CycleBanter.com

CycleBanter.com (http://www.cyclebanter.com/index.php)
-   Recumbent Biking (http://www.cyclebanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   A different look at the helmet debate: was cycling links - (http://www.cyclebanter.com/showthread.php?t=70028)

Edward Dolan November 27th 04 06:25 PM

A different look at the helmet debate: was cycling links -
 

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 15:35:00 GMT, "Robert Haston"
wrote in message
et:

My real belief is the near mythical belief in bike helmets stems from how
incredibly convenient this belief is for drivers who don't cycle.


Check.

This 2-3 cm of
foam crushing is the last item in a long chain of much more powerful
opportunities to avoid injury.


Check

To me the biggest risk in cycling is people who think all they need to do
regarding bicycle safety is to put on a helmet.


Check

Consider that 90% of bike fatalities are actually car fatalities, since
the
car does the killing, and that most are from multiple trauma.


Check

We used to teach them bicycle safety, now "bicycle safety" programs are
often just people handing out bicycle helmets. That's the real problem to
me.


Check

I agree 100% with every word you say, Robert. An AOL post, I know,
but you said it so well I just had to say "amen to that". Especially
the last point: the arrogation of the cycle safety agenda by helmet
monomaniacs flies in the face of every analysis I have ever seen of
the relative merits of different cycle safety interventions, all of
which, to my knowledge, put helmets last.

Guy


Guy needs to check himself into a psychiatric clinic and have his brains
"checked." Anyone who wants to go with this nut on the subject of helmets is
as nutty as he is.

But that is what is wrong with Usenet and groups like ARBR. All the nuts and
screwballs come out of the wood work with their half baked theories. Guy
most likely does not want to wear a helmet because it will muss up his hair.
A lot of idiotic women cyclists are like that too.

The only lesson to be learned from all of this is that a little learning is
a dangerous thing. It is the sort of thing that will get you killed. Listen
to Guy Chapman and you will be as dead as he is going to be someday from a
head injury due to a bike accident.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Wise and All-Knowing - Minnesota




Just zis Guy, you know? November 27th 04 06:47 PM

On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 12:25:22 -0600, Mr. Ed wrote in
message :

Guy needs to check himself into a psychiatric clinic and have his brains
"checked." Anyone who wants to go with this nut on the subject of helmets is
as nutty as he is.


Really? What proportion of serious head injuries do you think helmets
prevent? To the nearest 10%, please. Preferably with citations for
the evidence supporting the figure.

How would you rate the relative merit of traffic safety measures,
traffic law enforcement, rider and driver training, lighting and
conspicuity measures, bike maintenance initiatives, and helmet
promotion, as measures to improve cyclist safety? Give your best
estimate of the relative weightings.

The only lesson to be learned from all of this is that a little learning is
a dangerous thing. It is the sort of thing that will get you killed.


Correct. And the majority of helmet zealots have very little learning
indeed. Some of them still quote the 1989 Seattle study, for example,
despite the fact that it is Clearly ********.

How many helmet studies have you actually read, Ed?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Edward Dolan November 27th 04 08:50 PM


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 12:25:22 -0600, Mr. Ed wrote in
message :

Guy needs to check himself into a psychiatric clinic and have his brains
"checked." Anyone who wants to go with this nut on the subject of helmets
is
as nutty as he is.


Really? What proportion of serious head injuries do you think helmets
prevent? To the nearest 10%, please. Preferably with citations for
the evidence supporting the figure.


There is no need for anyone to do as you suggest. The preponderance of world
knowledge is in on the subject of helmets. The only question is what is your
credibility on the subject. You have apparently read one or two studies and
have come to an erroneous conclusion. The PREPONDERANCE is against you. That
is all anyone ever has to know.

How would you rate the relative merit of traffic safety measures,
traffic law enforcement, rider and driver training, lighting and
conspicuity measures, bike maintenance initiatives, and helmet
promotion, as measures to improve cyclist safety? Give your best
estimate of the relative weightings.


There is no need for anyone to do as you suggest. The preponderance of world
knowledge is in on the subject of helmets. The only question is what is your
credibility on the subject. You have apparently read one or two studies and
have come to an erroneous conclusion. The PREPONDERANCE is against you. That
is all anyone ever has to know.

The only lesson to be learned from all of this is that a little learning
is
a dangerous thing. It is the sort of thing that will get you killed.


Correct. And the majority of helmet zealots have very little learning
indeed. Some of them still quote the 1989 Seattle study, for example,
despite the fact that it is Clearly ********.


There is no need for anyone to do as you suggest. The preponderance of world
knowledge is in on the subject of helmets. The only question is what is your
credibility on the subject. You have apparently read one or two studies and
have come to an erroneous conclusion. The PREPONDERANCE is against you. That
is all anyone ever has to know.

