|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On 5/5/2011 5:58 PM, Tom Lake (Space Alien) wrote:
On Thu, 5 May 2011 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT), in rec.bicycles.tech Frank wrote: No, Tom, my parents never forced me to wear a helmet. Bike helmets did not exist until I was long out of my parents' control, legal or otherwise. I post about this issue because it's something I became interested in; and, having become interested, I decided to learn about it (something that's part of my nature, it seems); and having learned quite a lot, I realized that the deeply held beliefs of helmet proponents were proven false by available data and facts. When someone enters the discussion and states things that I know to be false, I point out the mistakes. About accepting positions: I'll accept your right to wear a helmet, just as I'll accept your right to wear purple riding shorts. And I won't try to change your deeply held beliefs. I will, however, counter any effort to spread misinformation to others. Haha... you're too smart for me, Frank. I've been outed! I'm really an Alien from Outter Space. I control you puny humans' thought processes by transponders embedded in bicycle helmets. BAWWWhahaha... What's the deal with "purple riding shorts"? I haven't mentioned them. Why bring up the color of someone's clothing? Why do you think that *I*, with a paltry five or six postings about bicycle helmets have "deeply held beliefs"? I said that I didn't care. You are the one with about 2,340 or so postings to helmet threads... I'd say that, compared to you, I'm pretty luke warm. I've got a *long* way to go before I'm going to approach your record. I suspect that the normal people on this group are getting tired of this. Bye, Earthling. But you *will* be refuted! Your children will wear helmets, mark my words. They already wear seat belts... "click it or ticket", huh, Frank? We could ask Frank's adult children if they wear Magic Foam Bicycle Hats™. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Ads |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
Tom Lake (Space Alien) wrote:
On Thu, 5 May 2011 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT), in rec.bicycles.tech Frank Krygowski wrote: About accepting positions: I'll accept your right to wear a helmet, just as I'll accept your right to wear purple riding shorts. And I won't try to change your deeply held beliefs. I will, however, counter any effort to spread misinformation to others. What's the deal with "purple riding shorts"? I haven't mentioned them. Why bring up the color of someone's clothing? It's Frank's way of giving you a big sloppy kiss. On clothing, I saw a dude warming up for an iron man event near Port Macquarie not long ago. He was riding his tri bike in leopard skin DTs and mid thigh black leg warmers. Make of that what you will. JS. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On Thu, 05 May 2011 18:02:48 -0500, in rec.bicycles.tech Tºm Shermªn™
°_° " wrote: What you state is one of the faults in the case-control studies such as Thompson-Rivara-Thompson, the source of the bogus 85% head injury reduction claim used to support mandatory foam hat usage laws. The children whose Liddite™ parents made them wear foam hats had significantly different demographics than the lidless children. However, certain countries (e.g. Australia, New Zealand) have introduced mandatory foam bicycle hat usage, enforced by traffic citations. Helmet usage rates dramatically increased, but death rates due to head injuries did not drop. Frank Krygowski has posted the citations many times. Does not apply to the studies of death rates from head injuries while cycling both before and after Liddite™ laws were enacted by legislators mislead by the foam hat selling funded lobbies (e.g. Safe Kids). No need, as wearing of foam bicycle hats has failed to show any real life average benefit when the usage rates double or triple. It's not a "fault" of the study any more than an inability to fly is a fault of a tractor. It's simply a property of that type of study; you start with existing data and study them. I'd bet half of the studies published on any topic use post facto data. I think you'll find that *all* helmet studies are thus. That doesn't make them flawed; they have their limitations; however, they're the best we've got or ever will have. It's a stronger design than a whole-pop because I can scale the results; whole-pops only apply locally. As for New Zealand, you'll find studies all over the map. I can cite contradictory findings by the same researcher; try these: Scuffham, 1995 the year after the law went into effect; compare that to the same author's 2000 and 