Helmet saves life of bike store owner hit by car......

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in
:

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:23:40 -0500, "psycholist"
wrote in message :

Interesting argument. You presented a bunch of data and findings and
any that you didn't agree with you called "lies."

I've seen these arguments so many times and always wanted to say
something but never have. It's so simple, if you don't care about your
safety, then don't wear a helmet. If you hit your noggin', you're gonna
be a vegetable or die more than likely. You're body can take alot of
abuse
but your head cannot. Here in Texas, you have the option, I don't care
what others do to look cool, but I look pretty cool as a walking,talking
Texan that wears a helmet. All I can say is if you don't, instead of a
vegatable that i have to support with my taxes, I hope you die,
painlessly
of course. As an EMT, I was shown a picture of a guy that was riding a
bike
and was hit by a car. The guy was laying on the ground, his eyes open,
looking at his brain laying in front of him that had popped out of the
front of his skull. Maybe, if he had a helmet on, this could have been
prevented, maybe not.

mrbubl wrote:

If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more
power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help
others.

mrbubl

Do you say this about pedestrians that don't wear helmets? Because there
are 5 times as many pedestrians than cyclists that receive head injuries (in
the US).

How about those taking a shower without a helmet? Again, many times as many
people receiving head injuries from shower use than bicycle use. How about
using a step ladder or driving in a car? All many, many times more likely
to result in a head injury. They better all be organ donors so that their
choices can help the rest of us out.

Your statement, on it's face, makes the utterly invalid assumption that
cycling is dangerous. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Austin (who takes real risks by climbing stairs without a helmet)

Dan wrote:
As an EMT, I was shown a picture of a guy that was riding a
bike
and was hit by a car. The guy was laying on the ground, his eyes open,
looking at his brain laying in front of him that had popped out of the
front of his skull. Maybe, if he had a helmet on, this could have been
prevented, maybe not.

Do you honestly believe that a 50 cent piece of Styrofoam that can be
crushed with a finger would protect a skull (which, by the way, is many,
many times harder than the Styrofoam hat) from that kind of trauma? If
that's the extent of your intelligence I don't want you to respond should I
ever need an EMT.

If bicycle helmets could protect from this kind of injury, then they need to
be required for much more dangerous activities such as climbing stairs,
walking, or taking a shower.

Austin

"Dan" wrote

I've seen these arguments so many times and always wanted to say
something but never have. It's so simple, if you don't care about your
safety, then don't wear a helmet. If you hit your noggin', you're gonna
be a vegetable or die more than likely. You're body can take alot of
abuse
but your head cannot.

If bike crashes are really that injurious/fatal, and helmets are really that
helpful...why are there still cyclists? Why didn't we all die off in the
~100 years between the invention of the bike, and the invention of the bike
helmet?

Pete

"AustinMN" wrote in message
...
mrbubl wrote:
Do you say this about pedestrians that don't wear helmets? Because there
are 5 times as many pedestrians than cyclists that receive head injuries
(in
the US).

How about those taking a shower without a helmet? Again, many times as
many
people receiving head injuries from shower use than bicycle use. How
about
using a step ladder or driving in a car? All many, many times more likely
to result in a head injury. They better all be organ donors so that their
choices can help the rest of us out.


I am not taking sides on this issue, but I will point out that in this form
your statistics are useless. Comparing number of showering injuries to
number of bicycling injuries is completely irrelevant. If you wanted to
prove something going in that direction, you would need to compare "injuries
per man-hour of showering vs. bicycling" or at the least "number of cycling
injuries per cyclist vs. number of showering injuries per showerer"

-Scott Ehardt
http://www.scehardt.com

"AustinMN" wrote in message
news
Requires registration.


http://www.bugmenot.com/view.php?url=dallasnews.com

-Scott Ehardt
http://www.scehardt.com

AustinMN wrote:
mrbubl wrote:

If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more
power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help
others.

mrbubl


Do you say this about pedestrians that don't wear helmets? Because
there are 5 times as many pedestrians than cyclists that receive head
injuries (in the US).

Numbers..pedestrians vs cyclist. Compare apples to apples and your
actual mileage may vary.

How about those taking a shower without a helmet? Again, many times as
many people receiving head injuries from shower use than bicycle use.
How about using a step ladder or driving in a car?

How about wearing seat belts, smoking anything on a regular basis,
drinking alcohol to excess. If there were people that wore an approved
helmet that fell from step ladders or people driving cars in accidents
wore helmets that would present more moot points. How does a race care
driver survive a 100g force crash to walk away?? DId their helmet help?

