A Cycle Helmet saved this lady's life.

[Andymorris]

Simon Brooke wrote:
> "Mark Thompson" <[email protected] (change warm for hot)> writes:
>
>>
>> You mean take up an entire lane for one bicycle (well, two thirds at least, but no cars gonna get
>> past oncoming traffic).
>
> Yes.
>
>> You aren't serious are you?
>
> Yes.

Yep for me as well

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

 

[Just Zis Guy]

"Patrick Herring" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> | The staunchest proponents of helmets, such as BeHit, absolutely refute the idea of risk
> | compensation despite the evidence for its existence

> Ahem, "deny", I think. Confusing denial and refutation is a common journalistic solicism,
> <Margot>you hear it even on the BBC these days</Margot>.

I meant repudiate, of course. There you go, who would trust an engineer with correct use of English?

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

 

[Just Zis Guy]

"Steve R." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:G%[email protected]...

> A cyclist on the other hand, generally falls from a greater height at a
greater speed
> and is often catapulted over the bars, with their hands sometimes still
holding onto
> the bike to retain some control. That's why they often fall head-first and
so are
> more vulnerable to head-injuries.

A cyclist rarely falls when riding on the road. They are more likely to be forcibly propelled by the
negligent actions of the driver of a motor vehicle. Somtimes they might be overconfident because
they believe their plastic hat will save them, that might make them more likely to fall I suppose.

"Often" catapulted over the bars? No. That's happened exactly once to me, when an object became
lodged in my front wheel - my inuries were insignificant other than mild concussion. At the time I
was wearing one of those old-fashioned leather racing hats, plastic hats being a rare eccentricity
at the time. Other crashes have seen me knocked sideways, hit from behind, run off the road. In no
case was my head at risk. The worst head injury I ever sustained was the result of a playground
accident, the second worst was due to cracking my head on a low lintel in an old barn. I would
venture the view that it is physically impossible for me to be launched over the bars of my present
bike, certainly most unlikely.

The most dangerous crashes for cyclists are those when we are hit from behind or left-hooked by a
goods vehicle. In both cases I think you'll find that abdominal injuries are the most usual cause of
mortality (that's certainly true for goods vehicle incidents).

You'll also find that in 16 out of 19 fatalities reviewed in a recent report where cause of death
was recorded as head injury, the cyclist was found to have other fatal injuries as well.

Plastic hats make no measurable difference to cyclist injury rates in the real world. The countries
with the best cyclist safety records are the Netherlands and Denmark, they also have among the
lowest helmet wearing rates.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

 

[Peter Clinch]

Steve R. wrote:

> Have you not watched TV lately?

No, I don't have a TV.

> Plenty of instances of cyclists falling off bikes and falling heavily.

And plenty of people winning the National Lottery on TV, but that doesn't mean my ticket is likely
to make me a millionaire.

I'd suggest you aim your browser at http://www.cyclehelmets.org and do some reading. There's lots of
references to actual research and distillations thereof.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Steve R.]

Simon Brooke wrote in message ...
> You should learn the difference between drama (probably scripted by people wholly ignorant of
> bicycles) and real life.

Don't you ever watch programs with Cycle Racing, Mountain Bike events etc.?

You can see the way cyclists frequently fall awkwardly over the bars, or when the front wheel wipes-
out, in an entirely different way to a ped falls, even when they are running, (as that what this
particular bit was about).

You saying those cycling events are dramatised for our benefit ??

 

[David Martin]

On 23/12/03 9:12 am, in article
[email protected], "Steve R."
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Don't you ever watch programs with Cycle Racing, Mountain Bike events etc.? You can see the way
> cyclists frequently fall awkwardly over the bars, or when the front wheel wipes-out, in an
> entirely different way to a ped falls, even when they are running, (as that what this particular
> bit was about).

Do you ever watch world rally or formula 1? Everyone must have a roll cage, five point seatbelt,
fireproof suit and helmet when driving their car.

Mountain bike racing or the tour de France are about as relevant to my commute as scaling the north
face of the Eiger is to me climbing the stairs in my house.

I don't wear a harness and ropes when taking the kids upstairs to bed, even though more people die
from falls on stairs than do in single vehicle bicycle accidents.

..d

 

[Peter Clinch]

Steve R. wrote:

> Don't you ever watch programs with Cycle Racing, Mountain Bike events etc.?

Don't you see that the sort of high end racing you see on TV has about as much in common with
typical road conditions for cyclists as an F1 Grand Prix has with driving round town in the
rush hour?

> You can see the way cyclists frequently fall awkwardly over the bars, or when the front wheel wipes-
> out, in an entirely different way to a ped falls, even when they are running, (as that what this
> particular bit was about).
>
> You saying those cycling events are dramatised for our benefit ??

Even despite the higher risk in this sort of event than typical day-to-day cycling, when I have
watched events on the TV I don't recall any particularly common incidences of riders landing on
their heads. There are usually a few good crashes every year on Le Tour, yet it's arms and legs that
generally get broken, not heads.

