|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in
: On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 15:23:40 -0500, "psycholist" wrote in message : Interesting argument. You presented a bunch of data and findings and any that you didn't agree with you called "lies." I've seen these arguments so many times and always wanted to say something but never have. It's so simple, if you don't care about your safety, then don't wear a helmet. If you hit your noggin', you're gonna be a vegetable or die more than likely. You're body can take alot of abuse but your head cannot. Here in Texas, you have the option, I don't care what others do to look cool, but I look pretty cool as a walking,talking Texan that wears a helmet. All I can say is if you don't, instead of a vegatable that i have to support with my taxes, I hope you die, painlessly of course. As an EMT, I was shown a picture of a guy that was riding a bike and was hit by a car. The guy was laying on the ground, his eyes open, looking at his brain laying in front of him that had popped out of the front of his skull. Maybe, if he had a helmet on, this could have been prevented, maybe not. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
mrbubl wrote:
If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help others. mrbubl Do you say this about pedestrians that don't wear helmets? Because there are 5 times as many pedestrians than cyclists that receive head injuries (in the US). How about those taking a shower without a helmet? Again, many times as many people receiving head injuries from shower use than bicycle use. How about using a step ladder or driving in a car? All many, many times more likely to result in a head injury. They better all be organ donors so that their choices can help the rest of us out. Your statement, on it's face, makes the utterly invalid assumption that cycling is dangerous. Nothing could be further from the truth. Austin (who takes real risks by climbing stairs without a helmet) |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Dan wrote:
As an EMT, I was shown a picture of a guy that was riding a bike and was hit by a car. The guy was laying on the ground, his eyes open, looking at his brain laying in front of him that had popped out of the front of his skull. Maybe, if he had a helmet on, this could have been prevented, maybe not. Do you honestly believe that a 50 cent piece of Styrofoam that can be crushed with a finger would protect a skull (which, by the way, is many, many times harder than the Styrofoam hat) from that kind of trauma? If that's the extent of your intelligence I don't want you to respond should I ever need an EMT. If bicycle helmets could protect from this kind of injury, then they need to be required for much more dangerous activities such as climbing stairs, walking, or taking a shower. Austin |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan" wrote I've seen these arguments so many times and always wanted to say something but never have. It's so simple, if you don't care about your safety, then don't wear a helmet. If you hit your noggin', you're gonna be a vegetable or die more than likely. You're body can take alot of abuse but your head cannot. If bike crashes are really that injurious/fatal, and helmets are really that helpful...why are there still cyclists? Why didn't we all die off in the ~100 years between the invention of the bike, and the invention of the bike helmet? Pete |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"AustinMN" wrote in message
... mrbubl wrote: Do you say this about pedestrians that don't wear helmets? Because there are 5 times as many pedestrians than cyclists that receive head injuries (in the US). How about those taking a shower without a helmet? Again, many times as many people receiving head injuries from shower use than bicycle use. How about using a step ladder or driving in a car? All many, many times more likely to result in a head injury. They better all be organ donors so that their choices can help the rest of us out. I am not taking sides on this issue, but I will point out that in this form your statistics are useless. Comparing number of showering injuries to number of bicycling injuries is completely irrelevant. If you wanted to prove something going in that direction, you would need to compare "injuries per man-hour of showering vs. bicycling" or at the least "number of cycling injuries per cyclist vs. number of showering injuries per showerer" -Scott Ehardt http://www.scehardt.com |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"AustinMN" wrote in message
news Requires registration. http://www.bugmenot.com/view.php?url=dallasnews.com -Scott Ehardt http://www.scehardt.com |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
AustinMN wrote:
mrbubl wrote: If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help others. mrbubl Do you say this about pedestrians that don't wear helmets? Because there are 5 times as many pedestrians than cyclists that receive head injuries (in the US). Numbers..pedestrians vs cyclist. Compare apples to apples and your actual mileage may vary. How about those taking a shower without a helmet? Again, many times as many people receiving head injuries from shower use than bicycle use. How about using a step ladder or driving in a car? How about wearing seat belts, smoking anything on a regular basis, drinking alcohol to excess. If there were people that wore an approved helmet that fell from step ladders or people driving cars in accidents wore helmets that would present more moot points. How does a race care driver survive a 100g force crash to walk away?? DId their helmet help? All many, many times more likely to result in a head injury. They better all be organ donors so that their choices can help the rest of us out. That would certainly help the organ availability crisis in the US. Your statement, on it's face, makes the utterly invalid assumption that cycling is dangerous. Nothing could be further from the truth. Dangerous is a relative term. That pesky proactive action versus reactive actions come in to play. I don't ride thinking it's dangerous but have a reasonable expectation that those around me that directly influence what happens to me share the same expectations. The beauty is that you can make your own choices. Austin (who takes real risks by climbing stairs without a helmet) mrbubl (wears a variety of helmets where appropriate and organ donor by choice) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Just zis Guy, you know? says...
