Just zis Guy, you know? scribed with passion and wit:
Quoted message said:
Call it a foible. I can't allow advocacy of compulsory helmets pass unchallenged, because the only
research that has ever suggested significant benefit from wearing a helmet has been from people
who have already made up their minds that they want helmets to be compulsory, and no country which
has tried it has actually reduced injury rates. Cycling rates, yes, helmet laws cut cycling rates
pretty dramatically, but injury rates remain the same. Until we know why I am unwilling for me or
my children to be lab rats in the same failed experiment.
So all the development that helmet manufacturers put into helmets is not worth a light? Can you tell
me what the vast majority of cycle injuries are? We are not talking about the blanket of all
injuries here afterall, just head injuries, you trotting out non specifics and swallowing wholesale
non specifics from elsewhere is showing you to have "ostrich" syndrome.
Lets look at New Zealand.
" The relatively large increase in helmet wearing associated with the passing of a compulsory helmet
wearing law in 1994 reduced head injuries by between 24 and 32% in non-motor vehicle crashes, and by
20% in motor vehicle crashes."
Povey L J, Frith W J, Graham P G. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1999; volume 31, pp 763-770
Note no mention of broken legs or broken arms here, it is specific, something you have failed to be
on a consistent basis.
Australia.
"In Australia, recent mass data indicates that 25 per cent of bicyclists admitted to hospital, and
44 per cent of those killed, had head injury as their single most important injury. These figures do
not include multiple injuries, among many of which are unrecorded head injuries. Head injury is a
cause of death in 80 per cent of cyclists' deaths and 33 per cent of reported injuries in Victoria,
and several other studies have shown that, depending how the statistics are collected and analysed,
bicycle crashes result in serious head injuries in one-quarter to two-thirds of bicyclists admitted
to hospital, and up to 80 per cent if the collisions involved a motor vehicle. Up to 80 per cent of
deaths among bicyclists are due to severe head injury."
Of course this isn't worth anything to you because you would rather we have a head injury and a
broken leg rather than just the leg, so you can say that we need to educate car drivers, a few more
brain damaged kids will help further your cause afterall.
From the same report.
"Bicycle crashes occur mainly during times of heavy traffic, and during daylight. Three-quarters of
crash victims are male, with a high proportion being teenagers on school trips and young adults on
work trips. Most collisions between bicycles and cars occur at intersections or where cyclists or
drivers enter a roadway. The commonest injuries are to the limbs"
Well well, look at this, the commonest injuries are those to limbs, helmets do not help limbs, so
helmets are no good.
Best to overlook.
"Bicyclists admitted to hospital with head injuries are 20 times as likely to die as those without."
Attributed to The Effectiveness of Bicycle Helmets: a review Henderson, Michael.
Of course non of this research exists according to you.
How about this non scientific test.
sph.emory.eduboardman.htmlOpen ↗
From a British study.
"However, the great majority of the fatalities and approximately half the injuries - most of them
to adults - result from damage to the head following collision with a car or goods vehicle." The
cycle helmet: friend or foe? Hillman, Meyer.
There's that term "head injuries" again, not your blanket term "injuries", also note the frequency
throughout of the link between head injuries and death, no sign of anyone dying from a broken
finger, which is of course one of the statistics you use to discourage helmet use.
How much research do you want?
A study from Toronto concluded.
"In analyzing the type of injuries resulting in deaths, it was noted that 21 of the 38 victims (55
per cent) died as a result of head injuries."
So come on, lose the blanket you hide behind and talk "head injuries".
Of course I'm sure no studies are valid unless you do them yourself with your huge knowledge of such
matters[SARCASM]
Not trying to pick a fight, just trying to open some eyes, and I still advocate choice on wearing
helmets in adults.
--
Ian
catrike.co.ukcatrike.co.ukOpen ↗
