Helmets

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 10:39:24 GMT, Andy Leighton <[email hidden]>
wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

Gonzalez said:

Andy Leighton said:

>>Riders heads are 8ft off the ground Cyclists
>>....er...aren't
>
> 6 feet.

How do you work that out?

I'm 6' 1" tall. When cycling, sitting upright, my head is
about 6' off the ground.

Sorry - I thought you were contesting the riders' heads
bit. A bit of poor comprehension from me. When on a bike my
head is about 5' 6" from the road - on a horse about 8'.
Furthermore the ways of falling from a horse (namely
backwards if it rears) are more likely to result in me
hitting my head IMO.

And result in hitting the rear of your head on the surface,
rather than the forehead.

Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 10:37:09 +0100, "Tony Raven"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

How many of you with clipless pedals are complying
with the law?

Me. My bike was made in 1985 ;-)

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

We'll just have to disagree here. I firmly believe that a
child wearing a helmet is less likely to suffer head
injury than a child without a helmet.

Why do you believe that, when the statistical evidence
shows the opposite? Is it just superstition, or do you
have access to some data the rest of us don't have?

<pedant> You both agree with the statement. It's the
reduction of serious head injuries that you don't agree
on. </pedant

Tony Raven said:

How many of you with clipless pedals are complying
with the law?

Me. Cleats one side of the pedal, no cleat on the other
side. A total of four reflectors.

For information on a great new product being used as an additional
safety feature on motor cycle helmets please check out this web site:
riderlight.comriderlight.comOpen ↗

Tony Raven said:

Gonzalez said:

Have you tried running it?

I've walked it in summer, winter, sunshine and ice. Running
it does not mean you are running on every single step of
the way. You run where you can and don't where you can't.
That's why its a lot more energetic but not a lot more
difficult to run as to walk.

And there you have me at an advantage. I have walked it
once, Snowdon to Pen-y-pass, in summer but moderately
high winds.

I have, however, walked the Aonach Eagach in winter
conditions, and hope to walk the Cuillin in early June for
the first time. I will take a helmet.

you know? said:

You are clutching at straws. The most valid comparison, in
as much as there is one, is between pedestrians and
cyclists.

Poppycock.

To view an interesting AND new product used for additional safety on
motor cycle helmets please visit this site:
riderlight.comriderlight.comOpen ↗

On 25 Apr 2004 10:12:43 -0700, [email hidden] (JustMe)

wrote in message : said:

For information on a great new product being used as an
additional safety feature on motor cycle helmets please
check out this web site: riderlight.comriderlight.comOpen ↗

Ooh! Helmet spam. Imagine!

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:13:37 +0100, Gonzalez
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You are clutching at straws. The most valid comparison, in
as much as there is one, is between pedestrians and
cyclists.

Quoted message said:

Poppycock.

Thank you, yes, that was the word I was looking for. NOw
please explain why cyclists should be compared with sailors
and horse riders but not pedestrians.

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

Gonzalez said:

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 10:13:02 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you

know? said:

You are clutching at straws. The most valid comparison,
in as much as there is one, is between pedestrians and
cyclists.

Poppycock.

I take it you've taking to using a description of your reply
as shorthand.

Tony

On 24/4/04 9:21 pm, in article [email hidden],

Gonzalez said:

Russ said:

Quoted message said:

Indeed. I've even seen people get off the train at the
top of Snowdon in high heels. But I wouldn't recommend
trainers, wellies or even sandals for an ascent of
Snowdon from Pen-y-pass via Crib Goch.

Bet the fell runners might disagree about the trainers,

I have two friends who have run Crib Goch. I still
wouldn't recommend
it.

I have run down the Pyg track in plastic mountaineering
boots. I wouldn't recommend that either..

I have climbed Snowdon as the fifth person on a rope of five
up central gully, without a helmet (stupid) and without a
proper harness (improvised webbing one.. also not ideal but
not so stupid).

I wear walking boots to work occasionally. I rarely wear a
cycle helmet when at my desk (or a climbing harness for
that matter).

..d

On 24/4/04 9:43 pm, in article [email hidden],

Just zis Guy said:

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 18:52:27 +0100, Gonzalez
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

It hasn't been unknown. Walking up Tryfan, for example,
I've been known to wear a helmet.

You can't walk up Tryfan. The easiest route is a
scramble :-D

Yes you can. I have several friends who have walked up
Tryfan with their hands in their pockets (apart from the
final ascent of adam and eve).

The easiest route is the south ridge. I haven't been up the
east face since the pinnacle fell down.

..d

On 24/4/04 9:25 pm, in article [email hidden],

Just zis Guy said:

Quoted message said:

I don't know of a single life or injury which has been
saved on a passenger airline in the last three decades by
a life jacket.

l:http://www.guardian.co.uk/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-
24852,00.html>

That link has these quotes which are some of the few
relating to actual incidents

"A friend of my mother's (a Dr Duncan Chisolm) was flying
from England to Le Touquet on a small aeroplane in the
sixties when they encountered problems and were forced to
land in the English Channel. There were not enough life
jackets to go arround and two passengers ,Duncan included,
had to do with out. The two without lifejackets had to tread
water and swim around whilst they all waited to be rescued.
This saved their lives as the passengers with lifejackets
all died of hypothermia.

