|
|
Helmet News
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI
-- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Helmet News
AMuzi wrote:
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI "The counterfeit helmets were found not to contain roll cages or the internal reinforcements that are standard in high-end authentic Specialized and Giro bicycle helmets. When placed on a head form and dropped onto a testing surface at approximately 11 miles per hour, the counterfeit helmets broke into pieces during impact testing, resulting in direct contact between the head forms and the testing surface," the U.S. Attorneys Office said in a news release. Wow, great job by the US officers! What kind of sentence do you get for something like that? And what is the Alibaba doing dealing with knock offs? Shouldn't they be trialed as well or is that impossible to do? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
Helmet News
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. But those inexpensive genuine are still magic. The real problem? These Alibaba helmets were made on a production line that didn't feature a wizard to inject the magic. - Frank Krygowski |
Helmet News
Frank Krygowski wrote:
So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. What about the "counterfeits" that are identical to the real deal only produced, in the same factories, but off the record and then sold thru other distribution channels? If those items are truly identical, I suppose there is no safety/health aspect anymore to it, just a regular crime involving money like any other? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
Helmet News
On 6/15/2018 1:20 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. But those inexpensive genuine are still magic. The real problem? These Alibaba helmets were made on a production line that didn't feature a wizard to inject the magic. - Frank Krygowski The real punishment is trademark violation which in civil court can be 3x damages plus costs. It's a very expensive crime. I've known guys who won and also guys who lost in those suits; the money really flows. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Helmet News
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 11:20:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. As I read the article, the helmets didn't pass the usual impact tests. But those inexpensive genuine are still magic. The real problem? These Alibaba helmets were made on a production line that didn't feature a wizard to inject the magic. Well, it was a mail fraud and federal counterfeiting case, so helmet safety was not really the issue, but the fact is that these knock-offs were junk. I've smashed two or three helmets, so having one that works to the extent they can work is a good thing. No, they don't protect you from all harms, etc., etc. (please refer to last 25 years of posts), but they can protect against certain harms if well manufactured. -- Jay Beattie. |
Helmet News
On 6/15/2018 11:54 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI "The counterfeit helmets were found not to contain roll cages or the internal reinforcements that are standard in high-end authentic Specialized and Giro bicycle helmets. When placed on a head form and dropped onto a testing surface at approximately 11 miles per hour, the counterfeit helmets broke into pieces during impact testing, resulting in direct contact between the head forms and the testing surface," the U.S. Attorneys Office said in a news release. Wow, great job by the US officers! What kind of sentence do you get for something like that? About tree fiddy. And what is the Alibaba doing dealing with knock offs? Shouldn't they be trialed as well or is that impossible to do? Probably not a lot--but then, many people don't understand how difficult it can be to police Chinese industry. I read an article once about counterfeit/knockoff iPods back when they first came out. Most of the copies were coming from China, and manufacturers in China tend not to be vertically integrated--that is, they don't make the entire product. They just make one part, for someone else who ordered it. So they often don't know exactly how it gets used or where it ends up. To make an iPod clone, there was five major 'parts' involved: the plastic case, the LCD screen, the printed circuit boards, the electronics assembly, and the packaging. One estimate was that there was a total of 120,000 different companies in China capable of making at least one of those parts. |
Helmet News
On 6/15/2018 6:52 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 11:20:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. As I read the article, the helmets didn't pass the usual impact tests. Nope, that wasn't specified. They said they allowed the headform to contact the anvil. That in itself doesn't mean they didn't pass the 300g test. -- - Frank Krygowski --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Helmet News
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 8:20:53 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. But those inexpensive genuine are still magic. The real problem? These Alibaba helmets were made on a production line that didn't feature a wizard to inject the magic. - Frank Krygowski Geez Frank what is the significance of this post? Ever looked at the authentic high end helmets? I guess not. Never leave an opportunity to express your opinion about helmets heh?. Maybe you should spend that time on straightening your handlebar. Lou |
Helmet News
On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 5:44:15 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 8:20:53 PM UTC+2, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. But those inexpensive genuine are still magic. The real problem? These Alibaba helmets were made on a production line that didn't feature a wizard to inject the magic. - Frank Krygowski Geez Frank what is the significance of this post? Ever looked at the authentic high end helmets? I guess not. Never leave an opportunity to express your opinion about helmets heh?. Maybe you should spend that time on straightening your handlebar. Lou Lou, you'd better not demand "significance" tests for posts. Your own may not qualify. - Frank Krygowski |
Helmet News
