others who don't have your crash history
shouldn't be harangued, and shouldn't have to justify
their choice to ride as everyone rode before 1980 or so.

- Frank Krygowski


You're one to talk about haranguing people, Franki-boy. What do you think your entire post above is except a huge over-long spittle-flecked harangue?

Tell us then, Franki-boy, whether you took the same Luddite attitude of obstruction to ca safety belts?

And do tell us, Franki-boy, why you expect the rest of us to drive cars with catalytic converters that sap power if you're so against compulsion?

From questions about your irrationality we'll proceed to questions about your sanity.

Andre Jute
Just asking
 




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
Mandatory treadmill helmet laws soon to be announced.. James[_8_] Techniques 2 November 6th 14 12:57 PM
Helmet propaganda debunked [email protected] Social Issues 310 June 23rd 05 07:56 AM
Helmet propaganda debunked [email protected] Racing 17 April 27th 05 04:34 PM
Helmet propaganda debunked [email protected] UK 14 April 26th 05 10:54 AM
No mandatory helmet law in Switzerland... for now. caracol40 General 0 December 21st 04 12:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:54 AM.


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.