All many, many times
more likely to result in a head injury. They better all be organ donors
so that their choices can help the rest of us out.

That would certainly help the organ availability crisis in the US.


Your statement, on it's face, makes the utterly invalid assumption that
cycling is dangerous. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Dangerous is a relative term. That pesky proactive action versus
reactive actions come in to play. I don't ride thinking it's dangerous
but have a reasonable expectation that those around me that directly
influence what happens to me share the same expectations.

The beauty is that you can make your own choices.

Austin (who takes real risks by climbing stairs without a helmet)

mrbubl (wears a variety of helmets where appropriate and organ donor by
choice)

Just zis Guy, you know? says...
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 22:41:11 GMT, mrbubl wrote
in message .net:

If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more
power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help
others.

Oops, you spoiled it at the end there. Once again, if the facts are
so clear (a) why do the helmet lobby always give the highest figures
available, even when they know they are wrong, and (b) why do the
jurisdictions which have introduced laws not show the benefit?

That is the fundamental question for me. I am perfectly prepared to
believe helmets might prevent most trivial injuries, some more serious
ones, and even a few major ones. But the real world figures show that
overall there is no measurable benefit from even large scale increases
in helmet use, so there is clearly something else going on. I'd quite
like to know what it is, and preferably without being part of the
experiment. And actually I've not seen any figures which examine the
differential effect of helmets and any other kind of hat against scalp
injuries.

I dislike wearing helmets and in my instinctive dislike for them I see a
few things that might explain why they don't seem to help much. Helmets
are hot in the peak summer riding months and can increase sweat,
dehydration and heat exhaustion. They do nothing but decrease comfort
and are a distraction. Not only are they hot, but the straps cut into
the skin and there is a fine line between having them too loose and too
tight. I see a high percentage of helmet wearers with the helmet sitting
lopsided on their head. They are one more thing to fiddle with when the
rider could be concentrating on his riding and traffic. Bike helmets
protect the top of the head almost exclusively, the least likely place
for impact. The face, ears, and even the back of the neck have
significant exposure. A blow to the face will mean that the helmet will
deflect the force to the lower face, jaw, etc--not necessarily a
significant help. Helmets make the head a much bigger target. Near
misses become impacts. We actually have good instincts for protecting
our heads and some riders may short circuit these instincts in an
accident and try to protect other parts of their bodies.

Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:47:00 GMT,
et,
mrbubl proselytised:
\snip sos
How does a race care
driver survive a 100g force crash to walk away?? DId their helmet help?
\whack a doodle etc.

Their helmet has its own restraint system to keep it from breaking
their necks.

Apples and pineapples.
--
zk

"Super Slinky" wrote in message
t...
Just zis Guy, you know? says...
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 22:41:11 GMT, mrbubl wrote
in message .net:

If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more
power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help
others.

Oops, you spoiled it at the end there. Once again, if the facts are
so clear (a) why do the helmet lobby always give the highest figures
available, even when they know they are wrong, and (b) why do the
jurisdictions which have introduced laws not show the benefit?

That is the fundamental question for me. I am perfectly prepared to
believe helmets might prevent most trivial injuries, some more serious
ones, and even a few major ones. But the real world figures show that
overall there is no measurable benefit from even large scale increases
in helmet use, so there is clearly something else going on. I'd quite
like to know what it is, and preferably without being part of the
experiment. And actually I've not seen any figures which examine the
differential effect of helmets and any other kind of hat against scalp
injuries.

I dislike wearing helmets and in my instinctive dislike for them I see a
few things that might explain why they don't seem to help much. Helmets
are hot in the peak summer riding months and can increase sweat,
dehydration and heat exhaustion. They do nothing but decrease comfort
and are a distraction. Not only are they hot, but the straps cut into
the skin and there is a fine line between having them too loose and too
tight. I see a high percentage of helmet wearers with the helmet sitting
lopsided on their head. They are one more thing to fiddle with when the
rider could be concentrating on his riding and traffic. Bike helmets
protect the top of the head almost exclusively, the least likely place
for impact. The face, ears, and even the back of the neck have
significant exposure. A blow to the face will mean that the helmet will
deflect the force to the lower face, jaw, etc--not necessarily a
significant help. Helmets make the head a much bigger target. Near
misses become impacts. We actually have good instincts for protecting
our heads and some riders may short circuit these instincts in an
accident and try to protect other parts of their bodies.

Geez. I hope you learned to fit your bike better than you learned to fit
whatever helmet you may have tried. This is just simply ridiculous.

Bob C.