Compulsory Bicycle Helmets cost Australia almost $500 million p.a.

Peter Keller wrote:
On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 01:18:49 +0000, Zebee Johnstone wrote:

In aus.bicycle on 02 Apr 2009 21:32:36 GMT terryc
wrote:
On Fri, 03 Apr 2009 07:50:21 +1100, ray wrote:


And when you're cleaned up by two tonnes of metal doing 100 k/mh, you
are dead however you cut it.
I doubt if it is even that fast. I think is it something in the 40's.
In US states without motorcycle helmet laws, there's evidence that bods
who die who are not wearing helmets and were in multi vehicle crashes
had injuries that would have killed them anyway... they had head
injuries but tended to have other fatal injuries as well.

(Good data is hard to find as there's so much emotion about the issue.)

I don't have any data for the G forces bicycle helmets are supposed to
attenuate.

They are supposed to impart less than 300g to a headform dropped from
1.5m onto an anvil. This would correspond with a direct impact of about
20kph.
Various links from
http://www.bhsi.org/standard.htm

Peter


Is it raining so much everywhere else that you guys need something to do?

Dredging up this old article (it has done the rounds of this newsgroup
at least five times in my memory) and picking at it again would indicate
that you lot are terminally bored. Why don't you go and clean your chain
again? ;-)

ray wrote:
Here in Melbourne, we've just had another new freeway announced. Of what
conceivable use is this? It simply increases everyone's car dependency.
I'd like to maintain some optimism for the future, but it's difficult
when confronted with stupidity such as this on so massive a scale.

Today's Age has a feature where they asked various important people and
designers etc their dreams for Melbourne in the future. Robert Doyle
dreams of moving the CBD trams underground - to reduce congestion.

The Lord Mayor's dream is to increase car traffic? Abandon all hope...

http://www.theage.com.au/national/wa...lz.html?page=5




Hamish