|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 | |
|
|
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 |