cycling data report

On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 20:53:30 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 11/18/2020 7:57 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:34:02 -0800 (PST), Mark Cleary
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 5:13:33 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:25:24 -0800 (PST), Mark Cleary
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:11:47 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

So people do actually ride a bike without a helmet. I have on occasion seen someone riding and not wearing a helmet. My first thought is they are not serious cyclist and stay away. What little brains I have need all the protection they can get. You are up early Andrew is that your normal style?

Deacon Mark
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_injury_rates


https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_injury_rates

Seems to indicate that, in a number of countries, participation in
cycling decreased and rates increased with the advent of mandatory
helmet laws.
--
Cheers,

John B.
Frank do whatever you want, personally i am going to wear my bike helmet. I have little brains as it is...................
Deacon Mark


Yes, do what you want to do :-) But I wear a helmet for, perhaps, the
most logical reason...

My wife nags me if I don't :-)

My wife never nagged me, but she did request I wear a helmet when I
started bike commuting to a much bigger city center.

Eventually, I learned enough about the issue to decide helmets were
unnecessary at best. I explained to her I'd decided against wearing one
and she was fine with that decision. She no longer wears one herself.

A smart man chooses his battles with care :-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 5:38:20 p.m. UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/18/2020 3:56 PM, Mark Cleary wrote:
Snipped
I just cannot fathom an argument that riding without one is safer.
But it may well be. There's data showing that people wearing helmets are
more likely to crash, or more likely to show up at ER. In one famous
study, 21% of bicyclists showing up at ER had worn helmets. This was
back in the day when a concurrent street survey showed only 3% in
helmets. Those with helmets were seven times more likely to go to ER.
That ratio has reduced, but other newer studies still find that difference.
Snipped
- Frank Krygowski

Oh goody! Yet another meaningless helmet thread that won't change anyone's stance on helmet use.

If 21% of bicyclists showing up at ER's were wearing helmets, that means that79% of bicyclists showing up at ER's were NOT wearing helmets.

I've had falls where a helmet most definitely helped prevent an injury.

Recently I posted about an overhanging tree branch on a paved MUP. That branch was parallel to the trail and thus invisible. It snagged under my helmet strap and the helmet darn near directed that branch into my right eye. Had I been riding faster it would have. As it was I had a few nasty scraps that were bleeding. Two were on my head (one next to my eye) and the other was the entire side of my neck. Needless to say once I disentangled from the branch I broke it so that it wouldn't spear someone else.

Helmets are a great place to put a mirror. I use mine for that when wearing bulky clothing in cold weather. It keeps the mirror higher than the mirror mounted on my eyeglasses. The glasses mounted mirror often gives me a very nice of view of my left shoulder but not of anything behind me.

Put a melon on a long rod and fasten it to a bicycle. Now push the bicycle to a good speed and let it topple. Repeat with another melon inside a helmet. Notice any difference? I did. the melon in the helmet didn't split open like the unprotected melon did.

I do not care one whit as to whether pedestrians or drivers have more brain injuries than bicyclists. I'm more concerned about MY head during MY rides.. Sometimes I wear a helmet and sometimes I don't. The choice is mine here and I feel it should be everyone's personal choice whether or not to wear a helmet. I do NOT try to force helmet use a=on others and I am TOTALLY AGAINST the very idea of let alone the implementation of mandatory bicycle helmet laws.

Cheers

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 6:14:18 PM UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 11:43:54 AM UTC-6, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:44:36 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Op woensdag 18 november 2020 om 15:11:47 UTC+1 schreef AMuzi:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Damn, we in last place...
Watching bike traffic last year in the City of London, it looked like someone was running a Cat 5 bike race and a double-decker bus race at the same time on the same course -- with scooters thrown in for good measure. The limited bike facilities were on-street, choked and people were moving fast.. Most of the cyclists were just filtering in traffic at high speed. It's not very Netherlandish. I'm surprised there aren't more fatalities.

-- Jay Beattie.
So Frank you don't wear a helmet I take it. Ok, that sounds fair you are entitled to do that if you choose and it seems you are a serious cyclist. That you are more experience cyclist and competent that me. I don't know never cycled with you.

Deacon Mark
..
That's just Franki-boy being his usual obnoxious self. Ask him what he thinks of the full count of cycle fatalities in New York over a period of circa a decade which I have shown leads to the unavoidable conclusion that compulsory helmet wear in the US could cut cyclist fatalities by 350-400 every year. Krygowski refuses to read that study because there is no answer, no lie that he could invent, to counter a full count rather than a sample, and he knows there is no answer either to my analysis of those numbers. Frank Krygowski, who wants to be a "spokesman for bicycles", wants exactly that, to represent the inanimate objects rather than the human flesh and blood. Never mind that up to 400 cyclists may be dying unnecessarily every year in the States, Krygowski doesn't think their lives should count against his anti-helmet zealotry.