So I'd say it's not the events that are dramatised, but your perception of the head injuries you
see on them.

Again I point you at http://www,cyclehelmets.org and encourage to read some real research (there's
synopses there too, you don't need to wade through thousands of words of dry technical papers) and
find out actuality rather than rely on perceptions from TV.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Simon Brooke]

"Steve R." <[email protected]> writes:

> Simon Brooke wrote in message ...
> > You should learn the difference between drama (probably scripted by people wholly ignorant of
> > bicycles) and real life.
>
> Don't you ever watch programs with Cycle Racing, Mountain Bike events etc.?

I don't often watch television at all.

> You can see the way cyclists frequently fall awkwardly over the bars, or when the front wheel wipes-
> out, in an entirely different way to a ped falls, even when they are running, (as that what this
> particular bit was about).

Well, two things to that. Firstly in racing (particularly downhilling) athletes are pushing the
envelope to its limits. At the limits you can fall off, nobody doubts that. On courses chosen
particularly to be difficult people fall off more frequently. But people cycling at normal speeds on
normal roads do not, and going over the handlebars is not a normal sort of accisent at all.

I say again: have you ever actually seen a bicycle?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

-- mens vacua in medio vacuo --

 

[Frank X]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Again I point you at http://www,cyclehelmets.org and encourage to read some real research (there's
> synopses there too, you don't need to wade through thousands of words of dry technical papers) and
> find out actuality rather than rely on perceptions from TV.
>

Cool, from http://www.cyclehelmets.org/mainframes.html#1019.html

*****
There is a good deal of circumstantial evidence that helmeted cyclists are more likely to crash, and
data from one study [1] suggests that those wearing a helmet are more than 7 times likely to hit
their heads if they do.

*****

Do you really think that is true? If you do think it is true, perhaps you would like to hazard a
guess as to why this effect occurs?

 

[Peter Clinch]

Frank X wrote:

> Cool, from http://www.cyclehelmets.org/mainframes.html#1019.html
>
> *****
> There is a good deal of circumstantial evidence that helmeted cyclists are more likely to crash,
> and data from one study [1] suggests that those wearing a helmet are more than 7 times likely to
> hit their heads if they do.
>
> *****
>
> Do you really think that is true? If you do think it is true, perhaps you would like to hazard a
> guess as to why this effect occurs?

I don't see why it's so hard to accept that people wearing a helmet are more likely to hit their
heads: a helmeted head is bigger than an unhelmeted head and thus has more likelihood of hitting
something. The increased volume is also outside of the body's own reflexive defensive mechanism
for the head.

As to the "more likely to crash", I don't know to be honest, but there are a few possibilities as to
why that may be so. Risk compensation is an obvious one, and another is that helmet wearing is often
concentrated among less experienced cyclists. Experience is more likely to prevent a crash in the
first place than just about anything else. In that case, of course, it isn't the helmet that makes
the difference, though in risk compensation it may well be. FWIW I often wear a helmet so I
presumably don't think I'm risking much by doing so. OTOH I often don't wear a helmet, so I also
presumably don't think they're a Magic Talisman.

But the main point one can glean from www.cyclehelmets.org is that it isn't actually clear cut
either way whether helmets are good or bad in individual cases. Do you really think that is not
true, having looked at the evidence?

"Steve R." seems to think it is clear cut. I don't agree.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Just Zis Guy]

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> It's people's _lives_ you're suggesting they should risk so you can get to your destination
> 0.00002 seconds sooner.

Not so much destination, as the next traffic jam on the way ot the destination. Overall I'd be
surprised if it made any difference at all.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

 

[Just Zis Guy]

"Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Re motor traffic being delayed:
> > I bet you a pound they lose more hours a day to congestion than to slow-moving cyclists.

> They, and me, will almost certainly lose more time being delayed by inconsiderately parked motor
> vehicles than cyclists.

Indeed. One of life's little ironies: not only are cagers the primary cause of the congestion about
which they bleat so much, but also a major secondary cause, through on-road parking.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk

 

[Ambrose Nankive]

"Peter B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> berlin.de...
> >
> > Two drivers were sentenced this week for killing two 13 year old girls
> while
> > racing through the streets of Grimsby. Presumably they deemed what they
> were
> > doing as safe or they wouldn't have done it. In fact by your logic no
> action
> > of any driver can be unsafe.
> (apologies for poor quoting: OEQuotefix didn't want to start)
>
> I saw this news item and my thoughts were that the system has failed but nobody was screaming for
> it to be reviewed as they would if, f'rinstance,
if
> social workers were seen to have failed. The main culprit had a string of previous driving
> convictions and yet was still out there and as dangerous as any schizophrenic incorrectly
released.
>
Still didn't get the maximum sentence, though, did they, despite the previous? Even so, it was held
up on the 6 o'clock news (Radio 4) as exemplary sentencing.

