Hope survives!

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Rick Onanian, Mar 15, 2004.

  1. Rick Onanian

    Rick Onanian Guest

    There is hope yet...I saw no less than 6 bikes parked at a
    school today. Kids are riding.
    --
    Rick Onanian
     
    Tags:


  2. Raoul Duke

    Raoul Duke Guest

    "Rick Onanian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > There is hope yet...I saw no less than 6 bikes parked at a
    > school today. Kids are riding.
    > --
    > Rick Onanian

    You are the optimist. Six bikes at a school where there are
    - presumably - hundreds of students? There are more than six
    bikes in my garage.

    Still, better than nothin'.

    Dave
     
  3. Rick Onanian

    Rick Onanian Guest

    On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 12:52:28 -0800, "Raoul Duke"
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    >"Rick Onanian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> There is hope yet...I saw no less than 6 bikes parked at
    >> a school today. Kids are riding.
    >
    >You are the optimist. Six bikes at a school where there are
    >- presumably - hundreds of students? There are more than
    >six bikes in my garage.

    There are more than six bikes in my various places to stash
    bikes, too. However, the school is only easily accessible
    from one small neighborhood; it's on a corner with that
    neighborhood's access street, and a highway which is a bit
    of a tough road for cyclists, let alone children who don't
    understand the rules of the road. I should have mentioned
    that originally.

    >Still, better than nothin'.

    Absolutely.
    --
    Rick Onanian
     
  4. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    Where do you live Rick? One nut case here told us that there
    were still hundreds of childrenriding bikes to school in the
    south San Francisco bay area. When I asked people that live
    down there they told me he was nuts.

    In the east bay there are essentially none.

    Thank you local helmet ordinanaces. After all, the helmet
    bill got thousands of children to stop riding bicycles and
    saved almost 10 lives per year. Of course 100 times that
    many now are suffering from overweigh and lack of exercise.
    I just heard that my 20 year old nephew has diabetis caused
    by being overweight and diet.

    Ain't America great?

    "Rick Onanian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 12:52:28 -0800, "Raoul Duke"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >"Rick Onanian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >> There is hope yet...I saw no less than 6 bikes parked
    > >> at a school today. Kids are riding.
    > >
    > >You are the optimist. Six bikes at a school where
    > >there are -
    presumably -
    > >hundreds of students? There are more than six bikes in my
    > >garage.
    >
    > There are more than six bikes in my various places to
    > stash bikes, too. However, the school is only easily
    > accessible from one small neighborhood; it's on a corner
    > with that neighborhood's access street, and a highway
    > which is a bit of a tough road for cyclists, let alone
    > children who don't understand the rules of the road. I
    > should have mentioned that originally.
    >
    > >Still, better than nothin'.
    >
    > Absolutely.
    > --
    > Rick Onanian
     
  5. Dane Jackson

    Dane Jackson Guest

    Tom Kunich <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Thank you local helmet ordinanaces. After all, the helmet
    > bill got thousands of children to stop riding bicycles and
    > saved almost 10 lives per year. Of course 100 times that
    > many now are suffering from overweigh and lack of
    > exercise. I just heard that my 20 year old nephew has
    > diabetis caused by being overweight and diet.

    Yup, they call it "early onset" type II Diabetes. My brother
    got it at 28, which is precisely how old I am now. If I
    hadn't worked for the last couple years on eating better and
    getting more exercise I would have probably been diagnosed
    with that shortly myself.

    http://www.defeatdiabetes.org/Articles/kids030421.htm

    --
    Dane Jackson - z u v e m b i @ u n i x b i g o t s . o r g
    "...you might as well skip the Xmas celebration completely,
    and instead sit in front of your linux computer playing
    with the all-new-and-improved linux kernel version." (By
    Linus Torvalds)
     
  6. Rick Warner

    Rick Warner Guest

    "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Where do you live Rick? One nut case here told us that
    > there were still hundreds of childrenriding bikes to
    > school in the south San Francisco bay area. When I asked
    > people that live down there they told me he was nuts.
    >
    > In the east bay there are essentially none.

    Not sure of the south bay, but there are hundreds in the
    lower peninsula area - Palo Alto, Los Altos, Mountain View.
    Pass them all the time, long lines of them trodding off to
    school on their bikes in the mornings.
     
  7. Peter

    Peter Guest

    Tom Kunich wrote:

    > Where do you live Rick? One nut case here told us that
    > there were still hundreds of childrenriding bikes to
    > school in the south San Francisco bay area. When I asked
    > people that live down there they told me he was nuts.
    >
    > In the east bay there are essentially none.
    >
    > Thank you local helmet ordinanaces. After all, the helmet
    > bill got thousands of children to stop riding bicycles and
    > saved almost 10 lives per year.

