Helmet saved my...

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 4, 12:59 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> JCrowe wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> JCrowe wrote:
> >>> In the end, the choice to use or not use a helmet does, or at
> >>> least should in a free country, remain with the individual. I
> >>> personally wear one, but I don't care if other people make the same
> >>> choice. BTW, Bill, I hope you heal at a good pace. There are some
> >>> intense hills around La Jolla IIRC.
>
> >> Thank you, J. Ironic thing in this case was that Via Capri is very
> >> gnarly up top -- broken, uneven pavement with all kinds of hazards
> >> -- but where I ate it the road is nice and smooth (recently
> >> re-paved). Had my shoulder X-rayed yesterday and next is P.T. Still
> >> hoping to
> >> avoid need for surgical repair.
>
> >> As for my head, I have absolutely zero injuries or effects from the
> >> fall. My $20 Bell helmet (brand new) saved me from a good deal of
> >> damage. (It's cracked in numerous places and the shell is buckled
> >> where main impact occurred.)
>
> >> I'm not in favor of MHLs, but I sure as hell am in favor of wearing
> >> a lid for all but "boardwalk cruising"-type riding. (And even then,
> >> it doesn't take much to have a nasty fall. Just never know.)
>
> > This issue has the same basic premise that the issue of whether or
> > not an individual chooses to listen to music while riding does. The
> > people favoring passage of laws infringing a rider's right to choose
> > to wear a bicycle helmet or listen to music while riding are, in
> > essence, implying that government has a legitimate power to tell the
> > individual what he can and cannot do to his or her body. Chilling.
>
> So I'll assume you feel the same way about government regulating what and
> where people can smoke, eat, drive, light their homes with, invest their
> money, etc. etc. etc.?
>
> I don't mind seat belt laws or motorcycle helmet laws, because people who
> don't use those simple devices often end up costing everyone much money and
> angst.

And therefore, you shouldn't mind diet laws and exercise laws, because
people who eat too much and exercise too little cost everyone much
more money and angst, right?

Is it time we passed laws to reduce the 750,000 annual American heart
disease deaths, and stopped overreacting to the mere 750 annual
bicycle deaths?

Or is there a chance we should let everyone make their own reasonable
choices about their personal health and that of their kids, so long as
it doesn't directly harm others?

- Frank Krygowski

 

[landotter]

On Jun 4, 8:59 am, Marz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 10:39 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Marz wrote:
> > > On May 30, 12:45 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> ...noggin!
>
> > > As a self confessed AMHLZ, I'm glad to hear that Bill's on his way to
> > > recovery and that the fall was not any worse that it was and I don't
> > > have a problem with this anecdotal account of how a helmet worked.
> > > This, for me, is what a helmet is for, to save your head from bumps
> > > and scratches. I don't think they can save lives or prevent brain
> > > damage, fractured skulls, etc, but they can prevent superficial
> > > injuries and why I always wear one mtbing.
>
> > My whole "Subject:" title was a takeoff on those "helmet saved my life"
> > stories.  HOWEVER, in this case I'm certain that my lid prevented morethan
> > mere "bumps and scratches".  Judging by the huge main crack and numerous
> > inner-core ones, it's clear that my head hit the pavement pretty darned
> > forcefully.  It's not inconceivable that my skull would have been fractured
> > or I'd have been knocked unconcious, or at the very least lost some scalp
> > and even ear pieces.
>
> > I've hit my head seemingly harder while mountain biking more than once, and
> > the helmet(s) showed no damage whatsoever.  That this time its core
> > completely fractured and outer shell buckled tells me that this impact was
> > mmuch more than "superficial".
>
> > The AHZs can believe whatever they choose.  I'll go by what I see and know.
>
> > Bill S.
>
> See, now you've gone off the deep end. There's nothing to show from
> the damage to the helmet how much damage your head may have received.
> Sounds like you hit the helmet at its side, the weakest point and you
> didn't realize you even hit your head until some else pointed out the
> damage to the helmet. If your head had hit the ground with enough
> force to fracture your skull or be knocked unconscious you would have
> known about, helmet or no helmet.
>

Bah, back in the day, we'll have just shook him awake, rinsed out
scrape with a bottle--if even, and if worse came to worse, stuck a
sock on there to keep the blood from dripping with a cycling cap on
top to keep it in place on the ride home. Grrrr. For $50 extra we stop
at the Humane Society for a cat scan! Meow?

