helmets

Hello out there, I would like to offer my opinion about wearing a helmet. I
see a lot of posts that suggest it doesn't help to wear a helmet and some
even suggest it can be more hazardous to wear one (?). I think it's foolish
to go without a helmet as it is foolish to go without various types of
insurance. I work in the surgery dept at a major trauma center and suggest
that my experience is not just anecdotal. We treat trauma cases every day
and head injuries are the worst sort. A bruise to the head can easily be
fatal. After the intitial bruise the pressure inside the skull builds up
over time eventually cutting off oxygen for the rest of the brain. If we get
to you soon enough you may survive with only limited damage but you may have
to learn to walk or speak again. Almost all of the serious and/or fatal
closed head injuries from bike accidents we see are from the lack of a
helmet. I'm sure there will be some strongly voiced opposition to this
opinion from those who feel that helmets don't help (and smoking is good for
you!). Well, fire away if you please. There is nothing more convincing than
a hopeless case of a 12 year old brain dead girl who got knocked off her
bike by a careless parent. Or a 15 year old skateboarder who smacked the
pavement once too many times who's parents now have to decide whether or not
to let them go and donate the organs.
-al

dreaded wrote:

Hello out there, I would like to offer my opinion about wearing a helmet. I
see a lot of posts that suggest it doesn't help to wear a helmet and some
even suggest it can be more hazardous to wear one (?). I think it's foolish
to go without a helmet as it is foolish to go without various types of
insurance. I work in the surgery dept at a major trauma center and suggest
that my experience is not just anecdotal. We treat trauma cases every day
and head injuries are the worst sort. A bruise to the head can easily be
fatal. After the intitial bruise the pressure inside the skull builds up
over time eventually cutting off oxygen for the rest of the brain. If we get
to you soon enough you may survive with only limited damage but you may have
to learn to walk or speak again. Almost all of the serious and/or fatal
closed head injuries from bike accidents we see are from the lack of a
helmet. I'm sure there will be some strongly voiced opposition to this
opinion from those who feel that helmets don't help (and smoking is good for
you!). Well, fire away if you please. There is nothing more convincing than
a hopeless case of a 12 year old brain dead girl who got knocked off her
bike by a careless parent. Or a 15 year old skateboarder who smacked the
pavement once too many times who's parents now have to decide whether or not
to let them go and donate the organs.
-al

So, what percentage of the serious brain injuries at your trauma center
happen on bikes? I'm quite curious, and hope you'll respond.

You know that for the USA as a whole, it's about 1%. Right?

Do you therefore recommend helmets for the other 99% too? If so, you
must drop in on lots of Usenet groups!


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message
...
dreaded wrote:

Hello out there, I would like to offer my opinion about wearing a
helmet. I
see a lot of posts that suggest it doesn't help to wear a helmet and
some
even suggest it can be more hazardous to wear one (?). I think it's
foolish
to go without a helmet as it is foolish to go without various types of
insurance. I work in the surgery dept at a major trauma center and
suggest
that my experience is not just anecdotal. We treat trauma cases every
day
and head injuries are the worst sort. A bruise to the head can easily be
fatal. After the intitial bruise the pressure inside the skull builds up
over time eventually cutting off oxygen for the rest of the brain. If we
get
to you soon enough you may survive with only limited damage but you may
have
to learn to walk or speak again. Almost all of the serious and/or fatal
closed head injuries from bike accidents we see are from the lack of a
helmet. I'm sure there will be some strongly voiced opposition to this
opinion from those who feel that helmets don't help (and smoking is good
for
you!). Well, fire away if you please. There is nothing more convincing
than
a hopeless case of a 12 year old brain dead girl who got knocked off her
bike by a careless parent. Or a 15 year old skateboarder who smacked the
pavement once too many times who's parents now have to decide whether or
not
to let them go and donate the organs.
-al

So, what percentage of the serious brain injuries at your trauma center
happen on bikes? I'm quite curious, and hope you'll respond.

You know that for the USA as a whole, it's about 1%. Right?

