|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperatingfrom Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
Paul O wrote:
In fact, I can't seem to recall any of my riding buddies ever mentioning that they have been hit by meteorites. However, all of my riding buddies can you tell stories about their various falls, collisions, or close calls. And they can tell you these experiences because they wore helmets and survived the ordeals? I grew up in the 50s and 60's when a *lot* of kids rode bicycles everywhere. School, movies, friends houses, hangouts. Just about *everyone* crashed at some point or another. A few fairly seriously. However none of my peers that I can recall, ever died from bicycle accidents. They died from drowning, one from stepping on a rusty nail, a few from disease of one sort or another, and most from car accidents. Doesn't mean no one at that time ever died while on a bicycle, but just wasn't common to my knowledge. Now days, it seems the image portrayed is that you are defying death to bike without a helmet, with some even arguing you are being socially irresponsible for not doing so. It's a bike! I'll most likely skin my knee or leg or at worst break a leg or collarbone. It really isn't death defying! SMH |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperating from Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
smharding wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote: Bill "if your skull bounces off a curb edge, do you want it protected yes or no?" S. Yes, if I know my head is going for a meeting with a brick wall, I'd want it protected as much as possible. This would be true if that meeting came about via bicycle, motor vehicle, tripping on a sidewalk crack. I'd also want to be wearing flame retardant clothing if my truck burst into flame from some sort of accident. A parachute (a well documented life saver) might be a good idea when flying, commercial or private. The real question is whether the activity is dangerous enough to warrant using such protections on a day to day level, "just in case". My understanding is that a lot of activities we regard as "safe" are in fact quite a bit more deadly than we are willing to believe (motor vehicle operation for example). I just don't consider bicycling dangerous enough to consider helmet use improving my odds of survival doing it. A helmet probably does improve one's survival odds *if* something happens; just not enough to be bothered with as far as I'm concerned. Yet just about every organized ride where I don't wear a helmet (to test if the organizers *really* mean mandatory use), I have fellow cyclists ride up to me asking me why I don't "value my head". SMH So that's a yes then. Smart choice. BS |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperatingfrom Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
Bill Sornson wrote:
So that's a yes then. Smart choice. How many hours a day is your helmet on your head? I guess it would be a dumb choice if you didn't have your helmet on when you tripped over the rug in your house some evening heading for the fridge for a glass of milk and ended up in the emergency room. SMH |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperating from Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
Stephen Harding wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote: So that's a yes then. Smart choice. How many hours a day is your helmet on your head? I guess it would be a dumb choice if you didn't have your helmet on when you tripped over the rug in your house some evening heading for the fridge for a glass of milk and ended up in the emergency room. SMH What are you talking about? |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperatingfrom Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
On Mar 13, 1:24 pm, smharding wrote:
Bill Sornson wrote: Bill "if your skull bounces off a curb edge, do you want it protected yes or no?" S. Yes, if I know my head is going for a meeting with a brick wall, I'd want it protected as much as possible. This would be true if that meeting came about via bicycle, motor vehicle, tripping on a sidewalk crack. I'd also want to be wearing flame retardant clothing if my truck burst into flame from some sort of accident. A parachute (a well documented life saver) might be a good idea when flying, commercial or private. If I was offered a parachute when boarding a plane, I think I'd take it. Possibly the same for the fire suit and truck - depending on circumstances. If I did either of those things as often as I ride bike, I might even invest in my own gear. The real question is whether the activity is dangerous enough to warrant using such protections on a day to day level, "just in case". And this question is answered by considering the cost of using said protection against the potential benefit. My understanding is that a lot of activities we regard as "safe" are in fact quite a bit more deadly than we are willing to believe (motor vehicle operation for example). I just don't consider bicycling dangerous enough to consider helmet use improving my odds of survival doing it. A helmet probably does improve one's survival odds *if* something happens; just not enough to be bothered with as far as I'm concerned. Then in your estimation, the cost ("bother") exceeds the benefit. That's fine. Sometimes, in some circumstances, I make the same decision; but usually it goes the other way for me. Yet just about every organized ride where I don't wear a helmet (to test if the organizers *really* mean mandatory use), I have fellow cyclists ride up to me asking me why I don't "value my head". They're being idiots. You've weighed the costs vs. benefits, and made your own decision. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperatingfrom Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