How many helmet studies have you actually read, Ed?


None, nor do I plan to. Why reinvent the wheel? Bike helmets are necessary
for the same reason that motorcycle helmets are necessary and for the same
reason that race car drivers also wear helmets. It protects the old noggin
in the event of an accident.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Man Who Knows All - Minnesota




Edward Dolan November 28th 04 12:40 AM


"Ken_in_Michgan" wrote in message
om...
[...]

....Everyone should
be free to decide to wear one or not to for themselves. I DON'T
BELIEVE THAT THE STATE SHOULD PASS HELMET LAWS FOR CYCLISTS (EVEN
THOSE THAT RIDE HARLEY DAVISONS). We should keep the state our of our
lives as much as possible.


Sorry Ken, but I sure don't agree with you about that. People have to be
protected from their own stupidity - and that is the job of government. I
would pass laws requiring helmet use by cyclists and motorcyclists and
anyone who didn't agree with me could spend the rest of their life in jail
contemplating the error of their ways. This would have the added benefit of
keeping them off our roads and highways and thereby not incurring any health
care for their inevitable accidents.

Have you ever noticed that stupid people are thorough going stupid. I mean,
they do not have one shred of intelligence. Most of them have their brains
in their testicles so they are in effect sitting on their brains when they
are riding their bikes. Maybe that is why they think they do not need to
wear a helmet.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota



DiscoDuck November 28th 04 12:43 AM

"Edward Dolan" wrote in message ...
Guy needs to check himself into a psychiatric clinic and have his brains
"checked." Anyone who wants to go with this nut on the subject of helmets is
as nutty as he is.


Did you feel that way when the law was suggested by proponants?

But that is what is wrong with Usenet and groups like ARBR. All the nuts and
screwballs come out of the wood work with their half baked theories. Guy
most likely does not want to wear a helmet because it will muss up his hair.
A lot of idiotic women cyclists are like that too.


Actually that is what is RIGHT with it as we do fear weirdo control
freaks like you who want to force thier will on others.


The only lesson to be learned from all of this is that a little learning is
a dangerous thing. It is the sort of thing that will get you killed. Listen
to Guy Chapman and you will be as dead as he is going to be someday from a
head injury due to a bike accident.


Three words: Ignorant control freak. Clearly trying to belittle
those who value truth, and freedom of choice. Please get therapy.

Ed's method is classic ego driven drivel. Cannot admit he is wrong
therefore belittles.

Edward Dolan November 28th 04 12:51 AM


"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
On 27 Nov 2004 14:40:33 -0800, (Ken_in_Michgan)
wrote in message :

I am aware that wearing a helmet when riding a 'bent is not as
critical as when riding the old fashioned DF "safety bikes," but when
you consider that we often share the road with some heavy metal (cars,
SUVs, and trucks) driven by people who are ofted distracted by
cell-phones, kids in the car, or - my favorite terror - reading while
driving, we should wear anything that can make us a little safer.


Sorry, Ken, but I am getting a little weary of this right now - there
are at least three helmet wars going on right now, so I might not be
as tactful as I otherwise would be here.

Here is a simple fact for you: helmets are not designed for, and have
no proven efficacy in, impacts with motor vehicles. Neither the
manufacturers nor the standards support the idea. Honestly.


So then, the only reason not to be wearing a helmet is in the event you
impact a motor vehicle. However, considering there are a thousand and one
other ways you can hurt your noggin riding a bike, I guess will continue to
wear a helmet despite your very profound ignorance on these matters.

Helmets probably prevent a large proportion of trivial injuries, but I
know of no credible evidence that they prevent serious injuries or
death. ...


Surely the dumbest thing ever written. The reason Guy Chapman does not wear
a helmet is because he does not want to muss his hair. He is like a woman
that way and about on the same level of intelligence. Women are not known
for their large brains and neither is Guy Chapman.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan Who Always Wears A Helmet - Minnesota








Edward Dolan November 28th 04 01:00 AM


"Dave Kahn" wrote in message
...
On 27 Nov 2004 14:40:33 -0800, (Ken_in_Michgan)
wrote:

EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT ALL THAT EFFECTIVE, A HELMET IS STILL BETTER THAN
A BARE HEAD!


...an assertion that does not appear to be borne out by whole
population studies. It makes sense that a helmet is better than
nothing in a direct impact, but the worst brain injuries appear to be
from rotational acceleration. It is not clear at all that a helmet is
better than a bare head in this case. Indeed it may very well increase
the severity.

And of course if a helmet is better than a bare head I presume you
wear one when engaging in activities where you are more likely to
sustain a head injury than when you are cycling. Driving a car or
climbing stairs, for example.


