Hope survives!



K

Keith Willoughb

Guest
<Rick Onanian> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:56:37 -0500, Luigi de Guzman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>is the time an oldtimer will chime in that they walked
>>five miles in three foot snow to go to a one-room
>>schoolhouse.
>
> ..."With no shoes" ..."because we hadn't yet invented
> FEET!" ..."we had to walk on our ankles" ..."there was no
> pavement under the snow, just wood with sharp nails
> sticking up out of it" ..."each one of us had to pull a
> six foot plow on the way to school so our parents would
> have clean roads to get to work"

"uphill both ways"

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/ 01 811 8055
 
R

Ryan Cousineau

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
Mark Hickey <[email protected]> wrote:

> Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>I don't know if you'd call it sarcasm. But surely you
> >>have to understand that everyone that has ever fallen
> >>off of a bike will tell you that their life was saved by
> >>their helmet. This should give you an idea of just how
> >>far off people's ideas of injury and death are.
> >
> >I've fallen with and without helmets. The little foam hat
> >did nothing but sit on my head.
>
> They *can* do a bit more than that. For a totally
> anecdotal example, see:
> http://www.habcycles.com/bikecrash.html
>
> With the helmet on, I still had a bad enough concussion to
> experience significant memory issues for months. Without
> it? I'll never know, but I can't imagine that it wouldn't
> have been considerably worse.

This accident will go down in the annals of Habanero
history, just like Dylan's motorcycle accident* or Steve
Wozniak's plane crash**. Is it true that in the aftermath,
you've decided to simplify and built a single frame that can
be either a track bike, a road bike, or a 29er MTB?

*There is a theory, which may have been confirmed by now,
that Dylan's accident wasn't nearly as serious as it was
made out to be, but that he used a minor accident as an
excuse to take some time off from a gruelling concert
schedule. My favourite assessment is this one:

http://www.4freeessays.com/essays/1886.shtml

"In 1966 Bob had a fatal motorcycle accident..."

I'm sure it wasn't that bad.

**Woz really slowed down his participation in Apple after
the plane crash. He suffered a brain injury serious enough
that he suffered from amnesia for weeks.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected]
http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/ President, Fabrizio
Mazzoleni Fan Club
 
T

Tom Sherman

Guest
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> ... Although to be fair the fact that helmeteers have
> accused me of being in favour of children ending up as
> vegetables doesn't exactly endear the pro lobby to me....

Children as vegetables - how ridiculous.

Jonathan Swift
 
D

David Reuteler

Guest
Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
>> ... Although to be fair the fact that helmeteers have
>> accused me of being in favour of children ending up as
>> vegetables doesn't exactly endear the pro lobby to me....
>
> Children as vegetables - how ridiculous.

well, as a vegetarian i couldn't be more in favour.
--
david reuteler [email protected]
 
T

Tom Kunich

Guest
"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>I don't know if you'd call it sarcasm. But surely you
> >>have to understand that everyone that has ever fallen
> >>off of a bike will tell you that
their
> >>life was saved by their helmet. This should give you an
> >>idea of just how
far
> >>off people's ideas of injury and death are.
> >
> >I've fallen with and without helmets. The little foam hat
> >did nothing but
sit on
> >my head.
>
> They *can* do a bit more than that. For a totally
> anecdotal example, see:
> http://www.habcycles.com/bikecrash.html
>
> With the helmet on, I still had a bad enough concussion to
> experience significant memory issues for months. Without
> it? I'll never know, but I can't imagine that it wouldn't
> have been considerably worse.

Check out what I said in the sub-string just prevoius to
this one Mark. Of course "minor injury" is relative and it's
plain that helmets can reduce "minor injuries" to little or
no injury. That was REALLY what they were designed for.
 