    Not sure where in the East Bay you checked Tom, but
    'essentially none' sounds like an exageration. I just
    checked the nearest schools to me in San Ramon and got the
    following counts: elem. - 21; middle - 68; high - 38. Quite
    a few kids riding on the bike trail as well. Most have
    learned that the helmet law is only enforced at the school
    and/or at home. So the helmets are almost all dangling from
    their handlebars when they're actually riding.

    The numbers are certainly down from what they had been in
    the '90s, but are not yet zero.
     
  8. On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:28:09 GMT, Peter <[email protected]> wrote:

    >So the helmets are almost all dangling from their
    >handlebars when they're actually riding.

    Hell, in Maryland the helmet law doesn't apply to the bike
    trails. You can occasionally see families ride up to the
    trail in Severna Park on a wide shoulder and take off their
    helmets together and ride the trail. While I'm not a fanatic
    one way or the other, the B&A Trail has some pretty unsafe
    crossings. Wonder if they put them back on for those
    crossings...

    Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
    two wheels...
     
  9. Only six? I hope it was a small school!

    Many mothers won't let their kids ride nowadays. it's
    dangerous enough out there forn us adults (Esp, in the
    bigger cities).

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    "May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear
    for the hills!"

    Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

    Chris'Z Corner http://www.geocities.com/czcorner
     
  10. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    Dr. Russell, you make my point a great deal better than I
    do. The helmet can make the most common head injuries on
    a bicycle marginally less serious. On the other hand
    they ain't all that serious to begin with ad there
    aren't that many of them. So how did helmets ever become
    any sort of discussion point in the USA?

    "Curtis L. Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in
    message news:[email protected]...
    > On 16 Mar 2004 20:15:45 GMT, [email protected] (Xbaycb)
    > wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >I have been hit by automobiles three times while bike
    > >riding, each time
    while
    > >wearing a helmet. The first time my helmeted head
    > >shattered the car's windshield, the second time my
    > >helmeted head cracked the windshield while
    the
    > >car's fender broke my knee cap, the third time I was
    > >thrown over my
    handlebars
    > >and my helmet cracked when I hit the ground head first.
    > >
    > >If it weren't for my helmets, I wouldn't be alive today
    > >getting ready for
    a
    > >century ride next month.
    >
    > You're a statistical anomaly and either incredibly unlucky
    > or incredibly inept. And you manage to have at least two
    > accidents that don't follow the normal pattern of
    > collision.
    >
    > I've seen two people shatter auto windows - one a rear,
    > one a front. Both wouldn't have an idea of what happened
    > to their helmet as they both ended up in an ambulance from
    > the loss of blood. Both were well in excess of 25 mph,
    > probably nearer to 35 in a sprint.
    >
    > The problem with the two sides of the argument is that it
    > simply isn't that simple. OOH, just because a person gives
    > up cycling doesn't mean that they give up exercise. I
    > doubt many active people simply decide to sit down. OTOH,
    > bicycling without a helmet IS a lot better long term than
    > no exercise at all. OTOOH, bicycling with a helmet is
    > probably marginally safer (and helmets are both cheaper,
    > other than the latest models, and more accepted nowadays)
    > than riding without one.
    >
    > I stopped worrying about people riding without helmets
    > when I ran statistics on emergency rooms as part of my job
    > for more than a year and found that, anecdotal 'evidence'
    > from everyone from victims to emergency room professionals
    > aside, bicycling accidents are not a driving force in
    > serious long-term injury and disability or death. Totally
    > insignificant on morbidity, minor on serious accidents.
    > Period. If someone wants to ride without a helmet, I don't
    > feel compelled to scream something about them paying their
    > own way. I know that as far as at least five major
    > insurance companies are concerned , it isn't an billing
    > issue, not even a penny. So I'm not paying for their
    > insurance because it isn't a factor. Isn't even a
    > capitation factor.
    >
    > Basically - it means its their business until you solve
    > issues like AIDS, diabetes, asthma, hypertension, auto
    > accidents, drinking, well, the list goes on. These drive
    > insurance costs, not the very occasional long-term care
    > patient from bicycling.
    >
    > Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
    > two wheels... With a son that gave up cycling and took
    > up skateboarding. Is it a requirement that they fall
    > face first?
     
  11. On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:06:03 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >Dr. Russell, you make my point a great deal better than
    > I do.

    Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
    two wheels...
     
  12. On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:06:03 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >Dr. Russell, you make my point a great deal better than
    > I do.

    Not a doctor - just the CFO of a clinic group that was
    capitated (paid on a fixed-fee per member basis, where
    knowing your financial risk per patient is rather important
    to survival) by one insurance company and reimbursed for the
    most part by four others. Amazing what you can do with
    Excel's pivot tables if you set it up right and have lots of
    memory, and get the CDs from the companies.

    Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on
    two wheels...
     