 

[Marz]

On Jun 4, 9:46 am, landotter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 4, 8:59 am, Marz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 10:39 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Marz wrote:
> > > > On May 30, 12:45 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> ...noggin!
>
> > > > As a self confessed AMHLZ, I'm glad to hear that Bill's on his way to
> > > > recovery and that the fall was not any worse that it was and I don't
> > > > have a problem with this anecdotal account of how a helmet worked.
> > > > This, for me, is what a helmet is for, to save your head from bumps
> > > > and scratches. I don't think they can save lives or prevent brain
> > > > damage, fractured skulls, etc, but they can prevent superficial
> > > > injuries and why I always wear one mtbing.
>
> > > My whole "Subject:" title was a takeoff on those "helmet saved my life"
> > > stories.  HOWEVER, in this case I'm certain that my lid prevented more than
> > > mere "bumps and scratches".  Judging by the huge main crack and numerous
> > > inner-core ones, it's clear that my head hit the pavement pretty darned
> > > forcefully.  It's not inconceivable that my skull would have been fractured
> > > or I'd have been knocked unconcious, or at the very least lost some scalp
> > > and even ear pieces.
>
> > > I've hit my head seemingly harder while mountain biking more than once, and
> > > the helmet(s) showed no damage whatsoever.  That this time its core
> > > completely fractured and outer shell buckled tells me that this impactwas
> > > mmuch more than "superficial".
>
> > > The AHZs can believe whatever they choose.  I'll go by what I see and know.
>
> > > Bill S.
>
> > See, now you've gone off the deep end. There's nothing to show from
> > the damage to the helmet how much damage your head may have received.
> > Sounds like you hit the helmet at its side, the weakest point and you
> > didn't realize you even hit your head until some else pointed out the
> > damage to the helmet. If your head had hit the ground with enough
> > force to fracture your skull or be knocked unconscious you would have
> > known about, helmet or no helmet.
>
> Bah, back in the day, we'll have just shook him awake, rinsed out
> scrape with a bottle--if even, and if worse came to worse, stuck a
> sock on there to keep the blood from dripping with a cycling cap on
> top to keep it in place on the ride home. Grrrr. For $50 extra we stop
> at the Humane Society for a cat scan! Meow?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Who's sock?

 

[SMS]

JCrowe wrote:

> This discussion has crossed out of relevance to bicycles, but the
> issues with seatbelts and motorcycle helmets are the same. The fly in
> the ointment for arguing in their favor is that individuals are
> responsible for the results of the choices they make.....that
> others should bear financial responsibility for peoples' choices of
> self-endangerment is a warping of what people consider public good.

Some states have waived the motorcycle helmet requirement for riders
that provide proof of medical insurance.

Personally I don't really like this approach because it singles out one
specific form of dangerous behavior that is permitted if the person
engaging in it can prove that they won't be a burden to others should
their behavior result in excessive medical costs.

 

[landotter]

