A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Psycholists myths.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 6th 13, 09:50 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Dave - Cyclists VOHR
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 137
Default Psycholists myths.

Myth: Helmets are just foam hats and foam isn’t going to protect your head.

Fact: EPS (Expanded Polystyrene Foam), the material used in helmets, car
bumpers, and packaging materials is designed to absorb impact, which is
what it does. Hint: Look at how fragile eggs are packaged in many areas.
Any time you see someone using the "foam hat" shtick in an effort to
convince someone that helmets don't work because, you know, they're just
made out of "foam," it's an excellent indication that they're about to
lie again. They have utter contempt for the concepts of facts, logic,
science, and statistics because in contradicts what they want, but know
isn't, true. There's an easy way to test their beliefs. Tell them you're
going to throw a ten pound chunk of concrete at their head at 14MPH and
ask if they'd like to put on a "foam hat" or not.

If you're in a vehicle crash and your airbag deploys, and nylon and
nitrogen save your life do you claim that it's "magic nitrogen?" Or
magic nylon. How could some gas and nylon possibly protect you? Oh wait,
in a 60mph head-on crash, you'd still be dead even with an airbag, so
clearly air bags are under-designed for the forces involved and are
hence worthless. In fact the mere presence of air bags in cars has
reduced the number of cars sold as people give up driving--just look at
car sales figures for the last two years.

The "magic foam" and "foam hat" shtick are used by those that either
unintentionally uninformed or intentionally dishonest, with the latter
being more probable. No doubt they really do understand why EPS foam is
used in a plethora of products, including helmets, where the need for
impact protection and light weight are key requirements. They've lost
the argument based on statistical and scientific fact, so being smarmy
is their only choice.
--
Dave-Cyclists VOHR
''As the severity of the injury increased the benefit of wearing a
helmet increased, which is very hard to ignore I think,'' Dr Olivier said.

Results showed that cyclists without helmets were more than 3.9 times as
likely to sustain a head injury to those with helmets. Helmets reduced
the risk of moderate head injury by 49 per cent, of serious head injury
by 62 per cent, and of severe head injury by 74 per cent".
Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Annoying cycling myths [email protected] Racing 9 June 11th 08 09:52 PM
Doping Myths 101 MagillaGorilla Racing 23 January 12th 07 06:47 AM
Jackass Racing Myths Tom Kunich Racing 34 June 17th 06 11:31 AM
MIT debunks helmet myths Tony Raven UK 1 April 13th 06 04:15 PM
Cycling on the road: Myths vs. Reality cfsmtb Australia 1 September 21st 05 12:45 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.