I have a friend who was seriously injured (fortunately, quite well put together again, too) in a
crash earlier this year by a driver severely drunk and apparently under the influence of other
drugs. On the day of his court hearing, she was confidently assuming he'd get 10 years, and I really
had to hold myself back from saying "Oh, so they found a suitcase full of crack in the boot as well,
did they?". Which wouldn't have been very friendly.

A

btw I think you mean "schizophrenic incorrectly *supervised*", as schizophrenics are only held
securely if they're perceived to be a danger to the public (e.g. protesting against road
building, etc)

 

[Tony Raven]

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
> Not so much destination, as the next traffic jam on the way ot the destination. Overall I'd be
> surprised if it made any difference at all.

When I used to commute the 12 mile down the A10s into Cambridge on a regular basis I would nearly
always note with satisfaction that many of the vehicles which passed me as I started my journey
would be stuck in the queue on the outskirts of Cambridge as I passed them. I like to hope that many
of them noticed it too.

I did find there was a regular bunch that seemed to get to know me and took noticeably more
care passing.

Tony

 

[Al]

"Steve R." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Al wrote in message ...
> > I was thrown from the bike and hit the road in probably a similar manner to this lady albeit at
> > a greater speed.
>
> Firstly, sorry to hear about your accident.

Cheers.

> You can't possibly know how she fell. It seems that she struck her head quite hard, which you can
> easily do when the bike 'wipes-out' from beneath you.

True.

>Maybe you didn't land head-first.

Dunno one minute I was cycling the next I was lying in the road.

> That decision not to 'buy' a helmet proves that you must have had a bump on the head, as it's
> affected your ability to think logically and to 'care' for you well-being.

On the contrary I have thought about the accident alot and concluded that a helmet may well have
saved the grazing to my head, but probably not the actual impact, neither would it helped to avoid
the incident.

I also believe that I took reasonable care to make sure I was visible
- lumicycle rear steady light, a cateye flashing light, reflective ankle bands, reflective tights,
paniers, and fluorescent top, so my choice not to wear a helmet is logical to me and many others.

It's a very personal thing we'll just have to disagree!

Al

 

[Simon Brooke]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Steve R." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:G%GFb.3698$l27.33736723@news-
> text.cableinet.net...
>
> > A cyclist on the other hand, generally falls from a greater height at a
> greater speed
> > and is often catapulted over the bars, with their hands sometimes still
> holding onto
> > the bike to retain some control. That's why they often fall head-first and
> so are
> > more vulnerable to head-injuries.
>
> A cyclist rarely falls when riding on the road. They are more likely to be forcibly propelled by
> the negligent actions of the driver of a motor vehicle. Somtimes they might be overconfident
> because they believe their plastic hat will save them, that might make them more likely to fall I
> suppose.
>
> "Often" catapulted over the bars? No. That's happened exactly once to me, when an object became
> lodged in my front wheel - my inuries were insignificant other than mild concussion.

Never happened to me in forty something years of cycling. Indeed, I haven't fallen off at all when
on the road in the last thirty years (I've fallen off a road bike once in that time, when I cycled
onto a sandy beach clipped into my pedals...). In that time I've covered many tens of thousand
miles, possibly over 100,000, on the road. Of course I've fallen off mountain bikes, but that's part
of the fun.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

-- mens vacua in medio vacuo --

 

[Martinm]

Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> MartinM wrote:
>
> > I doff my hat/helmet to the man who had the courage to resign his CTC membership via the
> > magazine over their h****t policy (Dec 2003 issue)

snip
>
> Please read the letter again, and Dan Joyce's considered reply. And then decide whether the hat
> should be doffed or not.
>
> Pete.
I have (both). I wasn't agreeing with him, or the reply, I was admiring his courage to put his views
so openly on the subject. I would have just resigned.

 

[Peter Clinch]

MartinM wrote:

> I have (both). I wasn't agreeing with him, or the reply, I was admiring his courage to put his
> views so openly on the subject. I would have just resigned.

Why? He said in his letter he was in favour of choice. The CTC are in favour of choice. Would you
resign because you have the same views?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email protected]
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[Tony Raven]

Steve R. wrote:
>
> Don't you ever watch programs with Cycle Racing, Mountain Bike events etc.?
>
> You can see the way cyclists frequently fall awkwardly over the bars, or when the front wheel wipes-
> out, in an entirely different way to a ped falls, even when they are running, (as that what this
> particular bit was about).
>
> You saying those cycling events are dramatised for our benefit ??

Are you suggesting we all wear full face helmets, body armour and spinal protectors like the
downhill racers?

Tony

 

[Frank X]

"Peter Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Frank X wrote:
>
> But the main point one can glean from www.cyclehelmets.org is that it isn't actually clear cut
> either way whether helmets are good or bad in individual cases. Do you really think that is not
> true, having looked at the evidence?
>

Actually I don't normally wear a helmet and I'm very strongly opposed to it being compulsory.
However I object to silly distorted "7 times" more dangerous style statistics. When they say stuff
like that it makes it very hard to believe anything else they say.