On Jun 4, 9:52 am, Marz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 4, 9:46 am, landotter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 4, 8:59 am, Marz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 2, 10:39 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Marz wrote:
> > > > > On May 30, 12:45 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >> ...noggin!
>
> > > > > As a self confessed AMHLZ, I'm glad to hear that Bill's on his wayto
> > > > > recovery and that the fall was not any worse that it was and I don't
> > > > > have a problem with this anecdotal account of how a helmet worked.
> > > > > This, for me, is what a helmet is for, to save your head from bumps
> > > > > and scratches. I don't think they can save lives or prevent brain
> > > > > damage, fractured skulls, etc, but they can prevent superficial
> > > > > injuries and why I always wear one mtbing.
>
> > > > My whole "Subject:" title was a takeoff on those "helmet saved my life"
> > > > stories.  HOWEVER, in this case I'm certain that my lid prevented more than
> > > > mere "bumps and scratches".  Judging by the huge main crack and numerous
> > > > inner-core ones, it's clear that my head hit the pavement pretty darned
> > > > forcefully.  It's not inconceivable that my skull would have been fractured
> > > > or I'd have been knocked unconcious, or at the very least lost some scalp
> > > > and even ear pieces.
>
> > > > I've hit my head seemingly harder while mountain biking more than once, and
> > > > the helmet(s) showed no damage whatsoever.  That this time its core
> > > > completely fractured and outer shell buckled tells me that this impact was
> > > > mmuch more than "superficial".
>
> > > > The AHZs can believe whatever they choose.  I'll go by what I see and know.
>
> > > > Bill S.
>
> > > See, now you've gone off the deep end. There's nothing to show from
> > > the damage to the helmet how much damage your head may have received.
> > > Sounds like you hit the helmet at its side, the weakest point and you
> > > didn't realize you even hit your head until some else pointed out the
> > > damage to the helmet. If your head had hit the ground with enough
> > > force to fracture your skull or be knocked unconscious you would have
> > > known about, helmet or no helmet.
>
> > Bah, back in the day, we'll have just shook him awake, rinsed out
> > scrape with a bottle--if even, and if worse came to worse, stuck a
> > sock on there to keep the blood from dripping with a cycling cap on
> > top to keep it in place on the ride home. Grrrr. For $50 extra we stop
> > at the Humane Society for a cat scan! Meow?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Who's sock?


Sock's the thing on your head. Now now, that's Charlie to your right,
that's Sara over there, I'm Landotter. Just keep the direct pressure
on your head and don't go into the light--it's not grandpa calling
you, Jerry Falwell's just become a shapeshifter.

 

[dgk]

On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:25:59 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Jun 3, 8:33 am, dgk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:17:45 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>>
>>
>> >I invite SMS to explain clearly why helmets should be so strongly
>> >recommended, or even mandated, for an activity that generates fewer
>> >than 1% of the head injury fatalities in the US; and why they should
>> >_not_ be recommended for the activity that generates roughly 50% of
>> >those fatalities. IOW, be serious: Why bicyclists, why _not_
>> >motorists?
>>
>> >I invite SMS to explain clearly why helmets should be recommended for
>> >an activity that causes 0.19 head injury deaths per million hours, but
>> >not one that causes 0.34 head injury deaths per million hours. IOW,
>> >be serious: why bicyclists, why _not_ pedestrians?
>>
>> >I also invite SMS to explain his frequent claim that mandating helmets
>> >does not reduce bicycling. I've listed citations or links to roughly
>> >12 different studies showing that they definitely do, yet SMS says "no
>> >studies show this." Be serious: Why haven't you read the studies?
>>
>> >In fact, I invite SMS to _any_ serious, factual discussion on this
>> >subject. My hopes are slim, though.
>>
>> >- Frank Krygowski
>>
>> I don't agree with Frank on most of this and I do wear a helmet.
>
>I'm separating my replies, to deal with two topics.
>
>"dgk" says he doesn't agree with me on most of this. I'm curious,
>"dgk," about what factual points you disagree with.
>
>IOW, do you doubt that bicycling causes fewer than 1% of the head
>injury deaths in the US? Do you doubt that motor vehicle occupants
>are about half those fatalities? Or that simple falls around the home
>are about 40%?
>
>Do you have different numbers than I do on the number of head injury
>fatalities per hour for cyclists and for pedestrians? How about for
>motorists? Recall, my numbers show that cycling is NOT very dangerous
>per hour exposure.
>
>Do you have evidence that increasing helmet use has actually
>benefitted cyclists by preventing significant numbers of serious head
>injuries? Remember, my data shows that serious head injuries do not
>decline, per remaining rider - only that fewer people ride.
>
>I've repeatedly given citations for my statements. I can give them
>again, if you like.
>
>Admittedly, most people never think about these things in detail. The
>typical helmet wearing cyclist never reads much beyond the false
>propaganda saying "You could get killed!!!" and "85% benefit!!!"
>
>Have you read more, and found me to be wrong? Or are you just buying
>the propaganda without examining it?
>
>- Frank Krygowski


