|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1021
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
Good lord, there's too much of this to get through!
I really don't care who's a troll. I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. I was seriously hit by a car a month ago; got thrown backwards over the car hood and through the windshield. Woke up in the middle of the road with paramedics talking to me. Never hti my head; my guess is the broken leg is why I blacked out. I know mere sprains have brought me close. I wasn't wearing a helmet. My guess is that my humungus backpack is what hit the windshield, and it saved my upper body from injury. I did end up with mild whiplash. My question is, if I'd been wearing a helmet and been thrown like that, would I have had worse whiplash or broken my neck? Do I want to get a helmet, or just keep on wearing the humungous backpack? I know that motorcyclists claim that their bigger and heavier helmets mostly serve to cause broken necks if they crash. If the head gets jerked around, added weight causes it to get thrown around harder. -- Yours, Dora Smith Austin, Texas "Tom Kunich" wrote in message ink.net... "Bill Z." wrote in message ... Frank Krygowski writes: You disparage the knowledge of engineers (including at least one registered Professional Engineer) when they comment on the physical properties of helmets. Being a "registered PE" doesn't impress me. It is really no big deal. Oh, then why doesn't your name show up on the list do licensed? Since it gives one a fair amount of cache in employment obviously you can just run down and pass your EIT the first try. Yet you don't want to "brag" about your mysterious qualifications? Or to put it another way - unless you display something like a PhD in statistics and/or a PE license, you won't be bragging in this crowd. Try a field more difficult than statistics, but why should I bother throwing pearls before swine? Look how you reacted when I gave you an answer on another topic. My guess is basket weaving. I did spot Bill lately - playing in a picture called Dodgeball. |
Ads |
#1022
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
Good lord, there's too much of this to get through!
I really don't care who's a troll. I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. I was seriously hit by a car a month ago; got thrown backwards over the car hood and through the windshield. Woke up in the middle of the road with paramedics talking to me. Never hti my head; my guess is the broken leg is why I blacked out. I know mere sprains have brought me close. I wasn't wearing a helmet. My guess is that my humungus backpack is what hit the windshield, and it saved my upper body from injury. I did end up with mild whiplash. My question is, if I'd been wearing a helmet and been thrown like that, would I have had worse whiplash or broken my neck? Do I want to get a helmet, or just keep on wearing the humungous backpack? I know that motorcyclists claim that their bigger and heavier helmets mostly serve to cause broken necks if they crash. If the head gets jerked around, added weight causes it to get thrown around harder. -- Yours, Dora Smith Austin, Texas "Tom Kunich" wrote in message ink.net... "Bill Z." wrote in message ... Frank Krygowski writes: You disparage the knowledge of engineers (including at least one registered Professional Engineer) when they comment on the physical properties of helmets. Being a "registered PE" doesn't impress me. It is really no big deal. Oh, then why doesn't your name show up on the list do licensed? Since it gives one a fair amount of cache in employment obviously you can just run down and pass your EIT the first try. Yet you don't want to "brag" about your mysterious qualifications? Or to put it another way - unless you display something like a PhD in statistics and/or a PE license, you won't be bragging in this crowd. Try a field more difficult than statistics, but why should I bother throwing pearls before swine? Look how you reacted when I gave you an answer on another topic. My guess is basket weaving. I did spot Bill lately - playing in a picture called Dodgeball. |
#1023
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
Dora Smith wrote:
Good lord, there's too much of this to get through! I really don't care who's a troll. I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. {snip} That's exactly the question that engenders the flame wars. Not really sure why. My opinion (read CHOICE) is to wear a helmet and hope I never have to test it out. Today's models are so light that I /really/ doubt they "cause more harm than help", but that's just *my* belief. You have to decide for yourself. I've fallen on mountain bike rides and hit my (helmeted) head on sharp rocks; also run into low-hanging branches and bonked the mellon pretty good. No damage to me whatsoever. (Despite my posting history ) Haven't crashed on the road bike...YET (one year and a few days so far), but if (when) I do I want my head protected. Take a look at the pics Mark Hickey posted, and ask yourself what would have happened if he /hadn't/ been wearing the lid (same exact one I use, BTW). Then make up your *own* mind. Bill "cars, curbs, cement, stems -- lotsa hard stuff out there" S. |
#1024
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
Dora Smith wrote:
Good lord, there's too much of this to get through! I really don't care who's a troll. I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. {snip} That's exactly the question that engenders the flame wars. Not really sure why. My opinion (read CHOICE) is to wear a helmet and hope I never have to test it out. Today's models are so light that I /really/ doubt they "cause more harm than help", but that's just *my* belief. You have to decide for yourself. I've fallen on mountain bike rides and hit my (helmeted) head on sharp rocks; also run into low-hanging branches and bonked the mellon pretty good. No damage to me whatsoever. (Despite my posting history ) Haven't crashed on the road bike...YET (one year and a few days so far), but if (when) I do I want my head protected. Take a look at the pics Mark Hickey posted, and ask yourself what would have happened if he /hadn't/ been wearing the lid (same exact one I use, BTW). Then make up your *own* mind. Bill "cars, curbs, cement, stems -- lotsa hard stuff out there" S. |
