How Stupid Is This Guy?

[Pete Jones]

On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 18:09:58 +1300, "Westie"
<[email protected]> blathered:

>While I sympathise for your injuries sustained while biking in New Zealand I fear that you are
>being bitter and unfair.

My injuries were sustained 2 days before I left, with maybe 10-12 km left to ride. They have no
bearing on my opinions of cycling in NZ. I'd already formed my opinions, that's why I was leaving 7
weeks earlier than planned....

>> Article in Christchurch Press, 30th Dec 2003 -
>> -----------------------------
>> A beer bottle thrown from a car has brought a Swiss couple's round-the-world cycling trip to a
>> halt in New Zealand. The bottle crashed into the frame of Nadine Rist's bike....shards of glass
>> cut into Rist's right leg, severing tendons near her ankle and below her knee.
><snip parts of article>
>
>One idiot throwing a beer bottle and an extremely unfortunate piece of luck is not representative
>of the majority of drivers. And nor is this behaviour isolated to New Zealand.

Seems like the Swiss had at least 3 of those 'isolated incidents'. I had an 'isolated incident'
myself when I was deliberately run off the road near Greymouth, something that has never happened to
me before. How many 'isolated incidents' does it take to establish a trend?

>You'd be annoyed at cyclists slowing traffic to 15mile/hour on the M5, wouldn't you?

Went out on the A66 on Tuesday, my first main road since NZ. Something was wrong....what was it...oh
yeah, people were slowing down and giving me plenty of room as they drove past.

>Having said that, as you well know yourself from your personal experience, the "major highways" in
>New Zealand are usually very basic two lane road often without shoulders that wind dangerously
>along coastlines and mountainsides for hundreds of miles. Add to that the multitude of 18 wheeled
>trucks (including ever present logging trucks) because of a lack of rail service to transport goods
>and you have an environment hostile to bikers.
>
>I've tried it once and I wouldn't be caught dead riding on our highways again. I'm sorry, but New
>Zealand open roads and cyclists should not be mixed. The roading is not capable of supporting the
>two different types of traffic simultaneously.

And yet suckers (like me) are still being lured to New Zealand under the impression it's a
'Pedaller's Paradise'. A cynical exploitation of tourists' expectations? Shurely shome mishtake...?

Pete

 

[Pete Jones]

On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 22:49:33 +0100, bomba <[email protected]>
blathered:

>> What kind of perverse system of logic persecutes the victim? Cycling is not inherently dangerous,
>> although being hit by a ton of metal doing 50 can smart a bit. If New Zealand (and Canada, and
>> the US, and the UK) are serious about reducing cycling related injuries, maybe they should look
>> at what countries like Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands are doing.
>
>(I'll take Germany and the Netherlands as examples because they're the ones I'm most
>familiar with.)
>
>Whilst I don't disagree with your sentiments, the changes involved are enormous. From a purely
>infrastructure point of view, most pavements in towns in .de and .nl are built wider and split for
>cyclists and pedestrians. Trying to implement that in the UK would be both expensive and difficult.
>
>Tied to this are the attitudes. Because these cycle paths have existed for such a long time, they
>are well used and attitudes of the general population reflect that. You never find cars parked on
>cycle paths and cyclists are treated with absolute courtesy by drivers. It's amazing the amount of
>times I've stopped on the bike at the side of a junction and cars have braked to let me across in
>front of them. Instilling that sort of attitude in car-centric countries would take years and not a
>little propoganda.

Never said it's be easy - but do we really have any choice in the longterm?

The London congestion charges have shown the way. Incidentally, it's worth noting that there's been
an upsurge in cycling in the capital as a result. The sudden increase in novice cyclists is fraying
nerves, if articles in the media are anything to go by - an illustration that plonking helmets on
peoples' heads is not in itself a safety measure if you don't educate them on how to cycle in a
responsible, safe manner.

Pete

 

[Westie]

Pete Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Mar 2004 18:09:58 +1300, "Westie"
> <[email protected]> blathered:
>
>> While I sympathise for your injuries sustained while
>> biking in New Zealand I fear that you are being bitter
>> and unfair.
>
> My injuries were sustained 2 days before I left, with
> maybe 10-12 km left to ride. They have no bearing on my
> opinions of cycling in NZ. I'd already formed my opinions,
> that's why I was leaving 7 weeks earlier than planned....
>
>>> Article in Christchurch Press, 30th Dec 2003 -
>>> -----------------------------
>>> A beer bottle thrown from a car has brought a Swiss
>>> couple's round-the-world cycling trip to a halt in New
>>> Zealand. The bottle crashed into the frame of Nadine
>>> Rist's bike....shards of glass cut into Rist's right
>>> leg, severing tendons near her ankle and below her knee.
>> <snip parts of article>
>>
>> One idiot throwing a beer bottle and an extremely
>> unfortunate piece of luck is not representative of the
>> majority of drivers. And nor is this behaviour isolated
>> to New Zealand.
>
> Seems like the Swiss had at least 3 of those 'isolated
> incidents'. I had an 'isolated incident' myself when I was
> deliberately run off the road near Greymouth, something
> that has never happened to me before. How many 'isolated
> incidents' does it take to establish a trend?

