|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Are we obsessive?
On May 6, 10:23*pm, Tom Lake wrote:
Actually, the word "unusual" isn't important at all; if you disagree with my editing, then put it back. * Here's my statement, once again: "Statistics can (and do) show that ordinary cycling does not impose any unusual risk of serious head injury, despite propaganda to the contrary." Drop the blathering about hypothesis testing. We know about it already. Instead, look for some data. Tell us, for example, how bicycling and walking for transportation compare regarding the number of serious head injuries per kilometer. From what I've read, cycling is far safer in that regard. Tell us how bicycling compares with other activities regarding serious head injuries per hour activity. From what I've read, it's not significantly different than many things people do with no worry. Tell us how bicycling compares with other activities in head injury fatalities per year. From what I've seen, cycling is fewer than 1%. Those are the points I was considering when I said that bicycling does not impose unusual risk of serious head injury. I can post some numbers, but you'd probably learn by digging them up on your own. Frank, a "sceptic" doesn't spend his every waking hour posting about bicycle helmets. *That's called obsessive behavior. That would be. But I don't know anyone who does that. I do know people who have become interested in various topics, have studied them rather diligently, and who now know much more than most others. Many of those people take part in discussions on those topics. It's not unusual. In fact, it's one of the important ways that knowledge is disseminated. - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Does it ever end?
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! - Frank Krygowski |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 7, 8:52*am, Tom Lake wrote:
Common sense would suggest that an energy dissipating material is a good thing to have between your body and the pavement when you slam into it; however, I have never seen any scientific experimental studies to that effect. *They'd have to pay me a *lot* of money before I'd participate in such a study! You make the mistake of believing that because a double-blind study of helmeted versus non-helmeted cyclists being subjected to precisely the same crash does not exist that this is the same thing is the lack of any scientific evidence. In fact, there is an enormous body of scientific and statistical evidence that proves that bicycle helmets are extremely effective in reducing the severity of head injuries in head impact bicycle crashes. Now if the AHZs want to argue that the incidence of head impact bicycle crashes is relatively low, and that even if 100% of cyclists wore helmets that the overall death and injury rate for cyclists would not significantly change, that's another story entirely. In fact you often see them desperately trying to change the discussion from the effectiveness of helmets in the event of a head impact crash to something like "well statistically the number of deaths did not change much as helmet usage went up, and, oh by the way, the level of cycling went down as helmet usage went up." The fact that there is no evidence for the latter has not stopped them from endlessly repeating it. The reason I put together the list of myths and facts on the web site was to have a central repository of all the ridiculous claims made by people like Frank, along with the evidence that shows just how wrong those claims are. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 7, 6:14*am, Harry Brogan
wrote: On Fri, 6 May 2011 08:20:47 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski wrote: On May 6, 4:58*am, Harry Brogan wrote: On Thu, 5 May 2011 08:47:15 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski wrote: Why do people keep promoting an ineffective solution to a largely nonexistent problem? - Frank Krygowski I can certainly agree that bicycle head injuries are rare. *I am a member of the "over-the-handlebars" club and it wasn't a lot of fun smashing my head against the sidewalk. *Now, just in case, I do wear a helmet. *Simply because I don't want to end up with a more serious injury than what I had then. Thanks for your input, but I'll continue to wear one!!!!! * And that's fine, Harry. *I understand how such a crash could have that effect on a person. But isn't it interesting that the number of serious head injuries that occur inside cars, or while traveling on foot, completely eclipses the number that occur while bicycling - yet you never hear of motorists or pedestrians who adopt your tactic? - Frank Krygowski Perhaps that's because they feel completely safe in theit "steel cages". *As for the walking, I doubt that people really give much thought to having any accident any more serious than a stubbed toe. Oh, I agree! Yet despite their feelings, people are obviously NOT completely safe within their steel cages. Those cages are where the most common accidental deaths occur (most of those due to head injury). And people never give a thought to walking accidents, yet the risk for pedestrians is more than triple that for bicyclists, again due primarily to head injury. I've known people who have gotten serious head injuries while walking. I've known people who had serious and even fatal head injuries while traveling in cars. I've never, ever known a person who has said, as a result, "I'm wearing a helmet from now on." That thinking is applied almost exclusively to bicycling and motorcycling, it seems. The only drawback I have found to wearing a "bicycle" helmet has been that it seems to make it just a BIT harder to turn my head around. Although not really enough to hinder my riding. There certainly HAVE been times where I have not worn the helmet. *But it has become such an integral part of my daily riding that I feel a bit odd to NOT have the thing on. I have other problems with them, which I won't go into (unless asked). But it's obvious that most people do have problems. Otherwise, there would have been no necessity of promoting them - people would buy them spontaneously, without all the "Danger!" warnings. And otherwise, bicycling wouldn't get less popular when they are mandated. BTW, the feeling odd without one goes away. When I was first convinced to put one on, it felt odd, but I eventually got mostly used to it. When more examination of data showed me they were generally unnecessary and ineffective, I stopped wearing one unless forced to, and it soon felt quite normal. - Frank Krygowski |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a bicycle foam hat while riding a recumbent?
