Personally, I really don't care if you wear a helmet or not...

  • Thread starter Hell and High Water
  • Start date



"ackfugue" <[email protected]> writes:

> Compared to Tour de Frances of recent years, I have noticed that I
> never saw a rider without a helmet on during this tour. Never.


That's because it is now mandatory for the riders.

--
Joe Riel
 
Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>> Say what you will, think what you think, and do as you choose, but
>> you'll NEVER see me riding a bike without a helmet.

>
> This, IMO, is the correct attitude for helmets. I wear one, my kids (should I
> ever have any progeny) will wear them, but I won't run around yelling at others
> to wear one. It's their head.
>
> Hope you're feeling better now. Definitely glad you're not dead.
>


Don't forget to wear one when you cross the street! Oh, and in the
bathtub, and in your car, and on an airplane ....


Robin Hubert
 
Hell and High Water wrote:
> I, on the other hand, would clearly be dead, had I not had one on that
> day.
>
>
> Five Broken Ribs
>
> Broken Collar Bone
>
> Punctured lung
>
> Unconscious for about 10 minutes
>
> No memory of the first hour and a half
>
> 'Woke Up' in an ambulance...
>
>
>
>
> Say what you will, think what you think, and do as you choose, but
> you'll NEVER see me riding a bike without a helmet.


Well, depends now doesn't it-I, broken L1, L3, C-5, lacerated kidney,
knocked out for 15 minues, came to in the ambulance, 30 hours of
amnesia, 12 stiches around my right eye where it hit her
windshield...no bumps or bruises in any area that would have been
protected by a helmet...hit from behind by pickup truck traveling at 35
MPH, while riding bike....no helmet....

helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
injury...
 
"Joe Riel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "ackfugue" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Compared to Tour de Frances of recent years, I have noticed that I
> > never saw a rider without a helmet on during this tour. Never.

>
> That's because it is now mandatory for the riders.
>


What percentage of photos and video coverage of riders does not include (at
least a portion of) the head(s)?

I'm surprised it has taken this long for the sponsors to enforce additional
advertising surface.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
Robin Hubert <[email protected]> wrote:

SNIP
>
> Don't forget to wear one when you cross the street! Oh, and in the
> bathtub, and in your car, and on an airplane ....
>
>
> Robin Hubert


Airplane???

Back in the days when I was with the Force, two squadron members flew
into the back of Sandia Peak in New Mexico.

The only "good" the helmets - full pressure - did was to help the morgue
guys pick up the jello.

I always wear my helmut in the shower, does'nt everyone?

HAND
97F degrees - lets ride
 
Qui si parla Campagnolo a écrit :
> Hell and High Water wrote:
>
>> I, on the other hand, would clearly be dead, had I not had one on that
>> day.
>>
>>
>> Five Broken Ribs
>>
>> Broken Collar Bone
>>
>> Punctured lung
>>
>> Unconscious for about 10 minutes
>>
>> No memory of the first hour and a half
>>
>> 'Woke Up' in an ambulance...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Say what you will, think what you think, and do as you choose, but
>> you'll NEVER see me riding a bike without a helmet.
>>

>
> Well, depends now doesn't it-I, broken L1, L3, C-5, lacerated kidney,
> knocked out for 15 minues, came to in the ambulance, 30 hours of
> amnesia, 12 stiches around my right eye where it hit her
> windshield...no bumps or bruises in any area that would have been
> protected by a helmet...hit from behind by pickup truck traveling at 35
> MPH, while riding bike....no helmet....
>
> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
> injury...
>
>

That explains a lot.
 
On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:52:18 GMT, Robin Hubert <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] says...
>>> Say what you will, think what you think, and do as you choose, but
>>> you'll NEVER see me riding a bike without a helmet.

>>
>> This, IMO, is the correct attitude for helmets. I wear one, my kids (should I
>> ever have any progeny) will wear them, but I won't run around yelling at others
>> to wear one. It's their head.
>>
>> Hope you're feeling better now. Definitely glad you're not dead.
>>

>
>Don't forget to wear one when you cross the street! Oh, and in the
>bathtub, and in your car, and on an airplane ....
>
>
> Robin Hubert


Is that what you tell your customers?


