A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Recumbent Biking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Recumbent Accident Rates?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #131  
Old May 7th 11, 11:21 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?

On May 7, 3:25*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On May 7, 11:05*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Ah, Stephen, still posting absolute lies!


To review (not that it should be necessary): *I did not begin by
deciding I was against bike helmets. *In fact, I was once in favor of
bike helmets. *I wore one for almost every ride, and advised others to
do the same. *I bought the line that bicycling was a significant
source of serious head injury, and that helmets greatly reduced that
risk.


It was only after I began reading the research papers on the subject
(both pro and con), and digging for data on comparative risk, that I
changed my mind, based entirely on factual evidence. *I found that the
risk had been grossly exaggerated, the claims of efficacy wildly
overstated, and the specifications and certification tests of bike
helmets laughably inadequate.


Populaiton studies say nothing about whether a helmet is a smart
choice for an individual rider whose risk pattern may be different
from the norm, e.g., someone who rides fast or rides off road or who
rides in inclement weather including ice and snow or who rides in
close proximity to large numbers of other riders. *A person may
perceive a risk that actually exists for him or her, and you cannot
assume that a person is being hysterical or helmet whore or whatever
without seeing that person's riding environment.


There's some truth to that. If you'll notice, I generally talk about
the low danger level of ordinary cycling.

My riding tends to be reasonably cautious. That is, I've never been
one for trying to see how fast I could take a curve. I've exceeded 50
mph only once on a bike. I long ago gave up really scary mountain
biking. I seldom ride when roads are icy or really snowy. I watch
pavement conditions like a hawk.

I think the best chance of justifying bike helmet use, based on their
specifications and on the likelihood of head impact, would be
enthusiastic mountain biking (as opposed to just cruising in the
woods). Second best would be track racing. The hills on Portland's
west side when slicked down with winter rain could possibly be
another; I won't pass judgment. I've ridden those only in dry
weather.

But I think it's obvious that the advice given by helmet promoters,
that cyclists should wear a helmet "... every time they ride their
bike..." is silly. The level of risk certainly doesn't justify that.
And the measured results from decades of such promotion show that such
advice, to the considerable degree it's been followed, hasn't worked
to a detectable degree.

This is why population studies are meaningless to me in my personal
decision making -- except in terms of my injury reduction
expectations. *I do not expect a helmet to save my life. *However,
helmets have proven benefit in reducing scalp injury, certain upper
facial injuries and skull fractures, which are all costly to treat and
worth avoiding -- particularly for me.


It might be worth asking yourself whether you did ride, or would have
ridden as you do, in 1973, before helmets were widely used. What
would you have done differently?

- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #132  
Old May 7th 11, 11:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default Does it ever end?

On May 7, 4:38*pm, Michael Press wrote:
In article
,
*Frank Krygowski wrote:

On May 7, 12:01*am, Tom Lake wrote:


If you can't take the whole corpus of any author's work, then don't
cite that author. *I won't cite an author for whom I must apologize!


:-) *Well, so much for calculus, Newton's laws of motion, Newton's
work on gravitation, on optics, on fluid mechanics... need I go on?
The man was a big fan of alchemy, after all!


Lest anyone take away from this that Sir Isaac Newton
was not a practical man, he was made warden of the Royal Mint
where his chemical and mathematical knowledge enabled
him to rescue coinage from the brink of disaster,
and carry out the Great Recoinage of 1696. In recognition
of his achievement he was made Master of the Mint
at £1200 per annum.


I didn't know about that, but even without it, his contributions to
math and science were absolutely astonishing. I figure he was one of
the most intelligent people to ever walk the earth. A real SOB, quite
weird, but brilliant.

I recall reading about his development of a reflecting ceiling
sundial. He realized that a chip of mirror angled properly in a south-
facing window would put a point of light on the ceiling, and that the
light would be in any given spot only twice per year. He then
observed and plotted the curves on the ceiling so that by looking at
the point of light, he could read both the date and the time of day.
Not bad for a 12-year-old!