Andre Jute
Krygowski isn't a fascist because I say so. Krygowski is a fascist because he behaves and talks like a fascist.

On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:11:30 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/

I would suspect that those European countries with the largest pigeon
population would also have the largest helmet use. I couldn't find an
appropriate study comparing helmet use and pigeon population, so the
relationship will remain conjecture for now.

This might be a good start:
London Pigeons. A 10 year Study.
http://www.londonpigeons.co.uk
The great pigeon count of 2011
As part of my study I have estimated the population of
pigeons in London to be c.0.85 million +/- 0.2million.
The author then estimates the pigeon dropping mass at:
... 3 tonnes of litter would have to be cleared
up every day.
Methinks that's a sufficiently massive rain of pigeon droppings on
London to justify wearing a protective hat or helmet. Since cleaning
a cloth, felt, or leather hat is difficult and messy, a plastic lid is
the obvious alternative. Of course, some pigeons are providing
bicycle riders an appropriate hint:
http://www.londonpigeons.co.uk/Pigeons%20in%20space.jpg

Hopefully, this insight will help reduce the effects of the recent NBK
outbreak.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 4:34:05 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 5:13:33 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:25:24 -0800 (PST), Mark Cleary
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:11:47 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

So people do actually ride a bike without a helmet. I have on occasion seen someone riding and not wearing a helmet. My first thought is they are not serious cyclist and stay away. What little brains I have need all the protection they can get. You are up early Andrew is that your normal style?

Deacon Mark
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_injury_rates


https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_injury_rates

Seems to indicate that, in a number of countries, participation in
cycling decreased and rates increased with the advent of mandatory
helmet laws.
--
Cheers,

John B.
Frank do whatever you want, personally i am going to wear my bike helmet. I have little brains as it is...................
Deacon Mark
This shows the increase in safety from wearing a helmet. This was written a long time ago. A couple of years ago I checked the newer statistics available and while the number overall were surprisingly larger, the comparison between pedestrian and cyclist mortality percentages remained the same. Wear a helmet for minor protections as I said, but do not think that it effectively increases your safety. http://www.vehicularcyclist.com/kunich.html

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 7:28:00 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 6:14:18 PM UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 11:43:54 AM UTC-6, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:44:36 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Op woensdag 18 november 2020 om 15:11:47 UTC+1 schreef AMuzi:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Damn, we in last place...
Watching bike traffic last year in the City of London, it looked like someone was running a Cat 5 bike race and a double-decker bus race at the same time on the same course -- with scooters thrown in for good measure. The limited bike facilities were on-street, choked and people were moving fast. Most of the cyclists were just filtering in traffic at high speed. It's not very Netherlandish. I'm surprised there aren't more fatalities.

-- Jay Beattie.
So Frank you don't wear a helmet I take it. Ok, that sounds fair you are entitled to do that if you choose and it seems you are a serious cyclist. That you are more experience cyclist and competent that me. I don't know never cycled with you.

Deacon Mark
.
That's just Franki-boy being his usual obnoxious self. Ask him what he thinks of the full count of cycle fatalities in New York over a period of circa a decade which I have shown leads to the unavoidable conclusion that compulsory helmet wear in the US could cut cyclist fatalities by 350-400 every year. Krygowski refuses to read that study because there is no answer, no lie that he could invent, to counter a full count rather than a sample, and he knows there is no answer either to my analysis of those numbers. Frank Krygowski, who wants to be a "spokesman for bicycles", wants exactly that, to represent the inanimate objects rather than the human flesh and blood. Never mind that up to 400 cyclists may be dying unnecessarily every year in the States, Krygowski doesn't think their lives should count against his anti-helmet zealotry.

Andre Jute
Krygowski isn't a fascist because I say so. Krygowski is a fascist because he behaves and talks like a fascist.
Andre, My study showed zero effects of helmets. I have checked the latest figures to a couple of years ago and it agrees with my original study. As you showed, a large segment of people killed on bicycles were from drunk drivers and probably at night without lights. When you are struck by a vehicle going 25 mph or more, you are unlikely to survive and not because of a blow to your head but multiple trauma leading to serious internal bleeding and organ damage. My collision was probably 2 mph and the steel frame on my bike was bent and most of the carbon components destroyed or rendered useless. I had my large toenail broken off and it still hasn't grown back completely two years later and I had to have 6 weeks of physical therapy for the back injuries. Do you have a reference to your paper?

On 11/18/2020 9:29 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 5:38:20 p.m. UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 11/18/2020 3:56 PM, Mark Cleary wrote:
Snipped
I just cannot fathom an argument that riding without one is safer.
But it may well be. There's data showing that people wearing helmets are
more likely to crash, or more likely to show up at ER. In one famous
study, 21% of bicyclists showing up at ER had worn helmets. This was
back in the day when a concurrent street survey showed only 3% in
helmets. Those with helmets were seven times more likely to go to ER.
That ratio has reduced, but other newer studies still find that difference.
Snipped
- Frank Krygowski

Oh goody! Yet another meaningless helmet thread that won't change anyone's stance on helmet use.