On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 22:41:11 GMT, mrbubl wrote in message .net: If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help others. Oops, you spoiled it at the end there. Once again, if the facts are so clear (a) why do the helmet lobby always give the highest figures available, even when they know they are wrong, and (b) why do the jurisdictions which have introduced laws not show the benefit? That is the fundamental question for me. I am perfectly prepared to believe helmets might prevent most trivial injuries, some more serious ones, and even a few major ones. But the real world figures show that overall there is no measurable benefit from even large scale increases in helmet use, so there is clearly something else going on. I'd quite like to know what it is, and preferably without being part of the experiment. And actually I've not seen any figures which examine the differential effect of helmets and any other kind of hat against scalp injuries. I dislike wearing helmets and in my instinctive dislike for them I see a few things that might explain why they don't seem to help much. Helmets are hot in the peak summer riding months and can increase sweat, dehydration and heat exhaustion. They do nothing but decrease comfort and are a distraction. Not only are they hot, but the straps cut into the skin and there is a fine line between having them too loose and too tight. I see a high percentage of helmet wearers with the helmet sitting lopsided on their head. They are one more thing to fiddle with when the rider could be concentrating on his riding and traffic. Bike helmets protect the top of the head almost exclusively, the least likely place for impact. The face, ears, and even the back of the neck have significant exposure. A blow to the face will mean that the helmet will deflect the force to the lower face, jaw, etc--not necessarily a significant help. Helmets make the head a much bigger target. Near misses become impacts. We actually have good instincts for protecting our heads and some riders may short circuit these instincts in an accident and try to protect other parts of their bodies. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:47:00 GMT,
et, mrbubl proselytised: \snip sos How does a race care driver survive a 100g force crash to walk away?? DId their helmet help? \whack a doodle etc. Their helmet has its own restraint system to keep it from breaking their necks. Apples and pineapples. -- zk |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Super Slinky" wrote in message t... Just zis Guy, you know? says... On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 22:41:11 GMT, mrbubl wrote in message .net: If not wearing a helmet on your head is safer for you and yours, more power to yah and hope you are an organ donor so your choices may help others. Oops, you spoiled it at the end there. Once again, if the facts are so clear (a) why do the helmet lobby always give the highest figures available, even when they know they are wrong, and (b) why do the jurisdictions which have introduced laws not show the benefit? That is the fundamental question for me. I am perfectly prepared to believe helmets might prevent most trivial injuries, some more serious ones, and even a few major ones. But the real world figures show that overall there is no measurable benefit from even large scale increases in helmet use, so there is clearly something else going on. I'd quite like to know what it is, and preferably without being part of the experiment. And actually I've not seen any figures which examine the differential effect of helmets and any other kind of hat against scalp injuries. I dislike wearing helmets and in my instinctive dislike for them I see a few things that might explain why they don't seem to help much. Helmets are hot in the peak summer riding months and can increase sweat, dehydration and heat exhaustion. They do nothing but decrease comfort and are a distraction. Not only are they hot, but the straps cut into the skin and there is a fine line between having them too loose and too tight. I see a high percentage of helmet wearers with the helmet sitting lopsided on their head. They are one more thing to fiddle with when the rider could be concentrating on his riding and traffic. Bike helmets protect the top of the head almost exclusively, the least likely place for impact. The face, ears, and even the back of the neck have significant exposure. A blow to the face will mean that the helmet will deflect the force to the lower face, jaw, etc--not necessarily a significant help. Helmets make the head a much bigger target. Near misses become impacts. We actually have good instincts for protecting our heads and some riders may short circuit these instincts in an accident and try to protect other parts of their bodies. Geez. I hope you learned to fit your bike better than you learned to fit whatever helmet you may have tried. This is just simply ridiculous. Bob C. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
published helmet research - not troll | Frank Krygowski | Social Issues | 1716 | October 24th 04 06:39 AM |
Trips for Kids 13th Annual Bike Swap & Sale | Marilyn Price | Social Issues | 0 | June 1st 04 04:53 AM |
How old were you when you got your first really nice bike? | Brink | General | 43 | November 13th 03 10:49 AM |
my new bike | Marian Rosenberg | General | 5 | October 19th 03 03:00 PM |
Reports from Sweden | Garry Jones | General | 17 | October 14th 03 05:23 PM |