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 8:04:01 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/15/2018 6:52 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 11:20:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. As I read the article, the helmets didn't pass the usual impact tests. Nope, that wasn't specified. They said they allowed the headform to contact the anvil. That in itself doesn't mean they didn't pass the 300g test. Failing to pass some test other than the CPSC standard required for sale in the USA would make no sense from the standpoint of a criminal prosecution. From the AUSA's trial memo: The remaining two witnesses, Clint Mattacola and Niko Henderson, will testify about the destructive impact tests that they conducted on Specialized and Giro bicycle helmets, respectively. These helmets were put through a series of tests which were documented with photos and videos. Additionally, these findings were memorialized in the form of an affidavit written by Clint Mattacola, and a lab report written by Niko Henderson. The affidavit and lab report indicate that both helmets failed the impact tests pursuant to CPSC 16 CFR 1203, and therefore were unsafe for use by the general public. The affidavit written by Clint Mattacola was provided to the defendant soon after the defendant was indicted in this case. The lab report written by Niko Henderson was provided to the defendant on May 11, 2018, two days after the United States received the report on May 9, 2018. The videos of both of these impact tests were previously provided to the defendant soon after the defendant was indicted in this case. I pulled the docket. So yes, the helmets failed to meet CPSC standards. BTW, trial transcripts were not available and may not be part of the record in the Western District of Kentucky. Oddly, there was no expert disclosure of the USA's witnesses -- but there were disclosures for the defendant. Proving that the helmets didn't meet CPSC standards is not an element of either charged crime and was probably offered on some issue relevant to sentencing, e.g. potential harm to the public. -- Jay Beattie. |
Helmet News
On 6/16/2018 8:29 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 8:04:01 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/15/2018 6:52 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 11:20:53 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:48:08 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote: https://www.bicycleretailer.com/indu...y#.WyPRf0q99PI So the counterfeits lacked the internal reinforcement in those top of the line helmet models. In other words, they were like helmets that are not top of the line. As I read the article, the helmets didn't pass the usual impact tests. Nope, that wasn't specified. They said they allowed the headform to contact the anvil. That in itself doesn't mean they didn't pass the 300g test. Failing to pass some test other than the CPSC standard required for sale in the USA would make no sense from the standpoint of a criminal prosecution. From the AUSA's trial memo: The remaining two witnesses, Clint Mattacola and Niko Henderson, will testify about the destructive impact tests that they conducted on Specialized and Giro bicycle helmets, respectively. These helmets were put through a series of tests which were documented with photos and videos. Additionally, these findings were memorialized in the form of an affidavit written by Clint Mattacola, and a lab report written by Niko Henderson. The affidavit and lab report indicate that both helmets failed the impact tests pursuant to CPSC 16 CFR 1203, and therefore were unsafe for use by the general public. The affidavit written by Clint Mattacola was provided to the defendant soon after the defendant was indicted in this case. The lab report written by Niko Henderson was provided to the defendant on May 11, 2018, two days after the United States received the report on May 9, 2018. The videos of both of these impact tests were previously provided to the defendant soon after the defendant was indicted in this case. I pulled the docket. So yes, the helmets failed to meet CPSC standards. BTW, trial transcripts were not available and may not be part of the record in the Western District of Kentucky. Oddly, there was no expert disclosure of the USA's witnesses -- but there were disclosures for the defendant. Proving that the helmets didn't meet CPSC standards is not an element of either charged crime and was probably offered on some issue relevant to sentencing, e.g. potential harm to the public. OK, that's information that wasn't mentioned in the article. It's been interesting to me that the primitive helmet certification test is so revered, despite its ignoring most TBI science since about 1970. Yes, "no helmet can protect against all foreseeable impacts" as the proudly state on the internal stickers. (IOW, "don't blame us if this thing doesn't work.") But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. As mentioned, the old Skid Lid helmets of 1974 or so accumulated lots of "saved my life!!!" stories too. That's even though they didn't come close to meeting the present standard - which some suspect was deliberately set at a level that Bell could pass but Skid Lid could not. Ah well. I know questioning helmets is blasphemy... -- - Frank Krygowski --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Helmet News
Frank Krygowski wrote:
It's been interesting to me that the primitive helmet certification test is so revered, despite its ignoring most TBI science since about 1970. Yes, "no helmet can protect against all foreseeable impacts" as the proudly state on the internal stickers. (IOW, "don't blame us if this thing doesn't work.") But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. As mentioned, the old Skid Lid helmets of 1974 or so accumulated lots of "saved my life!!!" stories too. That's even though they didn't come close to meeting the present standard - which some suspect was deliberately set at a level that Bell could pass but Skid Lid could not. Ah well. I know questioning helmets is blasphemy... Tho I've heard hitting your head without a helmet in bicycle accidents can affect your mind in the sense it will repeat the same brain pattern over and over? -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
Helmet News
On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. |
Helmet News
On 6/17/2018 2:10 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I avoid wrecking. I remember one mountain bike ride long ago with, oh, maybe 8 other guys. I had no helmet. All others but one (IIRC) did. The ride was in a recreation area set aside for mountain bikes, dirt motorcycles, four wheelers, etc. Sure enough, at one point the crew decided to "get big air" by riding down into a gully and up the other side, then launching into the air. I decided it was too dangerous. The helmeted guys felt protected - until one crashed and broke his collarbone. The ride ended as we walked him back to his car. I believe in risk compensation. -- - Frank Krygowski --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Helmet News