:-) What can we say about a person who complains about helmet threads
while immediately jumping into one? The most charitable thing I can
think of is "Sir, you're being weirdly inconsistent."

As for changing anyone's stance:

I used to wear a helmet. I got suckered in by the propaganda, and used
to say that it was a good idea to wear a helmet. (Not that I ever
favored mandates.)

But it was the discussions here that led me to understand the errors in
the fanatical helmet promotions of the time - the gross exaggeration of
helmet benefit.

From there, I got curious about safety or danger of bicycling related
to other common activities, and about benefits of bicycling vs. its
risks. All that led me to say helmet promotion is counterproductive.
Actually, it's a scam.

So these discussions _were_ instrumental in changing my stance. And
others have reported the same - and AFAIK all the changes have been in
the same direction.

Which is not to say you can't wear one if you are afraid of the horrible
dangers of balancing on two wheels!

If 21% of bicyclists showing up at ER's were wearing helmets, that means that79% of bicyclists showing up at ER's were NOT wearing helmets.

Congratulations on the math! Brilliant!

I've had falls where a helmet most definitely helped prevent an injury.

Hundreds of thousands of helmet wearers say that. And it may be true,
for some small percentage of claims. But if most of the claims for
preventing _serious_ injuries were true, it would show up in national
data. Unfortunately, it just does not.

So congratulations on being one of the small percentage for which the
claim was true. If indeed it was, and the injury would have been
serious. If the injury would have been minor, then by definition it's no
big deal.

Recently I posted about an overhanging tree branch on a paved MUP. That branch was parallel to the trail and thus invisible. It snagged under my helmet strap and the helmet darn near directed that branch into my right eye.

IOW, there definitely are times that helmets hurt rather than help.

Helmets are a great place to put a mirror. I use mine for that when wearing bulky clothing in cold weather. It keeps the mirror higher than the mirror mounted on my eyeglasses. The glasses mounted mirror often gives me a very nice of view of my left shoulder but not of anything behind me.

Sounds like you need a redesign. I make my own eyeglass mirrors and
don't have that problem.

Put a melon on a long rod and fasten it to a bicycle. Now push the bicycle to a good speed and let it topple. Repeat with another melon inside a helmet. Notice any difference? I did. the melon in the helmet didn't split open like the unprotected melon did.

Do the same experiment without the bicycle. The results mimicking a
pedestrian would be precisely the same. So by your "logic" ...

I do not care one whit as to whether pedestrians or drivers have more brain injuries than bicyclists. I'm more concerned about MY head during MY rides. Sometimes I wear a helmet and sometimes I don't. The choice is mine here and I feel it should be everyone's personal choice whether or not to wear a helmet. I do NOT try to force helmet use a=on others and I am TOTALLY AGAINST the very idea of let alone the implementation of mandatory bicycle helmet laws.

That's good, and I'm not trying to say you shouldn't wear one. But
please understand this started when Mark implied cyclists who don't wear
one can't be "serious" or competent; and that there was no justification
for not wearing one that he could understand.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 5:46:12 PM UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 4:34:05 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 5:13:33 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 08:25:24 -0800 (PST), Mark Cleary
wrote:

On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:11:47 AM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

So people do actually ride a bike without a helmet. I have on occasion seen someone riding and not wearing a helmet. My first thought is they are not serious cyclist and stay away. What little brains I have need all the protection they can get. You are up early Andrew is that your normal style?

Deacon Mark
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_injury_rates


https://www.researchgate.net/publica...d_injury_rates

Seems to indicate that, in a number of countries, participation in
cycling decreased and rates increased with the advent of mandatory
helmet laws.
--
Cheers,

John B.
Frank do whatever you want, personally i am going to wear my bike helmet. I have little brains as it is...................
Deacon Mark
This shows the increase in safety from wearing a helmet. This was written a long time ago. A couple of years ago I checked the newer statistics available and while the number overall were surprisingly larger, the comparison between pedestrian and cyclist mortality percentages remained the same. Wear a helmet for minor protections as I said, but do not think that it effectively increases your safety. http://www.vehicularcyclist.com/kunich.html

I wear a helmet because I would wear a hat anyway as my skin is very fair. But even if I tanned well, I would wear a cycling helmet because I know how painful plastic surgery to your face can be. If a cycling helmet does nothing more than protect my face from road rash, it has already earned its keep. It is also some protection against low-flying branches and divebombing magpies. -- AJ

On Thursday, November 19, 2020 at 6:02:59 PM UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 7:28:00 PM UTC-8, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 6:14:18 PM UTC, wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 11:43:54 AM UTC-6, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 8:44:36 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Op woensdag 18 november 2020 om 15:11:47 UTC+1 schreef AMuzi:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Damn, we in last place...
Watching bike traffic last year in the City of London, it looked like someone was running a Cat 5 bike race and a double-decker bus race at the same time on the same course -- with scooters thrown in for good measure. The limited bike facilities were on-street, choked and people were moving fast. Most of the cyclists were just filtering in traffic at high speed. It's not very Netherlandish. I'm surprised there aren't more fatalities.