I think a lot of injuries, and more importantly, prevented injuries,
go unreported. I was biking through the park around dawn two years ago
when there was a loud WACK and something hit the helmet. It was a tree
branch that I never even saw. I went back to take a better look, and
it would have hit me somewhere in the forehead. I doubt I would have
ended up in the emergency room but it likely would have hurt quite a
bit and left a good bruise. It might have hit an eye though. My helmet
is a bit too roughed up to determine where it actually got hit.

I don't always wear a helmet; it depends on what I'm doing. For
standard commuting, 30 miles per day, I wear it. In winter, it doubles
by keeping my head warm. But for a week at Cape May, which is a very
bike friendly town, I don't find it necessary. In fact, no one wears a
helmet in Cape May even though all the bike rental places provide one.
I brink my bike, of course.

 

[SMS]

dgk wrote:

> I think a lot of injuries, and more importantly, prevented injuries,
> go unreported.

This is very true. This is one of the biggest issues with the injury
reports that already show such a large benefit from helmets--they don't
show the injuries that never happen because a helmet was worn, and they
don't show minor injuries that are unreported when they would have been
more major, and reported, injuries without a helmet. Helmet benefits are
vastly understated.

> I don't always wear a helmet; it depends on what I'm doing. For
> standard commuting, 30 miles per day, I wear it. In winter, it doubles
> by keeping my head warm. But for a week at Cape May, which is a very
> bike friendly town, I don't find it necessary. In fact, no one wears a
> helmet in Cape May even though all the bike rental places provide one.
> I brink my bike, of course.

Yes, there are definitely times where a helmet is probably not really
needed. I don't wear one when riding at relatively slow speeds in areas
I'm familiar with, with very little traffic. While commuting I'll
usually wear one, and on recreational rides with a lot of mountain
descents of course it's rare to see someone riding without a helmet.

Of course the AHZ's will come up with all sorts of bogus statistics and
falsehoods regarding injury rates. Fortunately, fewer and fewer people
seem to be falling for their propoganda.

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 4, 11:43 am, dgk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> I don't agree with Frank on most of this and I do wear a helmet.
>
> >I'm separating my replies, to deal with two topics.
>
> >"dgk" says he doesn't agree with me on most of this. I'm curious,
> >"dgk," about what factual points you disagree with.
>
> >IOW, do you doubt that bicycling causes fewer than 1% of the head
> >injury deaths in the US? Do you doubt that motor vehicle occupants
> >are about half those fatalities? Or that simple falls around the home
> >are about 40%?
>
> >Do you have different numbers than I do on the number of head injury
> >fatalities per hour for cyclists and for pedestrians? How about for
> >motorists? Recall, my numbers show that cycling is NOT very dangerous
> >per hour exposure.
>
> >Do you have evidence that increasing helmet use has actually
> >benefitted cyclists by preventing significant numbers of serious head
> >injuries? Remember, my data shows that serious head injuries do not
> >decline, per remaining rider - only that fewer people ride.
>
> >I've repeatedly given citations for my statements. I can give them
> >again, if you like.
>
> >Admittedly, most people never think about these things in detail. The
> >typical helmet wearing cyclist never reads much beyond the false
> >propaganda saying "You could get killed!!!" and "85% benefit!!!"
>
> >Have you read more, and found me to be wrong? Or are you just buying
> >the propaganda without examining it?
>
> >- Frank Krygowski
>
> I think a lot of injuries, and more importantly, prevented injuries,
> go unreported.

Of course! And this is true for every other activity in the world -
especially the "prevented injuries" getting unreported. Can you
imagine the bureaucracy needed to handle every report of _every_
injury?

For example, consider my most significant head injury in the last 20
years: I was working in my garage and hit my head on the bow tip of
my inverted canoe, which was hanging from the garage ceiling. Who
would be interested in that tiny, bloody scratch and bump?