On 6/17/2018 8:58 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/17/2018 2:10 PM, wrote: On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I avoid wrecking. I remember one mountain bike ride long ago with, oh, maybe 8 other guys. I had no helmet. All others but one (IIRC) did. The ride was in a recreation area set aside for mountain bikes, dirt motorcycles, four wheelers, etc. Sure enough, at one point the crew decided to "get big air" by riding down into a gully and up the other side, then launching into the air. I decided it was too dangerous. The helmeted guys felt protected - until one crashed and broke his collarbone. The ride ended as we walked him back to his car. I believe in risk compensation. Yes, there's that. But, as recently mentioned here, any helmet may well mitigate abrasions and such (aside from the 'thwarting death' argument). Yet designs such as Skid Lid, wildly popular, were out of business with some arbitrary standard, despite the fact that they mitigate common types of injuries as well as any. I posit that if helmet nazis were less shrill, there may well have been more helmets in more formats worn by more people than we have now despite rigid scolding and attempts at shaming, compulsion and insult along with backlash. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Helmet News
On 6/17/2018 2:47 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
wrote: I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I think there is no doubt a helmet helps against those injuries. In boxing the saying goes a helmet will protect against scars and tears but not really if you get a haymaker straight into the planet. Perhaps the same logic applies to bike accidents? As for me, I'm not that kind of rider so I don't use a helmet but intuitively one would think a helmet would decrease the impact in more severe cases as well. Anyway there should be research on this subject not only from the bike equipment manufacturers but also from university hospitals from all over the world, if anyone cares enough to look it up what their conclusions are. There is research of two general types. Most research papers on helmet effectiveness track "head injuries" (as opposed to brain injuries) in people showing up at hospitals from bike crashes. They compare the head injury count among those reportedly wearing helmets, vs. those not wearing helmets. They find more head injuries in those without helmets. The other research looks at trends (usually long term trends) when helmet use increases. (In some cases, like New Zealand, laws and/or publicity campaigns caused rapid jumps in helmet wearing.) Those trends usually show no improvement in bike brain injuries, bike fatalities, etc. In fact, recent data showed an _increase_ of over 60% in bike-related concussions during the time when American helmet use greatly increased. Why the discrepancy between the two types of results? I think the main reason is that those who choose to wear helmets are different in many ways from those who do not choose to wear helmets. For example, one physician in Texas performed a study of the first type to help his campaign for an all-ages mandatory helmet law. But his study was unique for the time because he also recorded blood alcohol content in bicyclists who crashed. His study found that helmet use was not significantly correlated with concussion or other brain injury, but alcohol use was significantly correlated. In other words, it makes more sense to get people to stop riding drunk than to get drunks to put on helmets. In reality, brain injury while bicycling is very rare. It's more common while traveling as a pedestrian. And helmets have not caused any significant improvement. They cause negligible improvement in a mostly imaginary problem. -- - Frank Krygowski --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Helmet News
On 6/17/2018 10:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/17/2018 8:58 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/17/2018 2:10 PM, wrote: On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades.* One without a helmet.* Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day.* Not a day I really care to remember.* Others I was wearing a helmet.* Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory.* Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident.* Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed.* Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face.* My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I avoid wrecking. I remember one mountain bike ride long ago with, oh, maybe 8 other guys. I had no helmet. All others but one (IIRC) did. The ride was in a recreation area set aside for mountain bikes, dirt motorcycles, four wheelers, etc. Sure enough, at one point the crew decided to "get big air" by riding down into a gully and up the other side, then launching into the air. I decided it was too dangerous. The helmeted guys felt protected - until one crashed and broke his collarbone. The ride ended as we walked him back to his car. I believe in risk compensation. Yes, there's that. But, as recently mentioned here, any helmet may well mitigate abrasions and such (aside from the 'thwarting death' argument). Yet designs such as Skid Lid, wildly popular, were out of business with some arbitrary standard, despite the fact that they mitigate common types of injuries as well as any. I posit that if helmet nazis were less shrill, there may well have been more helmets in more formats worn by more people than we have now despite rigid scolding and attempts at shaming, compulsion and insult along with backlash. Guy Chapman used to post here frequently. He told many times about how his life was (supposedly) saved by his "wooly cap." -- - Frank Krygowski --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Helmet News
On Sat, 16 Jun 2018 23:00:21 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: which some suspect was deliberately set at a level that Bell could pass but Skid Lid could not. If I recall correctly, Skid Lid was sunk by extreme horror that it gave almost no protection to the top of the head. Every time I've thunked my helmet it was in the area where Skid Lid concentrated its protection. Well, there was that time I climbed a playground slide meant for a much shorter person and didn't bother to remove my hat first. But Skid Lid would have sufficed. I wonder whether there is still a category of hard hat called a "bump cap"? Wikipedia said yes, but the link led to a page on which the word "bump" does not appear. DuckDuckGo says that I can buy dozens of different styles at Grainger. -- Joy Beeson joy beeson at comcast dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/ |
Helmet News