  13. Austinmn

    Austinmn Guest

    Rick Onanian wrote:
    > There is hope yet...I saw no less than 6 bikes parked at a
    > school today. Kids are riding.

    My son once attended a school with 5 or 6 bikes in a rack
    outside. All of them were clearly abandoned, because the
    chains were rusted, tires flat, etc.

    He didn't ride because we were so close it was faster to
    walk than get out the bike, ride it 75 feet, and then
    lock it up.

    Austin
     
  14. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    Chris Zacho "The Wheelman" wrote:

    > Only six? I hope it was a small school!
    >
    > Many mothers won't let their kids ride nowadays. it's
    > dangerous enough out there forn us adults (Esp, in the
    > bigger cities).

    In what way? Both traffic accidents and crime rates are
    lower now than in the 70s -- when everyone I knew rode to
    school, from about the third grade up. There's no more
    danger, just paranoia.

    Matt O.
     
  15. Tom Kunich

    Tom Kunich Guest

    "Curtis L. Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 03:06:03 GMT, "Tom Kunich"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Dr. Russell, you make my point a great deal better than I
    > > do.
    >
    > Not a doctor - just the CFO of a clinic group that was
    > capitated (paid on a fixed-fee per member basis, where
    > knowing your financial risk per patient is rather
    > important to survival) by one insurance company and
    > reimbursed for the most part by four others. Amazing what
    > you can do with Excel's pivot tables if you set it up
    > right and have lots of memory, and get the CDs from the
    > companies.
    >
    > Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two
    > wheels...

    Whoops, that MD was Maryland. That's the trouble with being
    farsighted and wearing dirty glasses.

    And that's just as well. I don't suppose someone who has
    had a moderate concussion would think of it as a "minor
    injury" even if he has full recovery and no after effects.
    However, I do believe that I've estimated (from the data
    I've been able to dig up here and there) that serious head
    injuries in bike accidents (defined as having to stay at
    least one night in the hospital) are somewhere in the
    neighborhood of 1,250 per year for the entire USA with the
    vast majority on the very low end of the scale and not very
    many of the truly serious head injuries. Fatal accidents
    almost always have multiple fatal injuries but EM room
    physicians have told me that they generally sign the most
    immediate cause of death as the cause of death. Which means
    that a man with a broken skull, a crushed heart and mashed
    spine with have a single cause of death of "head injury" in
    most of the cases despite the fact that the records are
    meant to be more complete than that.

    BTW, that number was derived from hospital data that claims
    that there are approximately 4-5 times the numbers of
    serious injuries as fatalities in vehicular accidents. And
    other data which said that "only" 40% of these injuries
    included head injuries. Since there are some 500 fatalities
    per year times 5 * 500 = 2500 * 50% = 1250

    Since I've also seen data that claims that there are some
    30,000 emergency rooms across the USA (this one seems a bit
    tenuous but I've seen it in THREE places so I'll use it)
    that would seem to indicate that on the average each
    emergency room would see a fatality or a serious injury to a
    cyclist about once every 10 years.

    In practice they see about 50 times that many because of the
    prevalance of minor injuries in minor bicycle accidents.

    However, it is likely that country emergency rooms will
    never see a seroius bicycle accident in their lifetimes
    since fatal and serious accidents seem to be grouped around
    large cities.

    The real message here is that bicycle accidents of magnitude
    are so rare that wearing a helmet for them is sort of like
    wearing suspenders in case your belt breaks. Far better to
    learn to ride more observant and safely that to wear a
    helmet. The effects are a hell of a lot more varifiable.
     
  16. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

    Tom Kunich wrote:

    > ... So how did helmets ever become any sort of discussion
    > point in the USA?...

    There was a pressing need for a topic that would produce
    long and annoying discussion on Usenet cycling groups. ;)

    --
    Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)
     
  17. "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Where do you live Rick? One nut case here told us that
    > there were still hundreds of childrenriding bikes to
    > school in the south San Francisco bay area. When I asked
    > people that live down there they told me he was nuts.
    >
    > In the east bay there are essentially none.
    >
    > Thank you local helmet ordinanaces. After all, the helmet
    > bill got
    thousands
    > of children to stop riding bicycles and saved almost 10
    > lives per year. Of course 100 times that many now are
    > suffering from overweigh and lack of exercise. I just
    > heard that my 20 year old nephew has diabetis caused by
    > being overweight and diet.
    >
    > Ain't America great?

    "Hundreds" is a pretty safe bet for the peninsula and south
    bay. I see kids riding their bikes to my kid's elementary
    school, probably only about ten kids. Lots of kids walk to
    school. Too many are driven.

    Blaming the helmet laws for this is ridiculous. Where did
    you get the idea that helmet laws got thousands of kids to
    stop riding bicycles to school, or otherwise? The factors
    are really the inflated fear of abductions, the general
    decline in the quality of drivers, and both parents working
    and the kid going to after school care.

