On Sun, 04 May 2003 15:38:56 +0100 someone who may be Paul Allen <
[email protected]> wrote this:-
>a helmet reduces the small danger further,
A cycle helmet reduces the chances of getting cuts and grazes on some parts of the head. That's all,
despite the emotive language of the helmet lobby which implies that they prevent life threatening
head injuries. The helmet lobby is very careful to give the impression that the head injuries they
talk about in their reports are life threatening ones, when they are actually almost all minor ones.
See the standard exposes on helmet lobby reports to study this issue more.
In the case of the relatively few major head injuries there is the tendency of the medical bunch to
claim that a cyclist died from head injuries when, even if they were wearing a perfect helmet that
protected the whole head from anything, the cyclist would have died from other injuries. The medical
bunch should stick to what they are trained in, repairing damage, not expressing their opinions on
the causes of damage, about which they tend to be ill informed.
Helmets would prevent far more cuts and grazes if worn in cars, while walking and in playgrounds.
Then it would be time to look at cycling.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.