Yes, I wear a helmet even when I go to bed at night. I have been known to
fall out of my bed in my sleep and I would not want to do that and land on
my head. My sage advice to the entire universe of ARBR is to always wear a
helmet every waking and sleeping moment of your life. It is impossible to be
too careful. Life has devised a thousand and one ways to kill you as dead as
a mackerel. Thus spake Zarathustra.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan Who Knows All Things - Minnesota




Edward Dolan November 28th 04 01:09 AM


"DiscoDuck" wrote in message
om...
"Robert Haston" wrote in message
ink.net...
My real belief is the near mythical belief in bike helmets stems from how
incredibly convenient this belief is for drivers who don't cycle....


One of the most reasonable and honest posts I have read here in years.
Well done.
One observation though. This hysteria has extended to cyclists as
well. I've been called "crazy" for "risking" riding bareheaded BY
cyclists. I think the reason for this, is that THEY (cyclists who
agree with the law) feel silly wearing a helmet, therefore want to
ensure every one "feels" as silly. I'm not saying they are, or look
silly. Indeed some helmets are quite cool looking. But their
resistance is based on ego - not reasoning or intelligence.


Whoops! Sorry there DiscoDuck! I wear a helmet because I feel silly NOT
wearing a helmet. What would you have me wear - one of those ridiculous
looking baseball caps? Hells Bells, I have to wear something on my head, so
I figure it might as well be a bike helmet. If I were all that concerned
about how I looked, I would just stay at home and hide in the closet. I
would then be a closet cyclist.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Brave - Minnesota



Edward Dolan November 28th 04 01:37 AM


"DiscoDuck" wrote in message
om...
"Edward Dolan" wrote in message
...
Guy needs to check himself into a psychiatric clinic and have his brains
"checked." Anyone who wants to go with this nut on the subject of helmets
is
as nutty as he is.


Did you feel that way when the law was suggested by proponants?


I am always in favor of lots of laws to control nuts and freaks like you and
Guy Chapman.

But that is what is wrong with Usenet and groups like ARBR. All the nuts
and
screwballs come out of the wood work with their half baked theories. Guy
most likely does not want to wear a helmet because it will muss up his
hair.
A lot of idiotic women cyclists are like that too.


Actually that is what is RIGHT with it as we do fear weirdo control
freaks like you who want to force thier will on others.


Their is spelled their, not thier.

The only lesson to be learned from all of this is that a little learning
is
a dangerous thing. It is the sort of thing that will get you killed.
Listen
to Guy Chapman and you will be as dead as he is going to be someday from
a
head injury due to a bike accident.


Three words: Ignorant control freak. Clearly trying to belittle
those who value truth, and freedom of choice. Please get therapy.


I do not care if you and Guy want to get yourselves killed because you do
not want to wear helmets. But I do object most strongly to having to bear
the expense of your health care if and when you have an accident because you
were not wearing a helmet. Do I want to control slobs like you? You bet -
for the good of society. Maybe you should think about moving to Antarctica
if you do not like to be "controlled."

Ed's method is classic ego driven drivel. Cannot admit he is wrong
therefore belittles.


I do not have the slightest problem whatsoever admitting I am wrong - when I
am wrong. I do not need to belittle anyone here as everyone is very good at
doing that all by themselves every time they post without any help from me -
including you DiscoDuck. But I admit I do like to rub it in a bit, just in
case others here are too dense to pick up on all the idiocies being
constantly expressed on this newsgroup.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Classic - Minnesota




Edward Dolan November 28th 04 01:42 AM


"Dave Kahn" wrote in message
...
On 27 Nov 2004 14:29:30 -0800, (DiscoDuck)
wrote:

One observation though. This hysteria has extended to cyclists as
well. I've been called "crazy" for "risking" riding bareheaded BY
cyclists. I think the reason for this, is that THEY (cyclists who
agree with the law) feel silly wearing a helmet, therefore want to
ensure every one "feels" as silly. I'm not saying they are, or look
silly. Indeed some helmets are quite cool looking. But their
resistance is based on ego - not reasoning or intelligence.


It's less a case of wanting everyone else to look silly too than of
persuading yourself that you've made the only logical choice. This is
a well established psychological phenomenon known as "cognitive
dissonance". Before making a decision, such as the one to wear a
helmet, we weigh up the pros and cons. After making it the cons
produce uncomfortable feelings - dissonance. These feelings are most
effectively reduced by an attitude change that increases the weight
given to the pros and reduces that given to the cons. "I thought I
would feel silly in a helmet, but now that I've got one I'm convinced
I'm not only safer but look cool too". That sort of thing.

--
Dave...


Exactly so, or as Guy Chapman would say ... check.

--
Regards,

Ed Dolan the Decided - Minnesota






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:39 PM.
Home - Home - Home - Home - Home

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com