William Green, Finchley, England

Life jackets for passengers are very useful, but in certain
instances they are lethal. I have heard of an incident
where a plane had to ditch but on doing the plane being to
sink quite quickly. some of the passenger had inflated
there life jackets before the plane hit the water and were
unable to exit the plane so they drowned. other passenger
who had exited the plane before inflating their life
jackets were fine

Chris, Bristol "

Hmm..

..d

David Martin said:

and without a proper harness (improvised webbing one..
also not ideal but not so stupid).

When I were a lad we did all our climbing on a rope round
the waist with a bowline and two half hitches (mind you
harnesses do hurt less when you do come off)

Tony

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:51:03 +0100, David Martin
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Yes you can. I have several friends who have walked up
Tryfan with their hands in their pockets (apart from the
final ascent of adam and eve).

And I know of no way to get to the top without making that
final ascent, so...

I have been told since I was knee high to an HP Velotechnic
Grasshopper that Tryfan is the only "proper" mountain in
Snowdonia because it is the only one you cannot climb with
your hands in your pockets. I don't mind that, it's coming
down I don't like. Give me the Carneddau any time.

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On 25/4/04 8:37 pm, in article [email hidden],

Just zis Guy said:

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:51:03 +0100, David Martin
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Yes you can. I have several friends who have walked up
Tryfan with their hands in their pockets (apart from the
final ascent of adam and eve).

And I know of no way to get to the top without making that
final ascent, so...

picky, picky. I presume you have done the pressups across
the two stones then?

One could have assistance.. to get up that last bit (a
willing friend's back for example) allowing for the hands to
remain in the pockets.

And it is very hard to get into the train carriage at the
bottom of snowdon without using your hands.. ;-)

Quoted message said:

I have been told since I was knee high to an HP
Velotechnic Grasshopper that Tryfan is the only "proper"
mountain in Snowdonia because it is the only one you
cannot climb with your hands in your pockets. I don't mind
that, it's coming down I don't like. Give me the Carneddau
any time.

Last time I came down the carneddau was after a nice ascent
of amphitheatre buttress, walk along the ridge and down pen
y ole wen. Didn't get on the path so ended up boulder
hopping down the heather.

Never ridden a bike in snowdonia though I was always tempted
to sling one onto the minibus.

..d

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 21:48:46 +0100, David Martin
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Last time I came down the carneddau was after a nice ascent
of amphitheatre buttress, walk along the ridge and down pen
y ole wen. Didn't get on the path so ended up boulder
hopping down the heather.

Last time I did the Carneddau was actually as part of my
Duke of Edinburgh gold expedition - the route was described
as "a bit epic" by assessors ;-)

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote:

| Patrick Herring wrote:
| >
| > A MHL would mean that if someone stole your helmet, and
| > the traffic was very light, and you decided to cycle
| > home anyway because you wanted to go out later and
| > otherwise you'd be late, and a car drove into you giving
| > you an injury that left you with a permanently lame leg,
| > for e.g., you'd have no way of getting any compensation,
| > none at all, zip, nada. There's no way you can get
| > insurance against the effects of doing something
| > illegal. So the MHL wouldn't just compel you to do
| > something you're already doing, it would also take away
| > your current choice to do anything else, no matter what
| > the circumstances.
|
| That's not how it works. You might get reduced
| compensation because of contributory negligence but that
| would only happen if they could show your lame leg was a
| consequence of a head injury which might not have occurred
| if you had been wearing a helmet. Otherwise almost no
| accident would count.

But we know some insurers now try to use an absence of a
helmet as a reduction mechanism, and that's without a MHL. I
suspect it would be much worse than "might get reduced
compensation", particularly as they could write it in as a
specific clause so it would get invoked as indicating
contributory negligence, when there was doubt as to who
caused what, even when irrelevant to the injury.

--
Patrick Herring, Sheffield, UK anweald.co.ukanweald.co.ukOpen ↗

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote:

| On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 00:47:18 +0100, Gonzalez
| <[email hidden]> wrote in message
| <[email hidden]>:
|
| >Would you treat recreational pedestrians differently from
| >commuting pedestrians?
|
| The Government does. But that is an aside.
|
| Now give us your reasons why two groups of people engaged
| in human-powered transportation, whose injury severity
| ratios and head injury proportions are comparable, and who
| are both most likely to die or be seriously injured when
| encountering a motor vehicle, should be treated completely
| differently?

There is an easy (devils-advocate) answer to that: "we
have to start somewhere and there already is a purpose-
designed helmet familiar to cycling culture". What would
you reply to that?

--
Patrick Herring, Sheffield, UK anweald.co.ukanweald.co.ukOpen ↗