A

Austinmn

Guest
"Keith Willoughby" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> <Rick Onanian> wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:56:37 -0500, Luigi de Guzman
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>is the time an oldtimer will chime in that they walked
> >>five miles in three foot snow to go to a one-room
> >>schoolhouse.
> >
> > ..."With no shoes" ..."because we hadn't yet invented
> > FEET!" ..."we had to walk on our ankles" ..."there was
> > no pavement under the snow, just wood with sharp nails
> > sticking up out of it" ..."each one of us had to pull a
> > six foot plow on the way to school so our parents would
> > have clean roads to get to work"
>
> "uphill both ways"
>

"While fighting off a pack of rabid wolves"
 
P

Peter Keller

Guest
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:30:42 +0000, Claire Petersky wrote:

> "Kevan Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
> The one time I fell such that the helmet needed to come
> into play -- i.e., there was an impact to my head -- it
> was remarkable. I remember the sharp pain as my shoulder
> and knee hit the pavement, and the shirt ripped open and
> the flesh ripped under that. But my head just made a
> gentle >thump< and was fine. This was probably the worst
> spill of my bicycling life, and happened Summer 1988.
>
> I have no strong opinions about helmets, and am always
> taken aback at how much emotion they generate. I can't
> imagine why anyone cares.
>
>
> Warm Regards,
>
> Claire Petersky

I care because the stupid government in our stupid country
has passed a stupid law mandating that everyone shall wear
one when on a road unless exempted -- and the police
ferociously enforce this damn' silly law. So much for the
image of bicycling being a pleasant safe pastime and means
of transport.

Peter

This transmission is certified free of viruses as no
Microsoft products were used in its preparation or
propagation.
 
C

Curtis L . Russ

Guest
On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 01:50:38 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Chalo makes the point well though - if we were to take a
>poll among club cyclists who wear helmets you'd find that
>approximately 10,000 lives were saved EVERY YEAR. Since the
>bicyclist's deaths from head injuries number only about 500
>a year you have to wonder what we ever did without helmets.

About the same, actually. The first ten years of my
'serious' riding was in the late 60s through the mid-70s,
both with LAW and ABLA clubs
- two of them in a relative hotbed of cycling at the time,
the area from Monterey to San Francisco. I knew personally
(though not well) one person that died and heard of two
others that supposedly hit a cable pulled between two
trees on a private road. Would have had to wear their
helmets real low to save themselves on that one. That's
pretty much it.

Since helmets have become more popular, I've heard of more
deaths and far. far more people that have been 'saved'. More
a factor of the Internet than of statistics; of obsessing
anal-retentive cyclists (and every other category of article
snippers on the Internet) than more accidents.

I now know five more deaths personally - over the last 30
years - and two serious injuries. OTOH this came about when
I was active in the USCF, LAW and LAW/LAB clubs and knew
thousands of cyclists over all of those 30 years. And
perhaps two were impacted by helmet-wearing.

However you parse the numbers, you can make an argument from
helmets don't save lives to that they save a few, but it is
a matter of a few over many, many health building miles. I
wear a helmet every time I ride, but I sure fail to get
heartburn over someone on a bike without one.

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

Curtis L . Russ

Guest
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 11:44:47 -0600, Kevan Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:

>The argument generates strong emotions for the primary
>reason, I think, that helmet supporters often say something
>like "you are stupid if you don't wear a helmet." No one
>likes to be called stupid; them's fightin' words. Over
>time, even when a helmet advocate doesn't say that, the
>thought is entrenched from others who have.

To me the flash point is simpler. Just as bike lane and bike
path advocates will pull out on occasion that riding on the
road is dangerous - even roads that are notable for heavy
use and no accidents
- MHL advocates pull out now-discredited studies (although
the actual numbers have a chance of being higher as well
as lower, the studies ARE discredited) to argue that only
loons ride without helmets.

Well, through the 50s and 60s it was argued that people
should get on bikes to improve their health. Helmets weren't
used by anyone but ABLA types in leather hairnets. What was
true in the 50s and 60s is still true today - riding with or
without a helmet is better for you long-term than sitting on
a couch. Period.

I like helmets. I've been wearing one for longer than many
on this list have been alive. Great for low-lying branches
and the occasional minor spill. And they are light and cheap
if you aren't wearing the latest Euro helmet. But I refuse
to put limits on how other people choose to ride. Better
riding than not.