Hmm. Especially a 12-year-old in England, where you get to see the
sun only a few times per year! ;-)

- Frank Krygowski
  #133  
Old May 7th 11, 11:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Don't we need teflon-coated bullets?

On 5/7/2011 2:56 PM, Tom Lake wrote:

snip

Well, it's not really *about* helmets, is it? Every person has his
own schtick and, I guess, in RBT, it's helmets and Frank& Phil are
the apostles.


Most of us here have had them filtered out for so long that we only see
their gems when a newbie falls into the trap of responding to them.

snip

Rock climbing groups? Laws restricting setting pitons and epoxy onto
rock faces in the national parks.

I'm sure there's more.


There are. You should see ba.broadcast!

For Usenet to retain any value at all you can't fall into the trap of
letting those that get caught up in their own agenda dominate and
destroy the group. You filter them out and you move on.
  #134  
Old May 8th 11, 08:03 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,153
Default Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?

On May 8, 8:21*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:

My riding tends to be reasonably cautious. *That is, I've never been
one for trying to see how fast I could take a curve. *I've exceeded 50
mph only once on a bike. *I long ago gave up really scary mountain
biking. *I seldom ride when roads are icy or really snowy. *I watch
pavement conditions like a hawk.


It must be horrible to ride with such constant fear, Frank.

You ought to take up a more risk free past time, like getting out of
bed. Oh, wait a minute...

--
JS.
  #135  
Old May 8th 11, 06:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Jay Beattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,322
Default Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?

On May 7, 3:21*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On May 7, 3:25*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:





On May 7, 11:05*am, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Ah, Stephen, still posting absolute lies!


To review (not that it should be necessary): *I did not begin by
deciding I was against bike helmets. *In fact, I was once in favor of
bike helmets. *I wore one for almost every ride, and advised others to
do the same. *I bought the line that bicycling was a significant
source of serious head injury, and that helmets greatly reduced that
risk.


It was only after I began reading the research papers on the subject
(both pro and con), and digging for data on comparative risk, that I
changed my mind, based entirely on factual evidence. *I found that the
risk had been grossly exaggerated, the claims of efficacy wildly
overstated, and the specifications and certification tests of bike
helmets laughably inadequate.


Populaiton studies say nothing about whether a helmet is a smart
choice for an individual rider whose risk pattern may be different
from the norm, e.g., someone who rides fast or rides off road or who
rides in inclement weather including ice and snow or who rides in
close proximity to large numbers of other riders. *A person may
perceive a risk that actually exists for him or her, and you cannot
assume that a person is being hysterical or helmet whore or whatever
without seeing that person's riding environment.


There's some truth to that. *If you'll notice, I generally talk about
the low danger level of ordinary cycling.

My riding tends to be reasonably cautious. *That is, I've never been
one for trying to see how fast I could take a curve. *I've exceeded 50
mph only once on a bike. *I long ago gave up really scary mountain
biking. *I seldom ride when roads are icy or really snowy. *I watch
pavement conditions like a hawk.

I think the best chance of justifying bike helmet use, based on their
specifications and on the likelihood of head impact, would be
enthusiastic mountain biking (as opposed to just cruising in the
woods). *Second best would be track racing. *The hills on Portland's
west side when slicked down with winter rain could possibly be
another; I won't pass judgment. *I've ridden those only in dry
weather.

But I think it's obvious that the advice given by helmet promoters,
that cyclists should wear a helmet "... every time they ride their
bike..." is silly. *The level of risk certainly doesn't justify that.
And the measured results from decades of such promotion show that such
advice, to the considerable degree it's been followed, hasn't worked
to a detectable degree.

This is why population studies are meaningless to me in my personal
decision making -- except in terms of my injury reduction
expectations. *I do not expect a helmet to save my life. *However,
helmets have proven benefit in reducing scalp injury, certain upper
facial injuries and skull fractures, which are all costly to treat and
worth avoiding -- particularly for me.


It might be worth asking yourself whether you did ride, or would have
ridden as you do, *in 1973, before helmets were widely used. *What
would you have done differently?