And what would you do with the anecdotes if I regularly wore a bike
helmet while working in my garage? The helmet would take up another
inch and bump the canoe probably every day, sometimes just as hard as
Bill Sornson's "saved my noggin" account.

But somehow, the helmet promoters know to ignore those sorts of
incidences, whether or not a helmet is present. But let the same
thing happen on a bike, and the pride of purchase jumps to the fore.
"Wow, was I smart to buy that essential piece of protective equipment,
because I'm _sure_ I'd be a vegetable without it! Why look, the decal
is torn!"

> I was biking through the park around dawn two years ago
> when there was a loud WACK and something hit the helmet. It was a tree
> branch that I never even saw. I went back to take a better look, and
> it would have hit me somewhere in the forehead. I doubt I would have
> ended up in the emergency room but it likely would have hurt quite a
> bit and left a good bruise. It might have hit an eye though. My helmet
> is a bit too roughed up to determine where it actually got hit.

Don't be so conservative! You need drama in your sales pitch! It
probably would have impaled your very brain, severing your spinal cord
on its way out the back!

BTW, you still haven't specified which of the facts I listed that you
disagree with, or given contrary data.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Bill Sornson]

Marz wrote:
> On Jun 2, 10:39 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Marz wrote:
>>> On May 30, 12:45 am, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> ...noggin!
>>
>>> As a self confessed AMHLZ, I'm glad to hear that Bill's on his way
>>> to recovery and that the fall was not any worse that it was and I
>>> don't have a problem with this anecdotal account of how a helmet
>>> worked. This, for me, is what a helmet is for, to save your head
>>> from bumps and scratches. I don't think they can save lives or
>>> prevent brain damage, fractured skulls, etc, but they can prevent
>>> superficial injuries and why I always wear one mtbing.
>>
>> My whole "Subject:" title was a takeoff on those "helmet saved my
>> life" stories. HOWEVER, in this case I'm certain that my lid
>> prevented more than mere "bumps and scratches". Judging by the huge
>> main crack and numerous inner-core ones, it's clear that my head hit
>> the pavement pretty darned forcefully. It's not inconceivable that
>> my skull would have been fractured or I'd have been knocked
>> unconcious, or at the very least lost some scalp and even ear pieces.
>>
>> I've hit my head seemingly harder while mountain biking more than
>> once, and the helmet(s) showed no damage whatsoever. That this time
>> its core completely fractured and outer shell buckled tells me that
>> this impact was mmuch more than "superficial".
>>
>> The AHZs can believe whatever they choose. I'll go by what I see and
>> know.
>>
>> Bill S.
>
> See, now you've gone off the deep end. There's nothing to show from
> the damage to the helmet how much damage your head may have received.
> Sounds like you hit the helmet at its side, the weakest point and you
> didn't realize you even hit your head until some else pointed out the
> damage to the helmet. If your head had hit the ground with enough
> force to fracture your skull or be knocked unconscious you would have
> known about, helmet or no helmet.

You make my point for me. In a high-speed crash, one doesn't know what has
hit what until one gets up (or tries to). I didn't know my shoulder was
trashed until I attempted to use my right arm. I didn't know my head had
contacted the ground at all until someone told me it was obvious. THEN I
felt the damage to the outer shell, and after that discovered that the core
had not just cracked in one place but many. If that's not an indication
that my head struck the pavement with quite a bit of force, then I'd like to
borrow some of your pharmaceuticals.

Just yesterday I bought the exact same lid as a replacement (19 bucks out
the door), and in setting up the straps and mirror discovered that the
sunglasses I'd been wearing were all scraped up on the right side (rubber
frame pad thing was completely torn up). I had no idea that my scalp/face
had come that close to contact. Without the helmet, it's clear that the
whole right side of my head would have been pretty messed up (granted, to an
unknown degree).

> I agree though it may have saved you from lose of scalp and ear
> pieces.

Even if /just/ that, why deride the use of a helmet?

> I hope the xrays show nothing’s wrong.