2002 studies with six and eight years' worth of data. Are they still post facto studies? Absolutely. Both have the same limitations. I'll bet you wave one of them (the one with which you agree) and pronounce the others "discredited"... that's the usual drill, anyway. It's called "cherry picking", BTW and Usenet is positively rife with it. Look at it this way: smoking rates in the United States have dropped by half from 1965 to 2006 falling from 42% to 20.8% of adults (CDCP, 2007), yet the rate of death from respiratory and heart disease has not seen a similar reduction; in fact, it has climbed slightly over the same period. If I apply your logic to those numbers, I would conclude that there are no harmful effects from tobacco use... in fact, it may even be a healthful exercise for your lungs. Do you agree? Works Cited: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (November 2007). "Cigarette smoking among adults, United States, 2006". MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 56 (44): 1157-61. PMID 17989644. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5644a2.htm. Scuffham PA, Langley JD. Trends in cycle injury in New Zealand under voluntary helmet use. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1997 Jan;29(1):1-9. 1997. Scuffham P. Head injuries to bicyclists and the New Zealand bicycle helmet law. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2000 Jul;32(4):565-73. 2000. Taylor M, Scuffham P., New Zealand bicycle helmet law-do the costs outweigh the benefits? Injury Prevention, 2002;8:317-320. 2002. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On Thu, 05 May 2011 18:07:45 -0500, in rec.bicycles.tech Tºm Shermªn™
°_° " wrote: Studies have shown that motorists pass closer to lidded cyclists than those riding sans foam bicycle hat. Dr. Mengele, where art thou? As history shows, the "obvious" can be scientifically wrong. The answer is obvious to anyone who is rational and has bothered to study the issue - bicycle foam hats provide bump and scrape protection, but do not significantly reduce serious brain injuries and deaths. Why boast of your ignorance? Well, again, there simply aren't any data to support that. There aren't any to support that helmets *do* reduce closed head trauma, either because the research design, as you pointed out, does not allow such a conclusion. It has been my experience that the best way to "prove" something is to find what the person really believes to be true. Remember the "proven" weapons of mass destruction in Iraq back in 2002... what ever happened to them? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On Fri, 06 May 2011 01:51:32 +0100, in rec.bicycles.tech Phil W Lee
wrote: No, that is incorrect. There are studies showing risk compensation as a result of foam hat use, and most worrying of all, that it occurs among motorists as well. Absolute nonsense! More cherry-picking is all. If a researcher uses post facto data and says helmets cause injury reduction, you're all over it and rightly so. OTOH, when the study agrees with your preconceived shape of the world, it suddenly becomes a proven fact even though both studies had an identical design. To use the term "as a result of...", the research must divide a sample into two groups and randomly assign the participants; this is known as operational control of the independent variable. If the study allowed the participants to choose in which group they would be, it's not an experimental design. Unless the researcher assigns people to the helmeted and non-helmeted groups, all you can find is correlation. Sheese... did they quit teaching basic research methodology to undergrads? Back in 1970 (when I had to walk to school... two miles... ) it was required core. I took it in my junior year, I recall. Did you know that studies have shown that virtually *every* sentence citing: "Studies have shown..." is utter nonsense. That's been proven, you know! |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On Fri, 06 May 2011 01:57:35 +0100, in rec.bicycles.tech Phil W Lee
wrote: And it would still be invalid. since it takes no account of any of the things that may adversely affect foam hat effectiveness. Risk compensation is one (both from the rider feeling "better protected" and taking more risks and the motorist passing closer to helmeted riders). Rotational brain injuries are another caused by the higher friction of a helmet on the road that a bare head. The increased head size also make a head impact more likely in any given incident. You really don't "do" science, do you? Of course it would be invalid... unless it found that with which you agree; then it would gain elevated status fairly quickly, I expect. The increase of moment is the first point I've see in this whole discussion. You're aware that smoking cigarettes exercises your lungs, right? How else do you explain that respiratory illness increased during a time when cigarette use dropped by 50%? I think you should start smoking. It would make as much sense as the rest of your writing, anyway. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 5, 3:58 pm, "Tom Lake (Space Alien)" wrote:
On Thu, 5 May 2011 14:14:54 -0700 (PDT), in rec.bicycles.tech Frank Krygowski wrote: No, Tom, my parents never forced me to wear a helmet. Bike helmets did not exist until I was long out of my parents' control, legal or otherwise. I post about this issue because it's something I became interested in; and, having become interested, I decided to learn about it (something that's part of my nature, it seems); and having learned quite a lot, I realized that the deeply held beliefs of helmet proponents were proven false by available data and facts. When someone enters the discussion and states things that I know to be false, I point out the mistakes. About accepting positions: I'll accept your right to wear a helmet, just as I'll accept your right to wear purple riding shorts. And I won't try to change your deeply held beliefs. I will, however, counter any effort to spread misinformation to others. Haha... you're too smart for me, Frank. I've been outed! I'm really an Alien from Outter Space. I control you puny humans' thought processes by transponders embedded in bicycle helmets. BAWWWhahaha... What's the deal with "purple riding shorts"? I haven't mentioned them. Why bring up the color of someone's clothing? Because it's smarmarific! Why do you think that *I*, with a paltry five or six postings about bicycle helmets have "deeply held beliefs"? I said that I didn't care. You are the one with about 2,340 or so postings to helmet threads... I'd say that, compared to you, I'm pretty luke warm. I've got a *long* way to go before I'm going to approach your record. I suspect that the normal people on this group are getting tired of this. To say the least. Bye, Earthling. But you *will* be refuted! Your children will wear helmets, mark my words. They already wear seat belts... "click it or ticket", huh, Frank? |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 5, 3:50 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 5/5/2011 4:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: [...] I post about this issue because it's something I became interested in; and, having become interested, I decided to learn about it (something that's part of my nature, it seems); and having learned quite a lot, I realized that the deeply held beliefs of helmet proponents were proven false by available data and facts.[...] What - you do not believe in the well proven fact that Magic Foam Bicycle Hats™ prevent up to 70% of *LEG* injuries? Heathen! I won't mess with percentages, tending to think much of the "statistics" thrown out here as "proof" are a manipulation and in no way universally applicable anyway, but try this on for size: A good bicycle helmet *can* prevent leg injuries. In a crash, a bare-headed but otherwise sane rider will act (consciously and instinctively) to protect their head from even moderate glancing impact, which can override the relaxed tumbling that helps prevent unnatural forces on the limbs. (I know this may sound kooky, but Devil's Advocate has its place. So there :-) -- Yours, Dan |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On 5/5/2011 8:24 PM, Tom Lake wrote:
On Thu, 05 May 2011 18:07:45 -0500, in rec.bicycles.tech Tºm Shermªn™ " wrote: Studies have shown that motorists pass closer to lidded cyclists than those riding sans foam bicycle hat. Dr. Mengele, where art thou? As history shows, the "obvious" can be scientifically wrong. The answer is obvious to anyone who is rational and has bothered to study the issue - bicycle foam hats provide bump and scrape protection, but do not significantly reduce serious brain injuries and deaths. Why boast of your ignorance? While I wrote the above words, I did *not* write them as one paragraph. Combining them is therefore false quotation. Please do not do this again. Well, again, there simply aren't any data to support that. There aren't any to support that helmets *do* reduce closed head trauma, either because the research design, as you pointed out, does not allow such a conclusion. If foam bicycle hats were effective, why does making previous non-users wear them (e.g. Australia and New Zealand) fail to reduce the death rate due to head injuries? That is all the proof a *rational* person needs to know foam bicycle hats are ineffective beyond bump and scrape protection. It has been my experience that the best way to "prove" something is to find what the person really believes to be true. Remember the "proven" weapons of mass destruction in Iraq back in 2002... what ever happened to them? Those were Zionist lies from the very beginning, promoted by 5th columnists in the US government (e.g. Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Abrams, Libby), in the lobbying sector (e.g. AIPAC), and in the media (all the mainstream outlets) in order to have the US fight a war of destruction on Iraq on behalf of Israel and its goals of regional dominance. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On 5/5/2011 8:15 PM, Tom Lake wrote:
On Thu, 05 May 2011 18:02:48 -0500, in rec.bicycles.tech Tºm Shermªn™ " wrote: What you state is one of the faults in the case-control studies such as Thompson-Rivara-Thompson, the source of the bogus 85% head injury reduction claim used to support mandatory foam hat usage laws. The children whose Liddite™ parents made them wear foam hats had significantly different demographics than the lidless children. However, certain countries (e.g. Australia, New Zealand) have introduced mandatory foam bicycle hat usage, enforced by traffic citations. Helmet usage rates dramatically increased, but death rates due to head injuries did not drop. Frank Krygowski has posted the citations many times. Does not apply to the studies of death rates from head injuries while cycling both before and after Liddite™ laws were enacted by legislators mislead by the foam hat selling funded lobbies (e.g. Safe Kids). No need, as wearing of foam bicycle hats has failed to show any real life average benefit when the usage rates double or triple. It's not a "fault" of the study any more than an inability to fly is a fault of a tractor. It's simply a property of that type of study; you start with existing data and study them. I'd bet half of the studies published on any topic use post facto data. I think you'll find that *all* helmet studies are thus. That doesn't make them flawed; they have their limitations; however, they're the best we've got or ever will have. It's a stronger design than a whole-pop because I can scale the results; whole-pops only apply locally. As for New Zealand, you'll find studies all over the map. I can cite contradictory findings by the same researcher; try these: Scuffham, 1995 the year after the law went into effect; compare that to the same author's 2000 and 2002 studies with six and eight years' worth of data. Are they still post facto studies? Absolutely. Both have the same limitations. I'll bet you wave one of them (the one with which you agree) and pronounce the others "discredited"... that's the usual drill, anyway. It's called "cherry picking", BTW and Usenet is positively rife with it. We have been over the problems with Scuffham changing conclusions many times. Look at it this way: smoking rates in the United States have dropped by half from 1965 to 2006 falling from 42% to 20.8% of adults (CDCP, 2007), yet the rate of death from respiratory and heart disease has not seen a similar reduction; in fact, it has climbed slightly over the same period. If I apply your logic to those numbers, I would conclude that there are no harmful effects from tobacco use... in fact, it may even be a healthful exercise for your lungs. Do you agree? Comparing rates over 4 decades apart is hardly them same as comparing consecutive years before and after Liddite™ mandatory foam bicycle hat use implementation. Works Cited: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (November 2007). "Cigarette smoking among adults, United States, 2006". MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 56 (44): 1157-61. PMID 17989644. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5644a2.htm. Scuffham PA, Langley JD. Trends in cycle injury in New Zealand under voluntary helmet use. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1997 Jan;29(1):1-9. 1997. Scuffham P. Head injuries to bicyclists and the New Zealand bicycle helmet law. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 2000 Jul;32(4):565-73. 2000. Taylor M, Scuffham P., New Zealand bicycle helmet law-do the costs outweigh the benefits? Injury Prevention, 2002;8:317-320. 2002. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Unicycles and exchange rates | thejdw | Unicycling | 12 | November 2nd 07 05:57 PM |
Tdf 'live' Heart rates | cupra | UK | 2 | July 18th 07 12:55 AM |
Pedaling rates | Ron Graham | UK | 17 | February 3rd 07 05:52 PM |
decrease of heart rates | le-sheq | Techniques | 4 | February 28th 06 11:33 PM |
Heart rates. | Simon Mason | UK | 0 | January 21st 06 07:45 PM |