(My favorite thing about MH on club bike rides is that there
is no commensurate checking of brakes and wheelsets on these
rides, for the most part. So you can get on the ride with a
worn brake cable, brakes rubbing the tires and cones and
headsets that make steering guesswork, but you need that
helmet...)

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

Mark Hickey

Guest
Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

>This accident will go down in the annals of Habanero
>history, just like Dylan's motorcycle accident* or Steve
>Wozniak's plane crash**. Is it true that in the aftermath,
>you've decided to simplify and built a single frame that
>can be either a track bike, a road bike, or a 29er MTB?

Worse than that... I almost started building compact
frames! ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of
the $695 ti frame
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote ...
>> Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

>> >I've fallen with and without helmets. The little foam
>> >hat did nothing but
>sit on
>> >my head.
>>
>> They *can* do a bit more than that. For a totally
>> anecdotal example, see:
>> http://www.habcycles.com/bikecrash.html
>>
>> With the helmet on, I still had a bad enough concussion
>> to experience significant memory issues for months.
>> Without it? I'll never know, but I can't imagine that it
>> wouldn't have been considerably worse.
>
>Check out what I said in the sub-string just prevoius to
>this one Mark. Of course "minor injury" is relative and
>it's plain that helmets can reduce "minor injuries" to
>little or no injury. That was REALLY what they were
>designed for.

I don't disagree with you on that. I was just pointing out
that I had an accident that resulted in a fairly significant
injury that took months to recover from. It's obvious the
helmet "absorbed" a lot of the impact, hence my assumption
that it would have been worse without
it.

I hit the passenger's door, folded back the mirror
(somehow...) and my helmet hit the "sharp edge" of the
mirror mount. On the large Ford truck, that is essentially a
1/4" (6mm) thick piece of strap steel. I don't think even my
famously hard head is THAT hard... ;-)

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of
the $695 ti frame
 
K

Kevan Smith

Guest
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:14:54 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> from
Habanero Cycles wrote:

>It's obvious the helmet "absorbed" a lot of the impact,
>hence my assumption that it would have been worse without
>it.

Well, it's not. You have no idea, in fact, how much impact
the helmet "absorbed" either total or as a percentage of
total impact force.

Hey man, spring is almost here all over, and summer is just
around the corner. Helmet or not, let's all RIDE!

--
[email protected]
A very small object - Its center.
25
 
R

Rick Onanian

Guest
Excuse my top-post, but it seems appropriate for this.

You know, I attempted to post a small ray of sunshine to
brighten up some people's days just a little. A minor
pleasantry, as it were. You know, an "Oh, isn't that nice"
piece, a thread destined to disappear within a day or two.

Then, Mr. Kunich, you felt the need, completely unprovoked,
to step in and start a helmet war.

I can't believe that I now have to add a kill filter against
a thread that I started.

Rick "Don't bother replying in this thread" Onanian

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 01:43:17 GMT, "Tom Kunich"
<[email protected]> 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. 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
 
C

Curtis L . Russ

Guest
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:54:43 -0500, David Kerber
<[email protected]_ids.net> wrote:

>If the helmet has a huge dent (crevice) in it the shape of
>the edge of a truck mirror, but is still intact, you know
>it absorbed a lot of energy.

Not necessarily. You can put a similar dent in jello, as
long as it isn't that stuff they make in the Army. It only
means the mirror didn't penetrate, for whatever reason,
including the angle at which it hit.

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

David Kerber

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
potato.com says...
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:14:54 -0700, Mark Hickey
> <[email protected]> from Habanero Cycles wrote:
>
> >It's obvious the helmet "absorbed" a lot of the impact,
> >hence my assumption that it would have been worse without
> >it.
>
> Well, it's not. You have no idea, in fact, how much impact
> the helmet "absorbed" either total or as a percentage of
> total impact force.

If the helmet has a huge dent (crevice) in it the shape of
the edge of a truck mirror, but is still intact, you know it
absorbed a lot of energy.

....

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).
 
D

David Kerber

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
russells.org says...
> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:54:43 -0500, David Kerber
> <[email protected]_ids.net> wrote:
>
> >If the helmet has a huge dent (crevice) in it the shape
> >of the edge of a truck mirror, but is still intact, you
> >know it absorbed a lot of energy.
>
> Not necessarily. You can put a similar dent in jello, as
> long as it isn't that stuff they make in the Army. It only
> means the mirror didn't penetrate, for whatever reason,
> including the angle at which it hit.