I know the roads near Greymouth fairly well. What happened
and where was it?

>> You'd be annoyed at cyclists slowing traffic to
>> 15mile/hour on the M5, wouldn't you?
>
> Went out on the A66 on Tuesday, my first main road since
> NZ. Something was wrong....what was it...oh yeah, people
> were slowing down and giving me plenty of room as they
> drove past.
>
>> Having said that, as you well know yourself from your
>> personal experience, the "major highways" in New Zealand
>> are usually very basic two lane road often without
>> shoulders that wind dangerously along coastlines and
>> mountainsides for hundreds of miles. Add to that the
>> multitude of 18 wheeled trucks (including ever present
>> logging trucks) because of a lack of rail service to
>> transport goods and you have an environment hostile to
>> bikers.
>>
>> I've tried it once and I wouldn't be caught dead riding
>> on our highways again. I'm sorry, but New Zealand open
>> roads and cyclists should not be mixed. The roading is
>> not capable of supporting the two different types of
>> traffic simultaneously.
>
> And yet suckers (like me) are still being lured to New
> Zealand under the impression it's a 'Pedaller's Paradise'.
> A cynical exploitation of tourists' expectations? Shurely
> shome mishtake...?

Perhaps it is. Perhaps it isn't. I have no experience
cycling internationally. I certainly haven't had any
experience in the bicycle tour industry (or whatever you'd
like to call it) but I am surprised to hear New Zealand
described as a 'Pedaller's Paradise'. ' Paradise' is not a
word that would have sprung to mind if you'd asked me my
opinion on cycling in NZ. The theory sounds good but I
think that the reality falls far short of theory. Maybe 10-
15 years ago before the transport industry was deregulated
and allowed the truck companies to compete directly with
the rail services for transporting the riding might have
been a paradise? There were considerably fewer trucks on
the roads. Certainly if you stay off some of the major
routes the cycling is fine. Given that 99 times out of 100
you have to take a major route to get from A to B then,
well.... the cycling would not be my cup of tea. Likewise
with the mountain biking. Some nice spots, some very nice
trails here and there but few 'epic' rides and a lot of
travelling between them all. But of course you know all
this only too well.

I think that I've said it before, but I am sorry that the
trip didn't go as planned. And I am definitely sorry to hear
about the injuries. It's good to see in some of your other
posts that you are getting mobile again.

--
Westie (Replace 'invalid' with 'yahoo' when replying.)

 

[Trailgalore]

> >>> A beer bottle thrown from a car has brought a Swiss
> >>> couple's round-the-world cycling trip to a halt in New
> >>> Zealand. The bottle crashed into the frame of Nadine
> >>> Rist's bike....shards of glass cut into Rist's right
> >>> leg, severing tendons near her ankle and below her
> >>> knee.
> >> <snip parts of article>
> > Seems like the Swiss had at least 3 of those 'isolated
> > incidents'. I had an 'isolated incident' myself when I
> > was deliberately run off the road near Greymouth,
> > something that has never happened to me before. How many
> > 'isolated incidents' does it take to establish a trend?

Wonder what the average death rate per year for the last
10 is in NZ?

 

[Gazzer]

Shawn Curry <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<ypw1c.33360$ko6.318724@attbi_s02>...
> gazzer wrote:
> > Shawn Curry <[email protected]> wrote in
> > message news:<pEn1c.172389$uV3.730938@attbi_s51>...

> analysis. Explain why they got the results 180 degrees
> backward. To paraphrase Cuba Gooding Jr. in Jerry McGuire
> "Show me da data!"
>
> Shawn

They haven't got the analysis 180 around, because, other
than arguments about inceased radius causing more severe
head spinning trauma, helmets are themselves not dangerous.
It's therefore very dificult to argue that you're better
off without a helmet than with one. Yes if you bang your
head on a branch wearing a helmet it will hurt less, my
problem is with riders like the guy below with his "helmet
saved my life" claim. The helmet tests replicate hanging
upside down by your heels and dropping yourself vertically
onto a surface. If you've ever had or seen an accident like
that in your life I would be fairly amazed. The limited
test requirements allow helmets to include double sided
sticky tape holding on velcro patches that in turn hold on
the front retention straps, like my Giro. Remove these
cheesy items, if they havent fallen off already, and see
how well your helmet fits, and how likely it is to stay in
place to protect your head in a sliding crash. I just don't
believe it. I actually started wearing a helmet when I
crashed ,went OTB and landed next to a pile of discarded
broken cast iron furniture. The sight of the sharp shards
of metal persuaded me that I should do what I could to
protect myself, but I am in no illusion as to how much
protection a bike helmet affords, being that they are
hideously compromised by the need for light weight and
ventilation holes. In short ,yes you may as well wear a
helmet, but they won't save your life.