On May 7, 11:37*am, Tom Lake wrote:
*What the intelligent observer should avoid is picking a particular side and becoming the champion of that point of view. What an odd idea! If that's the ideal, we should still be casting spells to drive out demons when we want to cure the sick. Most people, especially those with some background in science, tend to believe that there are facts which can be determined, and strategies which can be evaluated for effectiveness. After all, there are agencies that approve medical treatments, and reject those that don't work. Would you advise them to go out of business? - Frank Krygowski |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 7, 11:43*am, SMS wrote:
The problem with Frank is that he first decided that he was against helmets then he went out and looked for data that supported his position. Unable to find any statistically or scientifically sound data to support his views, he decided on the approach of the birthers and the global warming deniers, just make it up! When confronted with the facts, that he actually knows to be true, he retreats to the world of "driving helmets" and such. 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. And of course, I've posted citations of those papers and the data I've found countless times. I've made none of it up. If you want to discuss a specific point, or some specific data, please do so. Skip the vague lies and accusations. We can start with the data in this table, if you like. Show me the evidence of helmet benefit in these numbers: http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1041.html - Frank Krygowski |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
SMS wrote:
Chalo wrote: You ask me to disregard observations I have made directly from innumerable crashes of my own, and from the crashes of people I know. Absolutely. The enormous body of statistical and scientific evidence that clearly shows the beneficial effects of bicycle helmets in head injury crashes trumps your tiny bit of anecdotal data (if that anecdotal data exists at all). My statement at the head of that chain was regarding the relative frequency of head injuries versus hand and wrist injuries in endo-type bike crashes. It's characteristic of you to distort that into the service of pro-bike-helmet disinformation, and characteristically incorrect. Chalo |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 7, 11:52*am, Tom Lake wrote:
I'll argue with you for the same reason I'll take issue with Frank when he spouts something like: "The enormous body of statistical and scientific evidence clearly shows the harmful effects of bicycle helmets." Except I never said that. Get a grip. - Frank Krygowski |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Does it ever end?
On Sat, 7 May 2011 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT), in rec.bicycles.tech Frank
Krygowski wrote: work on gravitation, on optics, on fluid mechanics... need I go on? The man was a big fan of alchemy, after all! Sorry, your ':' at the beginning of a line screwed up my reader. Hey! Having looked over Scuffham, I think you may have a point. There's something about that which fails my "sniff test". It wouldn't be the first time politics and money influenced research if what you claim is true... it may be so. I have seen that very dynamic in action; I can cite examples; however, I'll spare you having to read it. I might criticize his first study on biased language; though... but, yeah... he worked for people who had an interest in the outcome. Been there, done that! I'm giving you that point, but drop Scuffham '95; it's now worthless. 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. Too bad Newton wasn't as smart as we are, huh? |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Should you wear a helmet while riding a recumbent?
On May 7, 1:32*pm, SMS wrote:
Now if the AHZs want to argue that the incidence of head impact bicycle crashes is relatively low, and that even if 100% of cyclists wore helmets that the overall death and injury rate for cyclists would not significantly change, that's another story entirely. In fact you often see them desperately trying to change the discussion from the effectiveness of helmets in the event of a head impact crash to something like "well statistically the number of deaths did not change much as helmet usage went up, and, oh by the way, the level of cycling went down as helmet usage went up." The fact that there is no evidence for the latter has not stopped them from endlessly repeating it. Those interested in real facts, rather than straw-man arguments, might want to start with the British Cyclists' Touring Club's take on the subject. See http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4641 Regarding whether or not cycling drops when helmet use is mandated, start with http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1096.html (Not all laws have their effect clearly documented, since after Australia's experience, it's become much more difficult to get helmet promoters and legislators to agree to before and after surveys of bike use.) - Frank Krygowski |
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 |