Do you therefore recommend helmets for the other 99% too? If so, you
must drop in on lots of Usenet groups!


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]


I haven't taken down any data but I can specifically remember five deaths in
the last six months-maybe about 2 or 3% of all the traumas are from bike
crashes (ie bike v car, bike v tree, bike v pole etc.), of those the worst
prognosis is almost always from the head trauma (maybe as much as 90% of
fatal bike crashes from head injury). So we see a lot of bike crash victims,
but from the ones who hit their head it's always much worse- ask any
neurosurgeon. My original point is that while most people think their skull
is their natural helmet may not understand what happens when the skull meets
something like pavement or a rock or whatever. I would much rather take the
same blow to any other part of my body rather than the head. I see
statistics which can be used to say helmets dont help like: helmetless
riders crash less often or suffer fewer injuries. Maybe they do but when
they hit their head it's often fatal. I would rather crash fifty times with
my helmet on than once without it. In other words, yes i recommend helmets
for all riders. All 100%. They do save lives- it's too bad there's no stat
for that.
sorry for the weak data, wish i had access to something better. thanks for
reading.
-al

"dreaded" wrote in message
...

I would rather crash fifty times with
my helmet on than once without it.

After reading your post, sounds like you already have.

Dave

Dear Dreaded,

I applaud your efforts, and I am a helmet advocate as well. Just seems like
there's a bunch of folks out there who want to argue no matter how much
evidence there is that helmets help more than they hurt/hinder/cause more
crashes. Apparently just because statistics can be looked at from all
different angles to support their claims that why bother, your odds of being
one of "the few" where a helment can really help are so slim, they feel
helmets are a waste.

After reading (and debating it) here, I've finally decided to stop trying to
argue it, and just let Darwin take over, and we won't have to worry about
them for too long (then again, more are being made every day)...



"dreaded" wrote in message
...

"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message
...
dreaded wrote:

Hello out there, I would like to offer my opinion about wearing a
helmet. I
see a lot of posts that suggest it doesn't help to wear a helmet and
some
even suggest it can be more hazardous to wear one (?). I think it's
foolish
to go without a helmet as it is foolish to go without various types of
insurance. I work in the surgery dept at a major trauma center and
suggest
that my experience is not just anecdotal. We treat trauma cases every
day
and head injuries are the worst sort. A bruise to the head can easily
be
fatal. After the intitial bruise the pressure inside the skull builds
up
over time eventually cutting off oxygen for the rest of the brain. If
we
get
to you soon enough you may survive with only limited damage but you
may
have
to learn to walk or speak again. Almost all of the serious and/or
fatal
closed head injuries from bike accidents we see are from the lack of a
helmet. I'm sure there will be some strongly voiced opposition to this
opinion from those who feel that helmets don't help (and smoking is
good
for
you!). Well, fire away if you please. There is nothing more convincing
than
a hopeless case of a 12 year old brain dead girl who got knocked off
her
bike by a careless parent. Or a 15 year old skateboarder who smacked
the
pavement once too many times who's parents now have to decide whether
or
not
to let them go and donate the organs.
-al

So, what percentage of the serious brain injuries at your trauma center
happen on bikes? I'm quite curious, and hope you'll respond.

You know that for the USA as a whole, it's about 1%. Right?

Do you therefore recommend helmets for the other 99% too? If so, you
must drop in on lots of Usenet groups!


--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]


I haven't taken down any data but I can specifically remember five deaths
in
the last six months-maybe about 2 or 3% of all the traumas are from bike
crashes (ie bike v car, bike v tree, bike v pole etc.), of those the worst
prognosis is almost always from the head trauma (maybe as much as 90% of
fatal bike crashes from head injury). So we see a lot of bike crash
victims,
but from the ones who hit their head it's always much worse- ask any
neurosurgeon. My original point is that while most people think their
skull
is their natural helmet may not understand what happens when the skull
meets
something like pavement or a rock or whatever. I would much rather take
the
same blow to any other part of my body rather than the head. I see
statistics which can be used to say helmets dont help like: helmetless
riders crash less often or suffer fewer injuries. Maybe they do but when
they hit their head it's often fatal. I would rather crash fifty times
with
my helmet on than once without it. In other words, yes i recommend helmets
for all riders. All 100%. They do save lives- it's too bad there's no stat
for that.
sorry for the weak data, wish i had access to something better. thanks for
reading.
-al

dreaded wrote:

"Frank Krygowski" wrote in message
...