Thanks. It hurts a lot today -- naturally felt decent while at the doc's --
so even if xrays are neg (which I expect) I'm pretty sure something's torn
or at least strained pretty damned bad. Gonna try to do a yoga class in an
hour, hiding in the back so no one sees me cry...

Mucho Macho Me

 

[Bill Sornson]

SMS wrote:
> dgk wrote:
>
>> I think a lot of injuries, and more importantly, prevented injuries,
>> go unreported.
>
> This is very true. This is one of the biggest issues with the injury
> reports that already show such a large benefit from helmets--they
> don't show the injuries that never happen because a helmet was worn,
> and they don't show minor injuries that are unreported when they
> would have been more major, and reported, injuries without a helmet.
> Helmet benefits are vastly understated.

There is no doubt in my mind that I'd have taken an ambulance ride last
Thursday if not for the helmet. (See my reply above to recently discovered
scrapes to my sunglass frame.)

Even if the damage had been only superficial (which I highly doubt due to
the helmet's cracking in numerous places), a downed rider with blood
streaming down the side of his head gets a lot more concern and attention
than someone who might be hurt worse but without the blood flow.

>> I don't always wear a helmet; it depends on what I'm doing. For
>> standard commuting, 30 miles per day, I wear it. In winter, it
>> doubles by keeping my head warm. But for a week at Cape May, which
>> is a very bike friendly town, I don't find it necessary. In fact, no
>> one wears a helmet in Cape May even though all the bike rental
>> places provide one. I brink my bike, of course.
>
> Yes, there are definitely times where a helmet is probably not really
> needed. I don't wear one when riding at relatively slow speeds in
> areas I'm familiar with, with very little traffic. While commuting
> I'll usually wear one, and on recreational rides with a lot of
> mountain descents of course it's rare to see someone riding without a
> helmet.
> Of course the AHZ's will come up with all sorts of bogus statistics
> and falsehoods regarding injury rates. Fortunately, fewer and fewer
> people seem to be falling for their propoganda.

Which is why they're getting angrier and angrier. (Heh.)

Bill

 

[SMS]

Bill Sornson wrote:

>> Of course the AHZ's will come up with all sorts of bogus statistics
>> and falsehoods regarding injury rates. Fortunately, fewer and fewer
>> people seem to be falling for their propoganda.
>
> Which is why they're getting angrier and angrier. (Heh.)

They were amusing for a while, but the same old schtick got boring to me
(driving helmets, walking helmets, ignoring ER data while touting whole
populations studies, lack of any citations for their fallacies, trying
to compare injury and fatality rates of various types of transportation
by time rather than distance, etc.). I feel like it was listening to W
and his constantly changing explanations of why we're in Iraq. I think
that all the AHZs must be Republicans (not to say that every Republican
is an AHZ).

My newsgroup is so much cleaner with a gently used kill-file for the
most clueless of the clueless.

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 4, 4:41 pm, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> My newsgroup is so much cleaner with a gently used kill-file for the
> most clueless of the clueless.

And your life is so much simpler if you continually refuse to
discuss the facts! It saves all that tedious thinking!

Again, since you claim "all the studies" show such marvelous helmet
benefit, you should prove it by discussing the information at
http://www.ctcyorkshirehumber.org.uk/campaigns/velo.htm

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Bill Sornson]

SMS wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>
>>> Of course the AHZ's will come up with all sorts of bogus statistics
>>> and falsehoods regarding injury rates. Fortunately, fewer and fewer
>>> people seem to be falling for their propoganda.
>>
>> Which is why they're getting angrier and angrier. (Heh.)
>
> They were amusing for a while, but the same old schtick got boring to
> me (driving helmets, walking helmets, ignoring ER data while touting
> whole populations studies, lack of any citations for their fallacies,
> trying to compare injury and fatality rates of various types of
> transportation by time rather than distance, etc.). I feel like it
> was listening to W and his constantly changing explanations of why
> we're in Iraq.

You mean like Hillary and Bill Clinton, John Kerry, George Tenet, the Brits,
Russians, Israelis, French, etc. etc. etc.?