I rode and raced without a helmet at various times -- and in fact, I
was shamed into riding without a helmet by my shaved-leg buddies as
late as '84, and yes, I did not die of a head injury. Since then,
though, I have landed on my head a number of times while wearing a
helmet and appreciated the protection. All of those accidents
occurred on wet or icy roads, some in the dark -- and all while
commuting and not racing or risk taking, except for the inherent risk
of riding in inclement weather. We have inclement weather more than we
don't, and if I avoid riding in bad weather, I wouldn't ride.

I also admit that my mental processing speed hs decreased as well as
visual acccuity. I just transitioned off skis and back on to my bike
and was descending Newberry the other day, and realized my descending
skill were woefully rusty. http://www.flickr.com/photos/brianellin/3433416816/
That's about a 15% grade. At the bottom of that picture and out of the
frame is a tight right hand turn with lots of gravel. I got scared of
wiping out on gravel, took the turn wide and just about got smacked by
a mini-van when I crossed the center line. Totally my fault and only
illustrative because in 1973, I would have made the turn carrying
twice as much speed, and the mini-van would not have been there
anyway. All of my West Hills routes are now choked with cars because
of the way the urban areas have developed. Life is more dangerous than
in 1975 due to increased traffic densities and my own decreased mental
and physical abilities and the fact that I now ride in worse weather,
being that in 1973, I lived in California. Using a comfortable and
light weight helmet seems like a reasonable measure. -- Jay Beattie.
  #136  
Old May 8th 11, 10:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Michael Press
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,202
Default Does it ever end?

In article ,
Tom Lake wrote:

Back to Newton... have you, by any chance, seen his law of cooling?
It's something like: "The rate of heat loss of a body is proportional
to the difference in temperatures between the body and its
surroundings." (pasted, of course; however, believe what you want)

How do you explain the idea that "hot water freezes more quickly than
relatively chilled water" given a constant freezing temperature of
water? I will be happy to point you to various web sites and
discussions of that idea.


How do _you_ explain those assertions.
I know all the answers, so be careful.

--
Michael Press
  #137  
Old May 9th 11, 02:21 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Tom Lake[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 45
Default Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?

On Sat, 7 May 2011 15:21:37 -0700 (PDT), in rec.bicycles.tech Frank
Krygowski wrote:

There's some truth to that. If you'll notice, I generally talk about
the low danger level of ordinary cycling.

My riding tends to be reasonably cautious. That is, I've never been
one for trying to see how fast I could take a curve. I've exceeded 50
mph only once on a bike. I long ago gave up really scary mountain
biking. I seldom ride when roads are icy or really snowy. I watch
pavement conditions like a hawk.

I think the best chance of justifying bike helmet use, based on their
specifications and on the likelihood of head impact, would be
enthusiastic mountain biking (as opposed to just cruising in the
woods). Second best would be track racing. The hills on Portland's
west side when slicked down with winter rain could possibly be
another; I won't pass judgment. I've ridden those only in dry
weather.

But I think it's obvious that the advice given by helmet promoters,
that cyclists should wear a helmet "... every time they ride their
bike..." is silly. The level of risk certainly doesn't justify that.
And the measured results from decades of such promotion show that such
advice, to the considerable degree it's been followed, hasn't worked
to a detectable degree.
It might be worth asking yourself whether you did ride, or would have
ridden as you do, in 1973, before helmets were widely used. What
would you have done differently?


I don't know that it's any more *obvious* that advice given with which
you disagree is "silly" than it's *obvious* that you're wrong...
having looked at the research, I do not see any obvious consensus.

It looks like mandating helmets will, most likely, be as effective as
prohibition; this does not surprise me.

I once wrote a grant wherein we promoted helmets. That position
simply sounded good in the abstract... grants make almost as
interesting reading as research does; this is why nobody reads them.
What surprised me was that our local cyclists weren't willing to say:
"Yeah, helmets are good," in exchange for nearly 200K to upgrade
traffic signals and bike lanes. As in most grant writing, you don't
want to get bogged down in facts... get your "buzz words" onto the
first page; the rest is 50 pages of boiler plate. The last thing you
want is controversy because the political money bags bail out at the
first hint. I thought it was a done deal until a room full of
cyclists flooded city council to oppose it. The DOT people didn't
even listen to them; they simply walked out and reallocated the money.