Styrofoam absorbs quite a bit of energy while crushing.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
Curtis L. Russell <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:54:43 -0500, David Kerber
><[email protected]_ids.net> wrote:
>
>>If the helmet has a huge dent (crevice) in it the shape of
>>the edge of a truck mirror, but is still intact, you know
>>it absorbed a lot of energy.
>
>Not necessarily. You can put a similar dent in jello, as
>long as it isn't that stuff they make in the Army. It only
>means the mirror didn't penetrate, for whatever reason,
>including the angle at which it hit.

Which is probably the main reason helmets are not made
from jello.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of
the $695 ti frame
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:14:54 -0700, Mark Hickey
><[email protected]> from Habanero Cycles wrote:
>
>>It's obvious the helmet "absorbed" a lot of the impact,
>>hence my assumption that it would have been worse without
>>it.
>
>Well, it's not. You have no idea, in fact, how much impact
>the helmet "absorbed" either total or as a percentage of
>total impact force.

Tell you what - get a nasty old helmet, put it on a large
rock (something that is fairly similar to my head, after
all...) and try to whack it hard enough to crush the
styrofoam in a 1-1.5" (2.5-3.5cm) area across the entire top
of the helmet AND split in over a dozen places around the
circumference (dramatically enough to pull the plastic cover
apart in several places). Trust me, the photos don't really
do the damage justice - the foam in the "impact zone" is
very, very crushed (not just displaced).

Judging by the width of the crushed foam, it appears that
the force of the impact was spread across an area at least
4-5 times the width (front to back of the helmet) of the
mirror mount. Factor in the width of the area that absorbed
the impact (across most the top of the helmet), as opposed
to the very small area of my pointy little skull that would
have taken the full brunt of the impact without the helmet.

But you're right - I couldn't begin to quantify the force
the helmet absorbed in newtons, but I know for a fact I'm
glad I was wearing it. 20+mph into the edge of a 1/4" steel
strap anchored to three tons of steel with a bare head would
probably be more than even my incredibly thick skull could
stand. Come to think of it, you'd probably come through it
OK though, Kev... ;-)

>Hey man, spring is almost here all over, and summer is just
>around the corner. Helmet or not, let's all RIDE!

Spring, hell... it's SUMMER all the sudden in Arizona.
Sigh... (record high temperatures three days in a row).

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of
the $695 ti frame
 
K

Kevan Smith

Guest
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 15:54:43 -0500, David Kerber <[email protected]_ids.net> from
Cox Communications wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] potato.com says...
>> On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 08:14:54 -0700, Mark Hickey
>> <[email protected]> from Habanero Cycles wrote:
>>
>> >It's obvious the helmet "absorbed" a lot of the impact,
>> >hence my assumption that it would have been worse
>> >without
>> >it.
>>
>> Well, it's not. You have no idea, in fact, how much
>> impact the helmet "absorbed" either total or as a
>> percentage of total impact force.
>
>If the helmet has a huge dent (crevice) in it the shape of
>the edge of a truck mirror, but is still intact, you know
>it absorbed a lot of energy.

"A lot of energy" is a very relative term. In fact, it's
rather meaningless. You could run enough energy through your
body to power a small city and not be harmed; did it absorb
that much?

--
[email protected]
A very small object - Its center.
25
 
K

Kevan Smith

Guest
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:00:40 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> from
Habanero Cycles wrote:

>Tell you what - get a nasty old helmet, put it on a large
>rock (something that is fairly similar to my head, after
>all...) and try to whack it hard enough to crush the
>styrofoam in a 1-1.5" (2.5-3.5cm) area across the entire
>top of the helmet AND split in over a dozen places around
>the circumference (dramatically enough to pull the plastic
>cover apart in several places).

Nor a problem at all. I've seen a helmet crack and break
from being hit by a Nerf football. What's your point?

--
[email protected]
A very small object - Its center.
25