WSJ article on Dutch helmet-resistance

On 11/10/2010 3:31 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:
considered Wed, 10 Nov 2010 07:50:01
-0800 the perfect time to write:

On 10/11/10 7:29 AM, Duane Hébert wrote:

snip

Yes some people around here see causal relationships where they don't
exist and ignore those that do. I know that some people think that MHL
will reduce cycling. It's possible I guess but to say that preventing
helmets increases it while ignoring increased facilities is just stupid.

It's not that it's stupid or not, it's that in every country where an
MHL has been implemented there has not been a decrease in cycling. Sure
if you looked at cycling rates immediately after the law was enacted
(which is of course what those opposed to helmets always do) you might
find a slight dip, but the levels quickly recover to previous levels.

It doesn't matter how many times you assert this; the statistics show
that cycling levels are ALWAYS depressed by MHLs, particularly among
the younger riders. And while other factors may gradually increase
cycling rates, they never recover to the level they would have been
without a MHL.
MHLs are probably a major contributory cause for Australia having the
highest rate of obesity in the world. They are certainly responsible
for the failure of cycle hire schemes there.
If
cycling does drop, it's often due to other factors as well. OMG, in
China, cycling levels have fallen drastically, even though there are no
helmet laws. Improved mass transit and greater car ownership as the
society becomes more affluent, are the major causes.

I don't think anyone denies that other factors can depress cycling
rates, particularly the growth of motor traffic.

Similarly, it infuriates those opposed to helmets and facilities that
cycling rates don't decline when helmets are mandated or more facilities
are built.

I don't know about helmets, but increasing facilities certainly
increases numbers of cyclists here.

As it does everywhere. But are those recreational or transportational
riders.


The Dutch will come around eventually. It's all a process of education,
rather than compulsion.

The Dutch have such an extensive set of facilities that I would probably
not use a helmet there either. Of course this statement will probably
**** of the ones here that think that facilities make cycling more
dangerous.

They are so far removed from reality that it will likely have no effect
on them at all.

When you have some grasp of reality your view of others understanding
of it may be valid.

I think Scharf lives in an alternate Universe where Magic Foam Bicycle
Hatsâ„¢ and Magic White Paint Linesâ„¢ actually make cycling safer and more
popular. Either that, or they are putting something funny in the Silly
Cone Valley water supply.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 10/11/10 3:03 PM, Dan O wrote:

Did I tell you guys I have a nice blotch of blood now on the inside of
my helmet at the temple? :-)

If you hadn't been wearing a helmet then the diameter of your head would
have been reduced by about 1 inch and you would not have been injured at
all.

Oh wait, that's myth 13.
http://sites.google.com/site/bicyclehelmetmythsandfacts/#TOC-Myth-13:-A-helmet-makes-your-head-l

Dan O wrote:

Did I tell you guys I have a nice blotch of blood now on the inside of
my helmet at the temple? :-)

Plague of boils in your region?

Wearing something again and again without laundering it can cause
sores.

Chalo

On Nov 11, 11:14 am, Chalo wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Did I tell you guys I have a nice blotch of blood now on the inside of
my helmet at the temple? :-)

Plague of boils in your region?

Wearing something again and again without laundering it can cause
sores.


Not at the moment; it was the cut from my glasses - actually caused by
the helmet. Without the helmet I imagine my temple would have caught
the blow instead of the helmet, which in turn pressed my eyeglasses
against my eyebrow and cut me. I didn't even feel that - didn't even
know it was cut until home and helmet off and somebody told me.

The bloodstain is on the styrofoam, and remains notably red - possibly
due to electrolytes all over the inside of the helmet. I do wash the
forhead pad. Hair cushions every other contact point.

On Nov 11, 11:24 am, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 11, 11:14 am, Chalo wrote:

Dan O wrote:

Did I tell you guys I have a nice blotch of blood now on the inside of
my helmet at the temple? :-)

Plague of boils in your region?

Wearing something again and again without laundering it can cause
sores.

Not at the moment; it was the cut from my glasses - actually caused by
the helmet. Without the helmet I imagine my temple would have caught
the blow instead of the helmet, which in turn pressed my eyeglasses
against my eyebrow and cut me. I didn't even feel that - didn't even
know it was cut until home and helmet off and somebody told me.

The bloodstain is on the styrofoam, and remains notably red - possibly
due to electrolytes all over the inside of the helmet. I do wash the
forhead pad. Hair cushions every other contact point.

Of course, I suppose the asphalt might have pressed my glasses into my
eyebrow even without the helmet. That sounds way more painful, though
- not to mention that my very expensive glasses were unscathed.

The only notable damage to the helmet is cosmetic - a few asphalt
scuffs on the square plastic reinforcing tab for the strap rivet. The
shell is fine. The foam underneath looks okay. I know people say if
it's not destroyed it didn't do anything, but I still prefer the feel
of styrofoam between my head and the pavement - really like that hard
shell, too.

On 11/11/2010 2:24 PM, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 11, 11:14 am, wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Did I tell you guys I have a nice blotch of blood now on the inside of
my helmet at the temple? :-)

Plague of boils in your region?

Wearing something again and again without laundering it can cause
sores.


Not at the moment; it was the cut from my glasses - actually caused by
the helmet. Without the helmet I imagine my temple would have caught
the blow instead of the helmet,

Duck. Here it comes...

On 11/11/10 11:41 AM, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 11, 11:24 am, Dan wrote:
On Nov 11, 11:14 am, wrote:

Dan O wrote:

Did I tell you guys I have a nice blotch of blood now on the inside of
my helmet at the temple? :-)

Plague of boils in your region?

Wearing something again and again without laundering it can cause
sores.

Not at the moment; it was the cut from my glasses - actually caused by
the helmet. Without the helmet I imagine my temple would have caught
the blow instead of the helmet, which in turn pressed my eyeglasses
against my eyebrow and cut me. I didn't even feel that - didn't even
know it was cut until home and helmet off and somebody told me.

The bloodstain is on the styrofoam, and remains notably red - possibly
due to electrolytes all over the inside of the helmet. I do wash the
forhead pad. Hair cushions every other contact point.

Of course, I suppose the asphalt might have pressed my glasses into my
eyebrow even without the helmet. That sounds way more painful, though
- not to mention that my very expensive glasses were unscathed.

The only notable damage to the helmet is cosmetic - a few asphalt
scuffs on the square plastic reinforcing tab for the strap rivet. The
shell is fine. The foam underneath looks okay. I know people say if
it's not destroyed it didn't do anything, but I still prefer the feel
of styrofoam between my head and the pavement - really like that hard
shell, too.

Wait, you have no proof that if you had not been wearing a helmet, blah,
blah, blah......

On Nov 3, 12:19*am, wrote:

"Getting These Cyclists to Use Helmets .....

I still think this is a masterful troll
(Note that Carl initiated the thread and has not been seen since)

There are a number of scumbag names here that are a given.
Francis K being the priimary one.
Sadly there are also a number that are not typically seen in the
BS / name calling threads.
But I was also hoping it would help participants see how little useful
discussion takes place here.
I suppose a request for objective technical discussion and/or
experiences is asking too much.
We already have people (Francis) who make such proclamations but seem
(or claim) to be TOTALLY unaware that what they they actually say is
ANYTHNIG but objective.
Francis is just such an idiot. But you all knew that

DR