So, what percentage of the serious brain injuries at your trauma center
happen on bikes? I'm quite curious, and hope you'll respond.

You know that for the USA as a whole, it's about 1%. Right?

Do you therefore recommend helmets for the other 99% too? If so, you
must drop in on lots of Usenet groups!


I haven't taken down any data...

I'm not surprised.


... but I can specifically remember five deaths in
the last six months...

Hold on, hold on. There are only about 700 to 800 cycling deaths per
year in the entire United States. If your own trauma room saw five
cycling deaths in the last six months, you are in a strange place
indeed! There are over 1100 trauma centers in the US, and far more
emergency rooms. Your normal share of bike fatalities would be far less
than one.

So, you need to give us details. Otherwise, it certainly looks like
you're making things up, or otherwise misleading us!


... -maybe about 2 or 3% of all the traumas are from bike
crashes (ie bike v car, bike v tree, bike v pole etc.)...

Nationwide, it's a bit lower, but carry on.

of those the worst
prognosis is almost always from the head trauma....

.... which is generally true of all accident victims, is it not? There's
nothing special there about bicyclists.


(maybe as much as 90% of
fatal bike crashes from head injury).

I'm not impressed by statements like "maybe as much as..." It's clear
you're making up numbers as you go along.

The more common statement is that 75% of bicycle fatalities "involve
head injuries." But that itself is a hedge, since a fatality with
massive internal injuries plus a scratch on the forehead could be said
to "involve a head injury."

So we see a lot of bike crash victims,
but from the ones who hit their head it's always much worse- ask any
neurosurgeon.

Last time I talked to a neurosurgeon, he was soon saying the same thing
about the overwhelmingly greater number of motorist who were crash victims.

And when I talked to a head injury rehabilitation counselor, the
conversation went the same way. She said only one of her clients (in
her entire career) was a cyclist. Almost all were motorists. And BTW,
we think that one cyclist wore a helmet, since he was injured in a race.

My original point is that while most people think their skull
is their natural helmet may not understand what happens when the skull meets
something like pavement or a rock or whatever. I would much rather take the
same blow to any other part of my body rather than the head.

And _my_ original point was that it's the same for everyone. Cyclists
are not overrepresented in serious head injury counts. Roughly half of
serious head injuries happen inside motor vehicles. Roughly 40% happen
in falls around the house. Only about 1% are cyclists.

And it's not just because there's less cycling than motoring. The
per-hour data is hard to find, but what's available shows cycling head
injury fatalities per hour to be roughly equal to motorists, and better
than pedestrians (at least, near traffic.)

I'm sure you write from sincere concern, but I suggest you take an
honest look at the causes of serious head injuries at your trauma
center, or in the US as a whole. If you do, I think you'll find you
dropped in on the wrong Usenet group. You're missing 99% of the head
injury problem in America.

IOW, you need to go bother the folks at rec.autos.driving and
misc.fitness.walking, to start.

(I'm not sure how you reach the literal millions who get their serious
head injuries falling in the homes. I'll leave that to you.)

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

"dreaded" wrote in message
...
Hello out there, I would like to offer my opinion about wearing a helmet.
I
see a lot of posts that suggest it doesn't help to wear a helmet and some
even suggest it can be more hazardous to wear one (?). I think it's
foolish
to go without a helmet as it is foolish to go without various types of
insurance. I work in the surgery dept at a major trauma center and suggest
that my experience is not just anecdotal. We treat trauma cases every day
and head injuries are the worst sort. A bruise to the head can easily be
fatal. After the intitial bruise the pressure inside the skull builds up
over time eventually cutting off oxygen for the rest of the brain. If we
get
to you soon enough you may survive with only limited damage but you may
have
to learn to walk or speak again. Almost all of the serious and/or fatal
closed head injuries from bike accidents we see are from the lack of a
helmet. I'm sure there will be some strongly voiced opposition to this
opinion from those who feel that helmets don't help (and smoking is good
for
you!). Well, fire away if you please. There is nothing more convincing
than
a hopeless case of a 12 year old brain dead girl who got knocked off her
bike by a careless parent. Or a 15 year old skateboarder who smacked the
pavement once too many times who's parents now have to decide whether or
not
to let them go and donate the organs.
-al