> I think that all the AHZs must be Republicans (not to
> say that every Republican is an AHZ).

Actually, my observation is exactly opposite: nearly every single AHZ is
left-wing politically, yet many (most) left-wing people are clearly
pro-helmet. (Republicans and conservatives ARE against mandatory helmet
laws for the most part, of course. Not sure about Dems, who favor
restrictions and regulations on almost everything under the sun it seems.)

> My newsgroup is so much cleaner with a gently used kill-file for the
> most clueless of the clueless.

I love to argue, but Frank and Flailor and Ravin' (Mad) and the rest all
became personally abusive and condescending, and it quickly became tiresome
and counter-productive. Life's too short as is.

Bill "live and let live...dammit" S.

 

[Bill Sornson]

For those of you who know about my bike crash (tire blow-out @ 40 mph) two
weeks ago, the verdict is in on X-ray film: broken scapula. (Ow!)

http://www.eorthopod.com/images/ContentImages/shoulder/shoulder_anatomy/shoulder_anatomy_bones01.jpg

Also scheduled for an arthrogram MRI, to see any tears to my labrum, rotator
cuff, assorted tendons, etc.

NO WONDER IT HURTS!

Bill "see, it wasn't my imagination" S.

{OP left below. Link to lid pics now has one tire/tube and one helmet.}


Bill Sornson wrote:
> ...noggin!
>
> Flying down a steep, curvy road today, my front tire blew out just as
> I came around a turn. (4" of bead separated from the casing; fairly
> new Michelin Pro Race 2; no recent flats so not a "tube installation"
> issue.)
> I briefly thought I could save it, but as I headed down and left into
> the oncoming lane a car was headed right in my path so I had no
> choice but to try to steer the bike to the right. BLAM -- down I
> went on my right side at close to 40 mph.
>
> Immediate injury noticed was to my right shoulder. Probable torn
> ligaments if not rotator cuff (ripped previously so familiar with the
> pain). Road rash was surprisingly slight (knee, elbow, hip and
> shoulder -- the latter two protected a bit by Spandex so not visible
> until later).
> Another rider, Mike, came along and helped me. Started to fix my
> flat when he saw the trashed tire bead. (No pics yet.) Called my
> friend Miles (of world famous "Miles Todd crash video" fame) to pick
> me up.
> Then Mike said, "Well, your helmet sure did its job." I touched the
> outside shell and felt a scrape, but had no idea that I'd even hit my
> head, much less cracked the **** out of it:
>
> http://home.san.rr.com:80/billsornson/ (server wouldn't allow more
> than these three pics).
>
> So now it's 8-9 hours later and other than a really messed up
> shoulder I feel pretty decent. Sure my neck is going to be sore as
> hell tomorrow, and may end up needing surgery on the wing (time will
> tell), but no concussion, cracked skull, or hood
> ornament/undercarriage action, so all in all I'm feeling pretty
> fortunate. I just wish it had been my own error instead of an
> obvious product defect (and why couldn't it have been the REAR
> tire?!?)...
> Beaten Up But Not Beat (Yet) Bill

 

[Marz]

On Jun 11, 12:59 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> For those of you who know about my bike crash (tire blow-out @ 40 mph) two
> weeks ago, the verdict is in on X-ray film:  broken scapula.  (Ow!)
>
> - Show quoted text -

OW, indeed. So off the bike for a while then?

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 11, 1:59 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> For those of you who know about my bike crash (tire blow-out @ 40 mph) two
> weeks ago, the verdict is in on X-ray film: broken scapula. (Ow!)
>
> http://www.eorthopod.com/images/ContentImages/shoulder/shoulder_anato...
>
> Also scheduled for an arthrogram MRI, to see any tears to my labrum, rotator
> cuff, assorted tendons, etc.
>
> NO WONDER IT HURTS!
>
> Bill "see, it wasn't my imagination" S.

From now on: http://tinyurl.com/47b72l

Why, if only _one_ scapula can be saved....!

