|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Chris Phillipo wrote:
Why oh why do these sites only take fatalities into account. There are good reasons. Here are a couple: First, those who promote MHLs always seem to focus on saving lives. It's useful to show that idea's false. Second, there's little doubt when a person is dead. The definition of "Dead" is pretty water tight. By contrast, the definition of "head injury" is amazingly vague - in fact there is no official definition. More detail on that: the Thompson & Rivara study that calculated the ridiculous "85%" benefit from helmets literally counted scratched chins and cut ears as "head injuries," as in "injuries above the neck." Of course, helmet promoters know that most people hear the words "head injuries" and think of human vegetables. The fuzzy definition works to the helmet promoters' advantage. The FACT is, if an accident is severe enough to kill you then it's going to kill you with or without a Styrofoam hat on your head. The value of helmets is injury prevention. It would be good if you'd repeat that, loudly and often. If legislators understood how truly limited helmets are, they wouldn't be trying to pass inane laws. -- --------------------+ Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com, replace with cc.ysu dot edu] |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Would you PLEASE put "helmet" back in the thread title so my newsreader will
properly disregard these messages? Many thanks. -- Warm Regards, Claire Petersky please substitute yahoo for mousepotato to reply Home of the meditative cyclist: http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/ See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:50:41 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote: More detail on that: the Thompson & Rivara study that calculated the ridiculous "85%" benefit from helmets literally counted scratched chins and cut ears as "head injuries," as in "injuries above the neck." Of course, helmet promoters know that most people hear the words "head injuries" and think of human vegetables. The fuzzy definition works to the helmet promoters' advantage. They also claimed a higher efficacy for brain injury, which is inherently implausible until you realise that headaches were counted as brain injuries. Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Freewheeling May Be Running Stealth Campaign | Sam | General | 17 | October 28th 04 05:08 PM |
Back on the A12 - Cycle safety campaign starts again | Peter Fox | UK | 4 | July 27th 04 09:11 AM |
open invite to a Sarnia Ontario trials demo | Sofa | Unicycling | 3 | July 13th 04 03:24 AM |
Southern Ontario 100KM Coker Ride Aug 21 | Sofa | Unicycling | 5 | June 30th 04 02:57 PM |
CTC / Cycle Campaign Network Autumn Conference | Simon Geller | UK | 0 | September 2nd 03 11:15 AM |