    The helmet laws have nothing to do with suburban kids no
    longer riding their bikes to school.
     
  18. Austinmn

    Austinmn Guest

    Steven M. Scharf wrote

    > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:-
    > [email protected]
    > >
    > > Thank you local helmet ordinanaces. After all, the
    > > helmet bill got
    > thousands
    > > of children to stop riding bicycles and saved almost 10
    > > lives per year.
    Of
    > > course 100 times that many now are suffering from
    > > overweigh and lack of exercise. I just heard that my 20
    > > year old nephew has diabetis caused by being overweight
    > > and diet.
    > >
    > > Ain't America great?
    >

    <snip>

    >
    > Blaming the helmet laws for this is ridiculous. Where did
    > you get the idea that helmet laws got thousands of kids to
    > stop riding bicycles to school,
    or
    > otherwise? The factors are really the inflated fear of
    > abductions, the general decline in the quality of drivers,
    > and both parents working and
    the
    > kid going to after school care.
    >
    > The helmet laws have nothing to do with suburban kids no
    > longer riding
    their
    > bikes to school.

    Helmet laws convinced parents that cycling was dangerous.
    That was how they were enacted in the first place, convince
    enough people that cycling is dangerous, and that you will
    most certainly die without our helmet.

    Parents who saw through that, got their kids helmets, and
    made them wear them (for legal reasons), soon had kids who
    didn't want to ride because they didn't want to wear that
    stupid thing on their heads.

    IMHO, MHL's are the single biggest factor in kids not riding
    bikes, to school or otherwise.

    Austin
     
  19. David Kerber

    David Kerber Guest

    In article <[email protected]
    news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, [email protected] says...

    ...

    > Helmet laws convinced parents that cycling was dangerous.
    > That was how they were enacted in the first place,
    > convince enough people that cycling is dangerous, and that
    > you will most certainly die without our helmet.
    >
    > Parents who saw through that, got their kids helmets, and
    > made them wear them (for legal reasons), soon had kids who
    > didn't want to ride because they didn't want to wear that
    > stupid thing on their heads.
    >
    > IMHO, MHL's are the single biggest factor in kids not
    > riding bikes, to school or otherwise.

    It may have been at one time, but people are used to
    seeing them now, and kids don't think they look (as)
    stupid any more.

    --
    Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
    the newsgroups if possible).
     
  20. On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 07:50:25 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Blaming the helmet laws for this is ridiculous. Where did
    >you get the idea that helmet laws got thousands of kids to
    >stop riding bicycles to school, or otherwise? The factors
    >are really the inflated fear of abductions, the general
    >decline in the quality of drivers, and both parents working
    >and the kid going to after school care.

    The inflated fear of abductions is definitely a factor. No
    parent watching the surveillance tape of that Bruscia girl
    taken in Florida is really going to be that willing to leave
    their kids alone, even if for a second.

    In my area, fiscal calculations have led to a consolidation
    of elementary schools; where kids used to walk or cycle to
    school, they now are driven, or take the bus, since the
    schools themselves are (for most of them) much further away
    than they used to.

    Distance compounds all the fears and problems associated
    with letting your kids out of sight and off to school.

    Some can't cover the distance on foot or on the bicycle
    at all. (This is the time an oldtimer will chime in that
    they walked five miles in three foot snow to go to a one-
    room schoolhouse. Kids and parents don't do that sort of
    thing now.)

    The distance will expose them to heavy-traffic suburban
    arterials full of road-raging automobile commuter traffic,
    anxious to shave a precious ten seconds on their sixty-
    minute commute.

    Other public resources--police and crossing-guards--can only
    be deployed within a reasonably small radius around the
    school (funding, again!), so that abduction fear comes into
    play again as kids are meant to cross unsurveilled
    territory.

    I don't think parents are scared to have their kids riding
    bicycles at all; that would reflect itself in sales figures.
    More scared parents, fewer bikes for kids. And, in
    neighborhood streets, you can still see kids on their bikes
    doing regular kids-on-bikes stuff: tricks, races, etc.

    What's really at work here is the mind-set that kids on toys
    (bicycles) should not be on the road, that bicycles are not
    really a way of getting from point A to point B, and that
    the roads are far too dangerous--the same perceptions that
    prevent anyone from cycling for transport.

    We all know, of course, that the question of traffic safety
    is a question of governance on the one hand--better, more
    visible, more exemplary enforcement--and self-governance--
    more disciplined and less-aggressive driving-- on the other.
    But since the motorist is extremely put-out when subject to
    the former and too put-upon (from his perspective) to
    practice the latter, we stagnate in the same cycle of fear.

    -Luigi

    >
    >The helmet laws have nothing to do with suburban kids no
    >longer riding their bikes to school.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - survives
  1. jujubi
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,358
Loading...