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 00:01:08 -0300, Joy Beeson
wrote: I wonder whether there is still a category of hard hat called a "bump cap"? Wikipedia said yes, but the link led to a page on which the word "bump" does not appear. DuckDuckGo says that I can buy dozens of different styles at Grainger. They're very much still alive. I have one. Basically, a bump cap is rather thin plastic safety helmet, sometimes with a cloth cover making it look something like a very large baseball cap. https://www.google.com/search?q=bump+cap&tbm=isch https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=bump+cap https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=bump+cap+baseball+-insert They're not made to deflect falling objects, but rather to deal with clumsy fools like me that have a tendency to smash into overhanging construction elements. None of them are DOT, ECE, or SNELL rated. I have no idea if they are suitable for bicycle riding. Probably not as there's almost no ventilation and would probably be like wearing a sauna. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Helmet News
On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 22:40:59 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: (...) I was hoping to find something in the way of a fashionable bump cap. They all seems to looks like baseball caps. This is as close to something fashionable that I could find: https://www.ishn.com/articles/100645-new-bump-cap-styles-by-bon-mar-textiles Nothing in the way of foil coverings to protect the brain from evil cell phone signals. No paint on Skid Lids. No dazzle camouflage. Nothing resembling a derby or top hat. All I found were very boring. I think there may be a fashion opportunity here for bump cap covers. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Helmet News
On 6/15/2018 3:52 PM, jbeattie wrote:
snip Well, it was a mail fraud and federal counterfeiting case, so helmet safety was not really the issue, but the fact is that these knock-offs were junk. I've smashed two or three helmets, so having one that works to the extent they can work is a good thing. No, they don't protect you from all harms, etc., etc. (please refer to last 25 years of posts), but they can protect against certain harms if well manufactured. Left unsaid was: a) did the counterfeit helmets pass or fail the CPSC test. b) did they test the genuine helmets in the same way. The fact that a helmet breaks upon impact is not new or something bad, they are single impact devices. They are not like football helmets. "In an inelastic collision, the objects in the collision absorb energy. In this case, the bike helmet should absorb as much of the energy as possible. It should slow your head down as gradually as possible, without sending it back in the opposite direction from the point of impact. In the process, that bike helmet is probably going to crush, and not bounce back. In fact, it may break into pieces. In any case, it’s not going to keep the shape it had before the crash. That’s a good thing." |
Helmet News
On 6/17/2018 11:47 AM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
I think there is no doubt a helmet helps against those injuries. The data is clear that helmets are making a big difference. "five well conducted case‐control studies and found that helmets provide a 63–88% reduction in the risk of head, brain and severe brain injury for all ages of bicyclists. Helmets were found to provide equal levels of protection for crashes involving motor vehicles (69%) and crashes from all other causes (68%). Furthermore, injuries to the upper and mid facial areas were found to be reduced by 65%, although helmets did not prevent lower facial injuries." |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 12:57 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 22:40:59 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: (...) I was hoping to find something in the way of a fashionable bump cap. They all seems to looks like baseball caps. This is as close to something fashionable that I could find: https://www.ishn.com/articles/100645-new-bump-cap-styles-by-bon-mar-textiles Nothing in the way of foil coverings to protect the brain from evil cell phone signals. No paint on Skid Lids. No dazzle camouflage. Nothing resembling a derby or top hat. All I found were very boring. I think there may be a fashion opportunity here for bump cap covers. we have a smattering of these: https://img0.etsystatic.com/187/0/68...81052_kk5u.jpg http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/272212...-1/s-l1000.jpg https://www.baggersmag.com/sites/bag...mOVnl&fc=50,50 Pressed steel, 'just for looks', meet no standards of any sort, $29.95. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Helmet News
On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/17/2018 2:10 PM, wrote: On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I avoid wrecking. Yes, we know. I remember one mountain bike ride long ago with, oh, maybe 8 other guys. I had no helmet. All others but one (IIRC) did. The ride was in a recreation area set aside for mountain bikes, dirt motorcycles, four wheelers, etc. Sure enough, at one point the crew decided to "get big air" by riding down into a gully and up the other side, then launching into the air. I decided it was too dangerous. The helmeted guys felt protected - until one crashed and broke his collarbone. The ride ended as we walked him back to his car. I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? Basically all of my riding would be considered risk compensation. The times I've crushed helmets, I was doing what I did decades ago without a helmet. I don't care if you or anyone else wears a helmet, but I have gotten good use out of mine, if only avoiding scalp lacerations. -- Jay Beattie. |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/17/2018 2:10 PM, wrote: On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I avoid wrecking. Yes, we know. I remember one mountain bike ride long ago with, oh, maybe 8 other guys. I had no helmet. All others but one (IIRC) did. The ride was in a recreation area set aside for mountain bikes, dirt motorcycles, four wheelers, etc. Sure enough, at one point the crew decided to "get big air" by riding down into a gully and up the other side, then launching into the air. I decided it was too dangerous. The helmeted guys felt protected - until one crashed and broke his collarbone. The ride ended as we walked him back to his car. I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? Basically all of my riding would be considered risk compensation. The times I've crushed helmets, I was doing what I did decades ago without a helmet. I don't care if you or anyone else wears a helmet, but I have gotten good use out of mine, if only avoiding scalp lacerations. +1 No one wakes up in the morning planning to die in a bike wreck: https://wbbm780.radio.com/articles/a...fter-bike-fall To call her 'inexpert' or 'deficit in cycling skills' or 'should have completed the Effective Cycling course' and so on is ridiculous. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Helmet News