#1025
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
"Dora Smith" wrote in message ... Good lord, there's too much of this to get through! I really don't care who's a troll. I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. Answer: it depends on the individual accident. What kind of accident are you planning to have? I was seriously hit by a car a month ago; got thrown backwards over the car hood and through the windshield.... [snip] It sounds as if you are expecting to have a repeat of your previous accident, and not to have any other kind. I think that you asking the wrong question, and you would do better pursuing a different approach. Accident people consider three phases: prevention, avoidance, and injury reduction. It has frequently been estimated that working on the first two phases among American cyclists has the potential for cutting out about three quarters of all bike accidents. Your lack of description of the events before the accident suggests to me that you have not thought about accident prevention or avoidance, and are not familiar with the various "accident types", their relative frequency and seriousness, and the countermeasures that prevent them. Cycling is safe enough that millions of people continue to ride around in the same condition, but that still doesn't make it a good idea. Jeremy Parker |
#1026
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
"Dora Smith" wrote in message ... Good lord, there's too much of this to get through! I really don't care who's a troll. I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. Answer: it depends on the individual accident. What kind of accident are you planning to have? I was seriously hit by a car a month ago; got thrown backwards over the car hood and through the windshield.... [snip] It sounds as if you are expecting to have a repeat of your previous accident, and not to have any other kind. I think that you asking the wrong question, and you would do better pursuing a different approach. Accident people consider three phases: prevention, avoidance, and injury reduction. It has frequently been estimated that working on the first two phases among American cyclists has the potential for cutting out about three quarters of all bike accidents. Your lack of description of the events before the accident suggests to me that you have not thought about accident prevention or avoidance, and are not familiar with the various "accident types", their relative frequency and seriousness, and the countermeasures that prevent them. Cycling is safe enough that millions of people continue to ride around in the same condition, but that still doesn't make it a good idea. Jeremy Parker |
#1027
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
Dora Smith wrote:
I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. The short answer is, it's unlikely to make a significant difference. Bike helmets are designed to very low standards of impact absorption, roughly enough to protect you from a "Laugh In" style stationary topple. This low level of protection is necessary, because anything more would result in helmets too hot and heavy to sell. When the standards were first enacted (back in the mid-1970s) there were immediate complaints that they weren't strong enough. Proponents said "Yeah, they're low, but they'll help." Ever since then, people have been trying to find out if the helmets really do help. One small, badly designed study in 1989 claimed helmets prevent 85% of head injuries (defining "Head injury" as anything above the neck, including scratched ears, etc.) Despite that study having been proven wrong, helmet proponents use that "85%" number as gospel. They also mis-apply it, saying helmets prevent 85% of serious injuries or deaths. That study never claimed such a thing. Much larger studies, some involving entire countries of cyclists, have found no detectable benefit against serious injuries or deaths. Australia and New Zealand have all-ages, heavily enforced mandatory helmet laws, and the laws aren't working. Serious head injuries per rider are unchanged at best. Do helmets help? I don't think anyone will doubt they protect against minor injuries. It's the major injuries and fatalities that cause disagreement. I think the best data indicates they don't help there. But it's good to remember that cycling is not, and never has been, an unusual source of serious or fatal head injuries. We know very well that cyclists are less than 1% of the head injury fatalities in America. Ordinary on-road cycling, if done with reasonable care and skill, is not dangerous enough to worry about. Trick riding, blood & guts mountain biking and road racing may be different. But before getting into those, it's good to remember that the rest of your body is breakable, too. -- --------------------+ Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com, replace with cc.ysu dot edu] |
#1028
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
Dora Smith wrote:
I just want to know if in a serious bike accident a helmet is more help or harm. If this question has already been answered, could someone please be forbearing and answer it again. The short answer is, it's unlikely to make a significant difference. Bike helmets are designed to very low standards of impact absorption, roughly enough to protect you from a "Laugh In" style stationary topple. This low level of protection is necessary, because anything more would result in helmets too hot and heavy to sell. When the standards were first enacted (back in the mid-1970s) there were immediate complaints that they weren't strong enough. Proponents said "Yeah, they're low, but they'll help." Ever since then, people have been trying to find out if the helmets really do help. One small, badly designed study in 1989 claimed helmets prevent 85% of head injuries (defining "Head injury" as anything above the neck, including scratched ears, etc.) Despite that study having been proven wrong, helmet proponents use that "85%" number as gospel. They also mis-apply it, saying helmets prevent 85% of serious injuries or deaths. That study never claimed such a thing. Much larger studies, some involving entire countries of cyclists, have found no detectable benefit against serious injuries or deaths. Australia