-- Jay Beattie.
So Frank you don't wear a helmet I take it. Ok, that sounds fair you are entitled to do that if you choose and it seems you are a serious cyclist. That you are more experience cyclist and competent that me. I don't know never cycled with you.

Deacon Mark
.
That's just Franki-boy being his usual obnoxious self. Ask him what he thinks of the full count of cycle fatalities in New York over a period of circa a decade which I have shown leads to the unavoidable conclusion that compulsory helmet wear in the US could cut cyclist fatalities by 350-400 every year. Krygowski refuses to read that study because there is no answer, no lie that he could invent, to counter a full count rather than a sample, and he knows there is no answer either to my analysis of those numbers. Frank Krygowski, who wants to be a "spokesman for bicycles", wants exactly that, to represent the inanimate objects rather than the human flesh and blood. Never mind that up to 400 cyclists may be dying unnecessarily every year in the States, Krygowski doesn't think their lives should count against his anti-helmet zealotry.

Andre Jute
Krygowski isn't a fascist because I say so. Krygowski is a fascist because he behaves and talks like a fascist.
Andre, My study showed zero effects of helmets. I have checked the latest figures to a couple of years ago and it agrees with my original study. As you showed, a large segment of people killed on bicycles were from drunk drivers and probably at night without lights. When you are struck by a vehicle going 25 mph or more, you are unlikely to survive and not because of a blow to your head but multiple trauma leading to serious internal bleeding and organ damage. My collision was probably 2 mph and the steel frame on my bike was bent and most of the carbon components destroyed or rendered useless. I had my large toenail broken off and it still hasn't grown back completely two years later and I had to have 6 weeks of physical therapy for the back injuries. Do you have a reference to your paper?

It was in post here on RBT in 2010. I've republished it here on the current board for your convenience. See:
https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicy.../c/EpMpX9VQSc0

Andre Jute
Statistics is an art at least the equal of patisserie

On 18/11/2020 21:56, Mark Cleary wrote:
On Wednesday, November 18, 2020 at 2:17:38 PM UTC-6,
wrote:
Op woensdag 18 november 2020 om 20:33:51 UTC+1 schreef AMuzi:
On 11/18/2020 10:44 AM, Lou Holtman wrote:
Op woensdag 18 november 2020 om 15:11:47 UTC+1 schreef AMuzi:
https://cyclingindustry.news/london-...s-almost-zero/





Damn, we in last place...

Lou

Or first depending on one's viewpoint.
Yeah let's look at it that way. On normal/utility bike no one wears
a helmet, on road bikes/ATB's almost everyone wears a helmet. I'm
the exception (when riding alone) and now the deacon is saying that
I'm not a serious rider. Damn.

Lou

My take on those not serious about riding and not wearing a helmet. I
guess the ones I see that never have a helmet usually are on bikes
that are relatively inexpensive. Nothing wrong with that but they
tend to be utility type bikes, and those that look pretty beat up. I
also notice on those same riders they never seem to have the seat
height down. To me they are pedaling squat down and most need to
seriously raise the saddle. They look like me when I try to run,
goofy.

I just cannot see how someone would not want a helmet riding. I agree
that in may cases the helmets might not do a lot of good. But clearly
they do more good than harm.

And this Ladies and Gentlemen, is why I wear a saucepan on my head.
Cheap, effective, and cooks noodles.

I just cannot fathom an argument that
riding without one is safer. Frankly a motorcycle type helmet is
probably what is need but so far I have not done that. I also always
ride with gloves, full fingered work gloves I buy at the local box
store. Yes I am a guitarist so like to protect the hands. In fact I
am a runner and I always run with gloves on even in the intense heat
of summer. I have runner's dystonia so running is a challenge and I
trip over my feel and can fall easy.

Now that is one thing I wish I could clear up. I manage to qualify to
run the Boston Marathon 3 times but never did it some 30 years ago
but now I can't remember how to run. I probably should even wear a
helmet running. It does not seem to effect me on the bike so that is
my outlet. Tried to run this morning and ended up walking fast for 6
miles. I can walk 13-14 minutes miles all day for hours but cannot
even get my legs to get 1 miler under 10 minutes. Tripping over my
own feet..........maybe a helmet running is now in order.

Deacon Mark