On 18/06/2018 9:59 AM, jbeattie wrote:
On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/17/2018 2:10 PM, wrote: On Saturday, June 16, 2018 at 10:00:25 PM UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote: But nationwide data makes it fairly clear that approved helmets aren't making much of a difference at all, despite hundreds of gullible "it saved my life!!!" stories. - Frank Krygowski I've been involved in a few bike accidents over the decades. One without a helmet. Still have the scar on my forehead 35+ years later to remind me of that day. Not a day I really care to remember. Others I was wearing a helmet. Nothing to remind me of those accidents except my memory. Well I do have a scar under my eye from one accident. Helmet was not a full face motorcycle helmet so under my eye was exposed. Went to the emergency room to get some stitches put in my face. My experience says its better to be wearing a helmet when you wreck that not wear a helmet. I avoid wrecking. Yes, we know. I remember one mountain bike ride long ago with, oh, maybe 8 other guys. I had no helmet. All others but one (IIRC) did. The ride was in a recreation area set aside for mountain bikes, dirt motorcycles, four wheelers, etc. Sure enough, at one point the crew decided to "get big air" by riding down into a gully and up the other side, then launching into the air. I decided it was too dangerous. The helmeted guys felt protected - until one crashed and broke his collarbone. The ride ended as we walked him back to his car. I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? Basically all of my riding would be considered risk compensation. The times I've crushed helmets, I was doing what I did decades ago without a helmet. I don't care if you or anyone else wears a helmet, but I have gotten good use out of mine, if only avoiding scalp lacerations. -- Jay Beattie. +1 |
Helmet News
On Mon, 18 Jun 2018 07:49:06 -0500, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/18/2018 12:57 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 22:40:59 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: (...) I was hoping to find something in the way of a fashionable bump cap. They all seems to looks like baseball caps. This is as close to something fashionable that I could find: https://www.ishn.com/articles/100645-new-bump-cap-styles-by-bon-mar-textiles Nothing in the way of foil coverings to protect the brain from evil cell phone signals. No paint on Skid Lids. No dazzle camouflage. Nothing resembling a derby or top hat. All I found were very boring. I think there may be a fashion opportunity here for bump cap covers. we have a smattering of these: https://img0.etsystatic.com/187/0/68...81052_kk5u.jpg Horse riding helmet: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=horse+riding+helmet The better one's seem rather expensive. Most are ASTM/SEI approved. https://www.troxelhelmets.com/pages/helmet-certifications http://i.ebayimg.com/images/i/272212...-1/s-l1000.jpg WWII German army helmet. The WWI helmets were better because they included a pickelhaube on top. https://www.baggersmag.com/sites/bag...mOVnl&fc=50,50 Salad bowl with a chin strap? Kinda crude and certainly not very fashionable. Pressed steel, 'just for looks', meet no standards of any sort, $29.95. Yes, but lacking in style, fashion, and elegance. The British seem to know how to design proper helmets. For example: http://www.linkorient.com/ceremonial-helmet/ If you're going to specify or design a bicycle helmet, think style, fashion, unique, and looking cool first. Once those are established and there's any money left, you can deal with price and protection. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 10:03 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: I avoid wrecking. .... I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? It does work out somehow, Jay. I take measures to prevent all those things, successfully. In some cases (riding on ice) the measure is to avoid it. Note, you seem to sometimes get ice when we might get snow - but I do ride in snow. Very carefully. Falls have been rare and injuries nonexistent, except for an "ouch!" bump on the back of my head when I was about 16. (I suppose if I'd worn a bike helmet then, people would have said it saved my life.) I'm willing to slow down for a dog on a leash, including the last one that came out after me about five days ago. It's a known hazard; I watch for it. The same is true for gravel on turns, potholes, motorists who may turn left across my path, etc. I don't care much for the story that goes "I goofed up and crashed, and that proves helmets are great." No one wakes up in the morning planning to die in a bike wreck: https://wbbm780.radio.com/articles/a...fter-bike-fall To call her 'inexpert' or 'deficit in cycling skills' or 'should have completed the Effective Cycling course' and so on is ridiculous. Apparently nobody knows the cause of her crash. We can't say if it was due to a mistake that she made, or something else. But I note that every cycling photo of her on several sites showed her wearing a helmet. So what's the lesson here? "Always wear your helmet because this lady died despite wearing a helmet?" Bike fatalities are rare - far more rare than pedestrian fatalities, for example. But in that small population of bike fatalities, helmeted fatalities are not uncommon. You can usually spot them in the news reports. When a person wearing a helmet dies, the helmet is often not mentioned, as in this case. When a person without a helmet dies, the news says "He was not wearing a helmet," to put partial blame on the victim. Of course, bicyclists and motorcyclists are the only ones subject to that blame. The far greater numbers of dead pedestrians and motorists are not shamed about their lack of plastic headwear, for some reason. -- - Frank Krygowski --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
Helmet News
On 18-06-18 04:11, Frank Krygowski wrote:
In reality, brain injury while bicycling is very rare. It's more common while traveling as a pedestrian. And helmets have not caused any significant improvement. They cause negligible improvement in a mostly imaginary problem. My helmet story: In 1989 I was stopped at a traffic light to the right of tram tracks that were wet from rain. As the light turned green I wanted to turn left. The front wheel slipped on the wet track and I came crashing down hard on the road/other track, breaking my left collar bone*. Also my head came crashing down onto the pavement or other track, hitting on the side. At that time probably less than one in a thousand riders wore a helmet in Zurich, and I had bought my Bell helmet while on vacation in the USA. I still clearly remember how the helmet took up the shock of the blow, and am convinced that without it I would have had at least a concussion and quite possibly ended up as a vegetable in a nursing home for the rest of my life. It's true that nowadays, with more experience from riding every day all these years, I would have realized that the tracks would be slippery and would have crossed them more carefully. But still I always where a helmet when riding. Ned * Further experience from that accident: If you are going to break a bone, the collar bone may be the best bone to break. You don't need a cast, and it generally heals well. Disadvantage: It's intensely painful. |
Helmet News
On 18/06/2018 1:45 PM, Ned Mantei wrote:
On 18-06-18 04:11, Frank Krygowski wrote: In reality, brain injury while bicycling is very rare. It's more common while traveling as a pedestrian. And helmets have not caused any significant improvement. They cause negligible improvement in a mostly imaginary problem. My helmet story: In 1989 I was stopped at a traffic light to the right of tram tracks that were wet from rain. As the light turned green I wanted to turn left. The front wheel slipped on the wet track and I came crashing down hard on the road/other track, breaking my left collar bone*. Also my head came crashing down onto the pavement or other track, hitting on the side. At that time probably less than one in a thousand riders wore a helmet in Zurich, and I had bought my Bell helmet while on vacation in the USA. I still clearly remember how the helmet took up the shock of the blow, and am convinced that without it I would have had at least a concussion and quite possibly ended up as a vegetable in a nursing home for the rest of my life. It's true that nowadays, with more experience from riding every day all these years, I* would have realized that the tracks would be slippery and would have crossed them more carefully. But still I always where a helmet when riding. Ned * Further experience from that accident: If you are going to break a bone, the collar bone may be the best bone to break. You don't need a cast, and it generally heals well. Disadvantage: It's intensely painful. Here we go... |
Helmet News
On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 10:13:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/18/2018 10:03 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: I avoid wrecking. ... I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? It does work out somehow, Jay. I take measures to prevent all those things, successfully. In some cases (riding on ice) the measure is to avoid it. Note, you seem to sometimes get ice when we might get snow - but I do ride in snow. Very carefully. Falls have been rare and injuries nonexistent, except for an "ouch!" bump on the back of my head when I was about 16. (I suppose if I'd worn a bike helmet then, people would have said it saved my life.) I'm willing to slow down for a dog on a leash, including the last one that came out after me about five days ago. It's a known hazard; I watch for it. The same is true for gravel on turns, potholes, motorists who may turn left across my path, etc. I don't care much for the story that goes "I goofed up and crashed, and that proves helmets are great." Hmmm. Yes, many crashes result from "goof-ups" -- by riders, drivers, pedestrians, manufacturers, etc. I crashed on UmmaGumma tires because of Specialized's choice of tread compound. That was a serious goof-up. God goofed-up and created invisible and localized black-ice on my way to work one morning. Racers have goofed-up in front of me, crashing and piling-up like cord wood. I cartwheeled over my son who goofed-up and crashed in front of me on a wet descent -- which was due in part to slippery tread compound. I won't even get into the goof-ups by motorists. -- Jay Beattie. |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 1:45 PM, Ned Mantei wrote:
On 18-06-18 04:11, Frank Krygowski wrote: In reality, brain injury while bicycling is very rare. It's more common while traveling as a pedestrian. And helmets have not caused any significant improvement. They cause negligible improvement in a mostly imaginary problem. My helmet story: In 1989 I was stopped at a traffic light to the right of tram tracks that were wet from rain. As the light turned green I wanted to turn left. The front wheel slipped on the wet track and I came crashing down hard on the road/other track, breaking my left collar bone*. Also my head came crashing down onto the pavement or other track, hitting on the side. At that time probably less than one in a thousand riders wore a helmet in Zurich, and I had bought my Bell helmet while on vacation in the USA. I still clearly remember how the helmet took up the shock of the blow, and am convinced that without it I would have had at least a concussion and quite possibly ended up as a vegetable in a nursing home for the rest of my life. It's true that nowadays, with more experience from riding every day all these years, I* would have realized that the tracks would be slippery and would have crossed them more carefully. But still I always where a helmet when riding. Ned Yep. "My helmet saved me" stories are a dime a dozen. Yet there is no corresponding reduction in cycling fatalities nor concussion counts. I'm not saying that no helmet has ever reduced injuries. But adding an inch of fragile styrofoam to one's head is very likely to produce false claims of benefit. Again, if my 16 year old self had worn a helmet on that icy day, it would have certainly cracked. Most helmet proponents would have said it prevented serious injury. But there was no serious injury at all - nothing beyond "Ouch, that really hurt!" We once had a tandem crash. It was at low speed, when the fork blades suddenly broke off upon hitting a pothole, because the custom builder was in a rush to finish the bike before his honeymoon. Without telling me, he substituted thin track-gage forks whose metal was one third that of the proper tandem gage forks. Anyway, my wife cracked the super-thin plastic shell on the helmet. I had to buy her a new one just to prevent the "See? It saved her life!" stories. And of course, the manufacturer says the magic leaks out if you're in any crash at all. And again, even if it _were_ proven that styrofoam helmets are marvelously protective, why should they be promoted only for the group that makes up just 0.6% of America's TBI fatalities? Pedestrians' counts are far higher, and are higher on a per-mile basis. Motorists' counts are also far higher, and car helmets would be far, far cheaper than explosive airbags. Society's medical costs would be reduced far more if the funny hats were applied to the groups with the biggest injury counts. Instead, they've applied a myth of brain injury to a very safe and beneficial activity. And cyclists are keen to promote the "Danger! Danger!" myth. Go figure. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 1:49 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 10:13:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/18/2018 10:03 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: I avoid wrecking. ... I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? It does work out somehow, Jay. I take measures to prevent all those things, successfully. In some cases (riding on ice) the measure is to avoid it. Note, you seem to sometimes get ice when we might get snow - but I do ride in snow. Very carefully. Falls have been rare and injuries nonexistent, except for an "ouch!" bump on the back of my head when I was about 16. (I suppose if I'd worn a bike helmet then, people would have said it saved my life.) I'm willing to slow down for a dog on a leash, including the last one that came out after me about five days ago. It's a known hazard; I watch for it. The same is true for gravel on turns, potholes, motorists who may turn left across my path, etc. I don't care much for the story that goes "I goofed up and crashed, and that proves helmets are great." Hmmm. Yes, many crashes result from "goof-ups" -- by riders, drivers, pedestrians, manufacturers, etc. I crashed on UmmaGumma tires because of Specialized's choice of tread compound. That was a serious goof-up. God goofed-up and created invisible and localized black-ice on my way to work one morning. Racers have goofed-up in front of me, crashing and piling-up like cord wood. I cartwheeled over my son who goofed-up and crashed in front of me on a wet descent -- which was due in part to slippery tread compound. I won't even get into the goof-ups by motorists. -- Jay Beattie. Right. After a lifetime of road rash, stitches and a nice selection of screws and hardware[1] I qualify as an expert, as much as anyone. Bad things happen to good riders. Some were by my error, either by omission or commission, but some were not avoidable in any practical sense. And there you have life's randomness. Chaos doesn't emote. Yes, critical analysis of riding helps. That and experience are good, but not sufficient to avoid all injuries. Yes, at the margin helmets do something[2], but are not a panacea either. [1] some neat scars; great conversation starter [2] not interested in that argument today -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 2:49 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 10:13:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/18/2018 10:03 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: I avoid wrecking. ... I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? It does work out somehow, Jay. I take measures to prevent all those things, successfully. In some cases (riding on ice) the measure is to avoid it. Note, you seem to sometimes get ice when we might get snow - but I do ride in snow. Very carefully. Falls have been rare and injuries nonexistent, except for an "ouch!" bump on the back of my head when I was about 16. (I suppose if I'd worn a bike helmet then, people would have said it saved my life.) I'm willing to slow down for a dog on a leash, including the last one that came out after me about five days ago. It's a known hazard; I watch for it. The same is true for gravel on turns, potholes, motorists who may turn left across my path, etc. I don't care much for the story that goes "I goofed up and crashed, and that proves helmets are great." Hmmm. Yes, many crashes result from "goof-ups" -- by riders, drivers, pedestrians, manufacturers, etc. I crashed on UmmaGumma tires because of Specialized's choice of tread compound. That was a serious goof-up. God goofed-up and created invisible and localized black-ice on my way to work one morning. Racers have goofed-up in front of me, crashing and piling-up like cord wood. I cartwheeled over my son who goofed-up and crashed in front of me on a wet descent -- which was due in part to slippery tread compound. I won't even get into the goof-ups by motorists. Yes, I understand. None of those were foreseeable. It's just normal behavior to fly through wet descents, to be unaware of freezing temperatures, to test the limits of new tires' traction, to push to the limit in races... Look, if I were to enter races, I'd wear a helmet. That's true for bike racing, motorcycle racing or car racing. That's beside the point. (Although the two road races I entered way back when featured no helmets. Same was true for most races around the world. Oh, the humanity!) And I suppose if you really have a compulsion to explore the limits of traction, it might be reasonable to wear a helmet, although some very smart people have disagreed. https://www.flickr.com/photos/stronglight/5460047009 But I've always been a pretty careful rider, and it's paid off. YMMV. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Helmet News
Frank Krygowski wrote:
In fact, recent data showed an _increase_ of over 60% in bike-related concussions during the time when American helmet use greatly increased. Perhaps other things changed during that time as well? More people riding, traffic getting even more out of hand, and so on. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 3:32 PM, Emanuel Berg wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote: In fact, recent data showed an _increase_ of over 60% in bike-related concussions during the time when American helmet use greatly increased. Perhaps other things changed during that time as well? More people riding, traffic getting even more out of hand, and so on. I've seen no evidence. The popularity of riding goes up and down with fashion, but there's been no 60% increase. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...t_popular.html Regarding helmet use and brain injury: Rare as it is, the needle isn't even moving in the right direction. How many excuses for the helmet mania can people make? It should be last on the list of tactics to improve bicycling. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Helmet News