Dave,

Thanks for the post, but in this newsgroup, this just provokes a TON of
nonsense. Take Frank for instance. I just hope that, when the time comes
that he's in a position to realize how much a helmet might have helped him,
he's not too brain dead to be able to realize it.

Over a decade of riding an average of 10,000 to 12,000 miles per year, I've
been hit by cars twice and had one other serious crash. In all three cases
my head hit the pavement ... HARD. The last time, according to witnesses,
after being launched 20 or more feet in the air off of a car windshield, I
landed squarely on my head. I sustained a compression fracture of the spine
(among many other serious injuries) which is evidence of a very severe
impact squarely atop my head. I had a very broken helmet, but NO head
trauma.

But you know what? None of my incidents ever made it into anyone's
statistics. Nobody ever asked. Nobody ever recorded it because I didn't
sustain a head trauma. People like Frank and the others here who want to
see statistics think they're being so logical and smart, but they're unable
to grasp the limitations of the data. They want to rationalize stupid
behavior. It's like The Tobacco Institute which wants you to believe that
there's no causal link between cigarette smoking and cancer. If they only
realized how stupid they sound saying that.

Bob C.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 21:44:42 -0700, "dreaded" wrote
in message :

Almost all of the serious and/or fatal
closed head injuries from bike accidents we see are from the lack of a
helmet.

Actually I would say that none of them are caused by that - most of
them will probably be caused by impact with a motor vehcicle. But
it's OK, that's a common mistake :-)

You might also want to look at what happened in Australia and New
Zealand when they introduced compulsion. With near-100% helmet
wearing rates, the head injury rate is essentially unchanged. Or, if
you prefer a US example, the cyclist head injury rate has increased by
40% in the time that helmet use rose from 18% to 50%.

Which suggests that it's not that simple.

The fact that a helmet is only tested to absorb the equivalent of a
simple low speed fall (which of course was always unlikely to be
fatal) may also be significant :-)

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

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:30:56 -0400, "psycholist"
wrote in message :

Thanks for the post, but in this newsgroup, this just provokes a TON of
nonsense. Take Frank for instance. I just hope that, when the time comes
that he's in a position to realize how much a helmet might have helped him,
he's not too brain dead to be able to realize it.

See? Like the man said, a TON of nonsense.

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

"Dave" wrote:

Just seems like
there's a bunch of folks out there who want to argue no matter how much
evidence there is that helmets help more than they hurt/hinder/cause more
crashes.

That's only one measure of efficacy, and it's a pretty shabby and
ambivalent justification for bike hats. A more important question is,
how serious a risk are you attempting to abate by using a bike hat?

Anybody who wears a helmet on the bike, but not in the car (a source
of 50 to 100 times more fatal head injuries) is in a fantasy
wonderland of denial. And you'd better strap on your beanie when
climbing a ladder or walking outside on an icy day, otherwise you're
going to look like a pretty uninformed safetynik.

After reading (and debating it) here, I've finally decided to stop trying to
argue it, and just let Darwin take over, and we won't have to worry about
them for too long

If I got an extra five minutes every time some foam hat evangelist
invoked Darwin, I'd probably live as long as the more than 100 years
that cycling thrived without anybody wearing helmets. Funny, but just
about as many cyclists get killed per capita these days as back when
none of them wore helmets at all! Yet I've heard that some 40% of
U.S. cyclists wear the ceremonial hat. I wonder if *that's* a good
indication of its efficacy?

Chalo Colina