and New Zealand have all-ages, heavily enforced mandatory helmet laws, and the laws aren't working. Serious head injuries per rider are unchanged at best. Do helmets help? I don't think anyone will doubt they protect against minor injuries. It's the major injuries and fatalities that cause disagreement. I think the best data indicates they don't help there. But it's good to remember that cycling is not, and never has been, an unusual source of serious or fatal head injuries. We know very well that cyclists are less than 1% of the head injury fatalities in America. Ordinary on-road cycling, if done with reasonable care and skill, is not dangerous enough to worry about. Trick riding, blood & guts mountain biking and road racing may be different. But before getting into those, it's good to remember that the rest of your body is breakable, too. -- --------------------+ Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com, replace with cc.ysu dot edu] |
#1029
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
"Dora Smith" writes:
Good lord, there's too much of this to get through! I was seriously hit by a car a month ago; got thrown backwards over the car hood and through the windshield. Woke up in the middle of the road with paramedics talking to me. Never hti my head; my guess is the broken leg is why I blacked out. I know mere sprains have brought me close. My question is, if I'd been wearing a helmet and been thrown like that, would I have had worse whiplash or broken my neck? Do I want to get a helmet, or just keep on wearing the humungous backpack? The very low mass of a bicycle helmet and its small thickness makes that not something to worry about. It sounds like in your crash, you avoided hitting the car with your head, and also didn't hit your head on the ground. The standards helmets are required to meet are designed to protect you from a fall to the ground, either off a bike or after sliding over the hood of a car. You claim you blacked out. If you blacked on the impact with the car but before you landed on the ground, don't count on being able to "tuck and roll" or do anything else to protect your head. So, given your definition of a serious accident, a helmet would increase your chances of minimizing or avoiding a head injury, with next to zero chance of a neck injury due to the use of the helmet. If you head hits certain parts of a car - the posts or struts that hold up the roof, for example, the impact would be localized on a small part of the helmet and the impact speed could be far higher than a fall to the ground. Don't expect a helmet to protect you from that kind of an impact. A helmet will, however, help in other kinds of crashes - ones where your head might hit the pavement instead of a fast-moving vehicle. I know that motorcyclists claim that their bigger and heavier helmets mostly serve to cause broken necks if they crash. If the head gets jerked around, added weight causes it to get thrown around harder. Some motorcyclists really dislike the helmet laws and will say anything as a result. Keep in mind that a helmet will not prevent a broken neck, and even if a motorcycle helmet increases the chance of a neck injury, you may still be better off by reducing the chances of a head injury. Bicycle helmets are much lighter and not anywhere near as thick or bulky, so there really isn't anything to worry about. -- My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB |
#1030
|
|||
|
|||
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad?
"Dora Smith" writes:
Good lord, there's too much of this to get through! I was seriously hit by a car a month ago; got thrown backwards over the car hood and through the windshield. Woke up in the middle of the road with paramedics talking to me. Never hti my head; my guess is the broken leg is why I blacked out. I know mere sprains have brought me close. My question is, if I'd been wearing a helmet and been thrown like that, would I have had worse whiplash or broken my neck? Do I want to get a helmet, or just keep on wearing the humungous backpack? The very low mass of a bicycle helmet and its small thickness makes that not something to worry about. It sounds like in your crash, you avoided hitting the car with your head, and also didn't hit your head on the ground. The standards helmets are required to meet are designed to protect you from a fall to the ground, either off a bike or after sliding over the hood of a car. You claim you blacked out. If you blacked on the impact with the car but before you landed on the ground, don't count on being able to "tuck and roll" or do anything else to protect your head. So, given your definition of a serious accident, a helmet would increase your chances of minimizing or avoiding a head injury, with next to zero chance of a neck injury due to the use of the helmet. If you head hits certain parts of a car - the posts or struts that hold up the roof, for example, the impact would be localized on a small part of the helmet and the impact speed could be far higher than a fall to the ground. Don't expect a helmet to protect you from that kind of an impact. A helmet will, however, help in other kinds of crashes - ones where your head might hit the pavement instead of a fast-moving vehicle. I know that motorcyclists claim that their bigger and heavier helmets mostly serve to cause broken necks if they crash. If the head gets jerked around, added weight causes it to get thrown around harder. Some motorcyclists really dislike the helmet laws and will say anything as a result. Keep in mind that a helmet will not prevent a broken neck, and even if a motorcycle helmet increases the chance of a neck injury, you may still be better off by reducing the chances of a head injury. Bicycle helmets are much lighter and not anywhere near as thick or bulky, so there really isn't anything to worry about. -- My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
published helmet research - not troll | Frank Krygowski | General | 1927 | October 24th 04 06:39 AM |
First Helmet : jury is out. | Walter Mitty | General | 125 | June 26th 04 02:00 AM |
Reports from Sweden | Garry Jones | General | 17 | October 14th 03 05:23 PM |
France helmet observation (not a troll) | Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles | General | 20 | August 30th 03 08:35 AM |