On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 12:22:09 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/18/2018 2:49 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 10:13:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/18/2018 10:03 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: I avoid wrecking. ... I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? It does work out somehow, Jay. I take measures to prevent all those things, successfully. In some cases (riding on ice) the measure is to avoid it. Note, you seem to sometimes get ice when we might get snow - but I do ride in snow. Very carefully. Falls have been rare and injuries nonexistent, except for an "ouch!" bump on the back of my head when I was about 16. (I suppose if I'd worn a bike helmet then, people would have said it saved my life.) I'm willing to slow down for a dog on a leash, including the last one that came out after me about five days ago. It's a known hazard; I watch for it. The same is true for gravel on turns, potholes, motorists who may turn left across my path, etc. I don't care much for the story that goes "I goofed up and crashed, and that proves helmets are great." Hmmm. Yes, many crashes result from "goof-ups" -- by riders, drivers, pedestrians, manufacturers, etc. I crashed on UmmaGumma tires because of Specialized's choice of tread compound. That was a serious goof-up. God goofed-up and created invisible and localized black-ice on my way to work one morning. Racers have goofed-up in front of me, crashing and piling-up like cord wood. I cartwheeled over my son who goofed-up and crashed in front of me on a wet descent -- which was due in part to slippery tread compound. I won't even get into the goof-ups by motorists. Yes, I understand. None of those were foreseeable. It's just normal behavior to fly through wet descents, to be unaware of freezing temperatures, to test the limits of new tires' traction, to push to the limit in races... How dramatic! All the sudden I'm flying through wet corners and pushing it to the limit in races! I should have my own YouTube channel. The fact is that ordinary people just riding along can get whacked or crash.. Black ice is invisible and localized, and riding in temperatures below 32F is SOP for year-round commuters in the PNW. Race crashes can occur when people are bunched up and not pushing it to the limit -- or a dog runs into the field or someone hits road furniture or railroad tracks. Crashes are not confined to the finishing sprint or hair-raising descents. I live in a wet environment that is hilly and has bad roads. People can crash just riding along -- even the mayor. https://bikeportland.org/2017/11/16/...e-crash-254716 And people can get whacked by cars or other bicyclists for no reason. **** happens -- except to you, which is amazing. You should should have your own shrine, right along with the cheese sandwich with the image of the Virgin Mary. -- Jay Beattie. |
Helmet News
On 6/18/2018 7:42 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 12:22:09 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/18/2018 2:49 PM, jbeattie wrote: On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 10:13:43 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 6/18/2018 10:03 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 6/18/2018 8:59 AM, jbeattie wrote: On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 6:58:08 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: I avoid wrecking. ... I believe in risk compensation. Yes, we know. So how does that work with getting hit by a car, wiping out on ice, going OTB after getting hung up in a dog leash? It does work out somehow, Jay. I take measures to prevent all those things, successfully. In some cases (riding on ice) the measure is to avoid it. Note, you seem to sometimes get ice when we might get snow - but I do ride in snow. Very carefully. Falls have been rare and injuries nonexistent, except for an "ouch!" bump on the back of my head when I was about 16. (I suppose if I'd worn a bike helmet then, people would have said it saved my life.) I'm willing to slow down for a dog on a leash, including the last one that came out after me about five days ago. It's a known hazard; I watch for it. The same is true for gravel on turns, potholes, motorists who may turn left across my path, etc. I don't care much for the story that goes "I goofed up and crashed, and that proves helmets are great." Hmmm. Yes, many crashes result from "goof-ups" -- by riders, drivers, pedestrians, manufacturers, etc. I crashed on UmmaGumma tires because of Specialized's choice of tread compound. That was a serious goof-up. God goofed-up and created invisible and localized black-ice on my way to work one morning. Racers have goofed-up in front of me, crashing and piling-up like cord wood. I cartwheeled over my son who goofed-up and crashed in front of me on a wet descent -- which was due in part to slippery tread compound. I won't even get into the goof-ups by motorists. Yes, I understand. None of those were foreseeable. It's just normal behavior to fly through wet descents, to be unaware of freezing temperatures, to test the limits of new tires' traction, to push to the limit in races... How dramatic! All the sudden I'm flying through wet corners and pushing it to the limit in races! I should have my own YouTube channel. The fact is that ordinary people just riding along can get whacked or crash. Black ice is invisible and localized, and riding in temperatures below 32F is SOP for year-round commuters in the PNW. Race crashes can occur when people are bunched up and not pushing it to the limit -- or a dog runs into the field or someone hits road furniture or railroad tracks. Crashes are not confined to the finishing sprint or hair-raising descents. I live in a wet environment that is hilly and has bad roads. People can crash just riding along -- even the mayor. https://bikeportland.org/2017/11/16/...e-crash-254716 And people can get whacked by cars or other bicyclists for no reason. **** happens -- except to you, which is amazing. You should should have your own shrine, right along with the cheese sandwich with the image of the Virgin Mary. -- Jay Beattie. "or a dog runs into the field" Dog indeed. Joachim Agostinho finished his career, and life, leading with just meters to the finish line when a dog did him in. Nothing in 'Effective Cycling' or any amount of prudence would have helped him. He was among the oldest Pros at the time, with as much riding experience as anyone on earth. In a similar vein, my ex employee Carl Zach, a fine young man and a schoolteacher, was leading a race, his mother watching at the finish line, when an ambulance, not on call, sailed around a barricade and across the course and killed him despite his helmet. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:04 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com