And the only people I talk to like 5 year olds are five
year olds.

cheers

g

 

[Chris Phillipo]

> dropping yourself vertically onto a surface. If you've
> ever had or seen an accident like that in your life I
> would be fairly amazed. The limited test requirements
> allow helmets to include double sided sticky tape holding
> on velcro patches that in turn hold on the front retention
> straps, like my Giro. Remove these cheesy items, if they
> havent fallen off already, and see how well your helmet
> fits, and how likely it is to stay in place to protect
> your head in a sliding crash. I just don't believe it. I
> actually started wearing a helmet when I crashed ,went OTB
> and landed next to a pile of discarded broken cast iron
> furniture. The sight of the sharp shards of metal
> persuaded me that I should do what I could to protect
> myself, but I am in no illusion as to how much protection
> a bike helmet affords, being that they are hideously
> compromised by the need for light weight and ventilation
> holes. In short ,yes you may as well wear a helmet, but
> they won't save your life.
>

This is an argument for a hard shell full face helmet,
perhaps with a lexan visor What I really hate is all
these so called studies that say the helmets didn't save
any more lives. Well despite the fact that they are almost
always blatantly flawed in their data collection method,
who cares if they don't save any more lives than not
wearing, dead people aren't the ones clogging up emergency
rooms or driving up healthcare costs. You can crack open
your skull and survive. Sometimes you might be better off
not surviving however.
--
_________________________
Chris Phillipo - Cape Breton, Nova Scotia http://www.ramsays-
online.com

 

[Shawn Curry]

gazzer wrote:
> Shawn Curry <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:<ypw1c.33360$ko6.318724@attbi_s02>...
>
>>gazzer wrote:
>>
>>>Shawn Curry <[email protected]> wrote in
>>>message news:<pEn1c.172389$uV3.730938@attbi_s51>...
>
>
>
>>analysis. Explain why they got the results 180 degrees
>>backward. To paraphrase Cuba Gooding Jr. in Jerry McGuire
>>"Show me da data!"
>>
>>Shawn
>
>
> They haven't got the analysis 180 around, because, other
> than arguments about inceased radius causing more severe
> head spinning trauma, helmets are themselves not
> dangerous. It's therefore very dificult to argue that
> you're better off without a helmet than with one.

I've heard of the hypothetical "Worse than no helmet" case.
Popular with the Harley crowd. Possible, less likely than
the standard OTB crash IMHO.

> Yes if you bang your head on a branch wearing a helmet it
> will hurt less, my problem is with riders like the guy
> below with his "helmet saved my life" claim.

One guy saying it is evangelism. Studies that look at dozens
or 100s of accidents is science. That science says helmets
save lives, maybe not yours or mine, but over a large
population compared to a similar group without helmets. Show
me the studies otherwise if I'm wrong. I could spend the
next $100 helmet money on something else.

> The helmet tests replicate hanging upside down by your
> heels and dropping yourself vertically onto a surface. If
> you've ever had or seen an accident like that in your life
> I would be fairly amazed.

Not quite. Not a top of head impact, more of a "Hat band"
impact. Otherwise, yes. Artificial

> limited test requirements allow helmets to include double
> sided sticky tape holding on velcro patches that in turn
> hold on the front retention straps, like my Giro.

My straps are much sturdier than this (but I did just
check).

Remove these cheesy items, if they
> havent fallen off already, and see how well your helmet
> fits, and how likely it is to stay in place to protect
> your head in a sliding crash. I just don't believe it. I
> actually started wearing a helmet when I crashed ,went OTB
> and landed next to a pile of discarded broken cast iron
> furniture. The sight of the sharp shards of metal
> persuaded me that I should do what I could to protect
> myself, but I am in no illusion as to how much protection
> a bike helmet affords, being that they are hideously
> compromised by the need for light weight and ventilation
> holes. In short ,yes you may as well wear a helmet, but
> they won't save your life.
>
> And the only people I talk to like 5 year olds are five
> year olds.
>
> cheers
>
> g

As I said g, I haven't seen the data that says they don't
work. I've seen studies that say they help.

 

[Pete Jones]

On Mon, 01 Mar 2004 23:04:21 GMT, "TBF" <[email protected]>
blathered:

>http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.2004030-
>1.wbike0301/BNStory/National/

http://www.bikebiz.co.uk/daily-news/article.php?id=3849

Pete

 

[Pete Jones]

On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:53:46 GMT, "Trailgalore" <[email protected]>
blathered:

>> >>> A beer bottle thrown from a car has brought a Swiss
>> >>> couple's round-the-world cycling trip to a halt in
>> >>> New Zealand. The bottle crashed into the frame of
>> >>> Nadine Rist's bike....shards of glass cut into Rist's
>> >>> right leg, severing tendons near her ankle and below
>> >>> her knee.
>> >> <snip parts of article>
>> > Seems like the Swiss had at least 3 of those 'isolated
>> > incidents'. I had an 'isolated incident' myself when I
>> > was deliberately run off the road near Greymouth,
>> > something that has never happened to me before. How
>> > many 'isolated incidents' does it take to establish a
>> > trend?
>
>Wonder what the average death rate per year for the last 10
>is in NZ?
>
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/thepress/0,2106,2863276a65-
30,00.html

Pete