Heck, Frank... you hand me 200K and I'll say damn near *anything*!
Trust me on this one, sir... you'll never get a grant to *prevent*
children from wearing bicycle helmets even if it is silly!

Now, they're complaining about the antique traffic signals that can't
"see" bicycles... no ****, Sherlock! A general obligation bond lacks
a prayer in this economy.

  #138  
Old May 9th 11, 02:27 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Tom Lake[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 45
Default Does it ever end?

On Sun, 08 May 2011 14:37:04 -0700, in rec.bicycles.tech Michael Press
wrote:

How do _you_ explain those assertions.
I know all the answers, so be careful.


Oh, I don't.

A "Law of Cooling" sounds pretty absolute; however, it looks to me
like there is some difference of opinion here.

I was expecting Frank, who is an expert in thermodynamics (while I, by
my own admission, am not) to take that one on. I really don't know
how to explain the varying positions.

I'll bet you could fill a *book* with the stuff I don't know.

  #139  
Old May 9th 11, 01:14 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
Tom Lake[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 45
Default Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?

On Mon, 09 May 2011 06:35:12 +0100, in rec.bicycles.tech Phil W Lee
suddenly shrieked:

So you were one of the stupid *******s that came up with that bull****
instead of something that might have actually made a difference, like
subsidised cycle training for schoolkids. So they have principles.
And you don't. There's a description used by law enforcement
agencies to describe people who deliberately lie for financial gain.
Who wants one? You go for grants for pro-cycling things instead
of anti-cycling things, not grants for anti-anti-cycling things. And you
admit that it's all your fault.


Goodness! I have certainly managed to hit *your* button this morning,
haven't I?

Grant writing is a bit like a scholarly study; if you want it to be
cited, then get something quotable in the first few pages... you know:
"Save the children; yada yada yada." Don't you want to save children,
Phil? Nobody's going to read it, anyway.

It's also like doing product endorsements; get some celebrity to plug
your product, big deal! You see it on TV all the time and the
celebrity probably thinks it tastes like crap, but he's getting paid
lots of money to say otherwise; law enforcement doesn't get involved.
Does that usually cause you to go ballistic?

  #140  
Old May 9th 11, 03:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,alt.rec.bicycles.recumbent
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?

On 5/5/2011 6:15 PM, Tom Lake wrote:

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.


For vehicle crash-worthiness there are some tests that are designed to
simulate a real accident with the use of crash test dummies. But of
course what is also looked at is post facto data on accident data,
comparing the use and non-use of safety equipment by accident victims.

Be very careful about those people that misuse whole population studies
with claims that they are inconclusive because out extenuating factors,
because often those extenuating factors are things they made up out of
thin air. For example, there is absolutely _no_ evidence that cycling
rates fall after helmet laws are introduced, but that does not stop the
birther-like claims that the only reason that whole population studies
show a decrease in injuries and fatalities is that cycling rates went
down. Of course first they started out denying any decrease, then when
they couldn't deny it any longer they came up with a rationalization for
it. This is covered in Myth 8 at
http://sites.google.com/site/bicyclehelmetmythsandfacts/#TOC-Myth-8:-Studies-show-that-when-helm

Before the proliferation of web sites where actual scientific and
statistical data was available for all to see, Usenet had a lot more
"helmet wars." Now, with the data readily available, you see just how
furious people like Frank and Phil become when the facts don't agree
with their agenda. The "Bicycle Helmet Myths and Facts" web site that I
started as an effort to have a central repository for all the myths that
the AHZs try to put out there, and the actual facts, has been a big help
with reducing the helmet war threads.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Unicycles and exchange rates thejdw Unicycling 12 November 2nd 07 06:57 PM
Tdf 'live' Heart rates cupra UK 2 July 18th 07 12:55 AM
Pedaling rates Ron Graham UK 17 February 3rd 07 06:52 PM
decrease of heart rates le-sheq Techniques 4 March 1st 06 12:33 AM
Heart rates. Simon Mason UK 0 January 21st 06 08:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.