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Bill Sornson]

Marz wrote:
> On Jun 11, 12:59 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> For those of you who know about my bike crash (tire blow-out @ 40
>> mph) two weeks ago, the verdict is in on X-ray film: broken scapula.
>> (Ow!)
>>
>> - Show quoted text -

> OW, indeed. So off the bike for a while then?

Well, an intelligent person would say yes. I did a 40-mile ride last Friday
and a 20 Monday; just got diagnosis today. Doc said to baby it for 4-6
weeks -- and of course I still don't know about labrum, cuff, or other meaty
bits. (And, if it doesn't heal right, then surgery with pins and screws
still possible.)

I just did a one-armed-but-still-painful yoga class. Will keep riding to a
minimum, I guess, as pain allows. (It's not too bad on the bike, but
stopping hurts like hell, and a fall would be truly excruciating -- not to
mention dangerous.)

Bill "still got off lucky, but..." S.

 

[Paul O]

Frank Krygowski wrote, On 6/11/2008 5:04 PM:
> On Jun 11, 1:59 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> For those of you who know about my bike crash (tire blow-out @ 40 mph) two
>> weeks ago, the verdict is in on X-ray film: broken scapula. (Ow!)
>>
>> http://www.eorthopod.com/images/ContentImages/shoulder/shoulder_anato...
>>
>> Also scheduled for an arthrogram MRI, to see any tears to my labrum, rotator
>> cuff, assorted tendons, etc.
>>
>> NO WONDER IT HURTS!
>>
>> Bill "see, it wasn't my imagination" S.
>>
>
> From now on: http://tinyurl.com/47b72l
>
> Why, if only _one_ scapula can be saved....!
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>
If Bill starts wearing body armor, then people will get the impression
that cycling is an unsafe activity... ;-)

--

Paul D Oosterhout
I work for SAIC (but I don't speak for SAIC)

 

[Bill Sornson]

Paul O wrote:
> Frank Krygowski wrote, On 6/11/2008 5:04 PM:
>> On Jun 11, 1:59 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> For those of you who know about my bike crash (tire blow-out @ 40
>>> mph) two weeks ago, the verdict is in on X-ray film: broken
>>> scapula. (Ow!)
>>> http://www.eorthopod.com/images/ContentImages/shoulder/shoulder_anato...
>>>
>>> Also scheduled for an arthrogram MRI, to see any tears to my
>>> labrum, rotator cuff, assorted tendons, etc.
>>>
>>> NO WONDER IT HURTS!
>>>
>>> Bill "see, it wasn't my imagination" S.
>>>
>>
>> From now on: http://tinyurl.com/47b72l
>>
>> Why, if only _one_ scapula can be saved....!
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
> If Bill starts wearing body armor, then people will get the impression
> that cycling is an unsafe activity... ;-)

Broken bones, possible major surgery... Nah, nothing wrong here!

If I stayed on bike paths like Frank, I'd prolly not even bother with a
helmet. (Also discovered that my sunglasses were totally scraped on right
side of frame, so lid -- which cracked in numerous places -- also helped
keep my scalp and face off the pavement, in addition to offering skull
protection.)

BTW, at least I was willing to ride home with a broken shoulder (tire was
trashed so couldn't), unlike certain people who go to the ER every time they
fall over in the parking lot (or get doored, like HWNMNBM).

Let's do an experiment: Frank recreates my fall riding lidless. (Oh, wait,
he never gets anywhere close to 40 mph.)

BS (callin' 'n sniffin' it)

 

[Frank Krygowski]

On Jun 11, 6:53 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> If I stayed on bike paths like Frank, I'd prolly not even bother with a
> helmet.

See http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Recreation/ALittleSummerRide.htm


> Let's do an experiment: Frank recreates my fall riding lidless.

Sorry, Bill, I'm smart enough to stay upright.

> (Oh, wait, he never gets anywhere close to 40 mph.)

I _will_ admit to not yet breaking 55 mph. The day I had the best
shot at it, a motorist was in my way, so 54 is my personal record.

But really, where _does_ Bill get his wild ideas?

- Frank Krygowski