On Mar 13, 10:00*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Mar 13, 1:24 pm, smharding wrote: The real question is whether the activity is dangerous enough to warrant using such protections on a day to day level, "just in case". And this question is answered by considering the cost of using said protection against the potential benefit. The problem now is with people's judgment about those variables. People have now been led to believe that ordinary bike riding is dangerous enough that they need all sorts of special protection - even though it's far safer than being a pedestrian. And people have been led to believe that the benefit of helmets is tremendous (85%!!!!!) even though wide use of helmets hasn't affected head injury rates at all. And of course, people have been led to believe that every time they put a dent in some soft styrofoam, it's saved their life, or brain, or skull, or handsome looks. I'll admit, the sales job has been brilliant. P.T. Barnum wasn't the only one who knew a thing or two about suckers and selling. - Frank Krygowski |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperating fromInjuries in a Bicycle Crash
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:59:27 -0800 (PST), Peter Rathmann
wrote: On Mar 12, 7:14*pm, Patrick Lamb wrote: On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:43:35 +0000, Phil W Lee phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote: In countries with universal health care there's also the matter of the cost of treating the additional injuries incurred by helmet-less riders. Of course, that's 0. The gain ratio has been established as 20:1 in favour of encouraging people to cycle, and helmets achieve the opposite. It's even been calculated that every pound spent on cycling promotion in the UK results in a saving of three pounds to the National Health Service. I'd be interested in a citation for this, if you have one. *My best guess, playing (unscientifically) with lies, damned lies, and statistics, was about 6:1 in favor of bicycles for death rates. Hillman, Cycling: Towards Health and Safety, BMA, Oxford University Press, 1992. He looked at the number of person-years lost due to deaths from cycling accidents vs. the number of person-years gained due to the health benefits of cycling and came up with a ratio of about 20:1 in favor of cycling. Don't have a cite for the cost savings by the NHS. Much appreciated. Pat |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Helmet Bill in Colorado to be Signed by Governor Recuperating from Injuries in a Bicycle Crash
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:00:47 -0800 (PST), Dan O
wrote: On Mar 13, 1:24 pm, smharding wrote: I'd also want to be wearing flame retardant clothing if my truck burst into flame from some sort of accident. A parachute (a well documented life saver) might be a good idea when flying, commercial or private. If I was offered a parachute when boarding a plane, I think I'd take it. Possibly the same for the fire suit and truck - depending on circumstances. If I did either of those things as often as I ride bike, I might even invest in my own gear. If I'm offered a parachute the next time I'm boarding a plane, I think I'll turn around and leave the airport. Seriously, the odds of injury or death from flying a commercial plane are some of the lowest I know. If someone thinks the risk is high enough for a particular flight that they need to offer me a parachute, I'd suspect something was wrong with the plane or the weather, and I'd rather not fly that day. Pat |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Oh frak, somebody said the "H" word...
I wonder how long and dirty this one will get? ;-3)
- - Compliments of: "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman" If you want to E-mail me use: ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
COLORADO BANNING BIG GROUP RIDES FW: FROM BICYCLE COLORADO | Colorado Bicycler | General | 23 | December 27th 05 09:53 PM |
COLORADO BANNING BIG GROUP RIDES FW: FROM BICYCLE COLORADO | Colorado Bicycler | Rides | 20 | December 27th 05 09:53 PM |
Colorado: new bicycle bill passes | Ken Marcet | General | 14 | March 2nd 05 07:20 AM |
Mandatory Helmet Legislation- How to reach the orginator of the bill | JFJones | General | 1 | November 7th 04 05:54 PM |
Private members bill on cycle helmet compulsion. | Mike Sales | UK | 24 | December 23rd 03 08:29 PM |