Life is Good!
Jeff
 
Jeff Starr wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 13:52:18 GMT, Robin Hubert <[email protected]>
> wrote:


>> Don't forget to wear one when you cross the street! Oh, and in the
>> bathtub, and in your car, and on an airplane ....


> Is that what you tell your customers?


Nah. They don't /talk/ to their customers:

{Post from 5/26}

Robin Hubert wrote:

> You should try shopping at Lickton's


I did a while back. Was building up a new frame, and ordered a 9 speed DA
triple FD from their (your?) website.

Parts started coming in and had a friend lined up to help me with some of
the trickier stuff, but still no FD. (This is more than a week since I
ordered it; appeared to go thru no problem on the site.)

So I finally call, leave a message, and then get a call back. Am told that
"you can't find any 9 sp. DA FDs any more", and only option is the '06
10-speed (for, like, $98 or something). This is despite the fact that it
was still showing on their/your website.

So I search a bit and like an idiot buy the very first one I find (for...$68
or so?), only to then find one for $49 or close to that a day later.

The point is that no one bothered to let me know my order couldn't be
filled, and only after a week or more when I finally called was I told
something that was completely untrue (that 9 DAFDs were no longer
available -- there were many online sources). I was very excited to build
up my new bike, and this delayed it for quite a while (had to arrange with
my friend to help another time, like 10+ days later).

The kicker? Whoever I finally talked to (the guy who tried to get me to buy
a 10 speed FD for close to a hundred bucks) never once apologized for the
mistake on the web page OR for not notifying me.

So no, I don't think I should "try shopping at Lickton's" ever again.

Bill "still waiting" S.
 
Sandy wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo a écrit :
> > Hell and High Water wrote:
> >
> >> I, on the other hand, would clearly be dead, had I not had one on that
> >> day.
> >>
> >>
> >> Five Broken Ribs
> >>
> >> Broken Collar Bone
> >>
> >> Punctured lung
> >>
> >> Unconscious for about 10 minutes
> >>
> >> No memory of the first hour and a half
> >>
> >> 'Woke Up' in an ambulance...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Say what you will, think what you think, and do as you choose, but
> >> you'll NEVER see me riding a bike without a helmet.
> >>

> >
> > Well, depends now doesn't it-I, broken L1, L3, C-5, lacerated kidney,
> > knocked out for 15 minues, came to in the ambulance, 30 hours of
> > amnesia, 12 stiches around my right eye where it hit her
> > windshield...no bumps or bruises in any area that would have been
> > protected by a helmet...hit from behind by pickup truck traveling at 35
> > MPH, while riding bike....no helmet....
> >
> > helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
> > injury...
> >
> >

> That explains a lot.


I'll let that pass Sandy but a few more zingers and I won't mind
getting into a pissing contest about France....
 
Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
> injury...


Man, we could have used a short and sweet summary like THAT about three
months ago! Might have saved a /lot/ of bandwidth...

<eg>
 
Bill Sornson wrote:

> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>> injury...

>
> Man, we could have used a short and sweet summary like THAT about three
> months ago! Might have saved a /lot/ of bandwidth...


It *might* have if "don't hurt" were changed to "are a minor inconvenience
and may contribute to inflated perceptions of the risks inherent in cycling".

.... and I don't even want to start with the theories regarding risk
compensation, rotational injuries, etc.!

--
Benjamin Lewis
 
Benjamin Lewis wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:


>>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>>> injury...


>> Man, we could have used a short and sweet summary like THAT about
>> three months ago! Might have saved a /lot/ of bandwidth...


> It *might* have if "don't hurt" were changed to "are a minor
> inconvenience and may contribute to inflated perceptions of the risks
> inherent in cycling".
>
> ... and I don't even want to start with the theories regarding risk
> compensation, rotational injuries, etc.!


So Peter, who knows just about everything about cycling (albeit with a
decidedly Campy slant), picked /this exact issue/ about which to make a
categorically incorrect statement.

Sorry, I think he pretty much nailed it. (Hell, he even said they /may/
help -- isn't THAT lukewarm enough for you guys?)

Just as helmets don't "save lives" except in extremely rare circumstances,
they don't "hurt" (as in make cycling more dangerous) except in extremely
rare circumstances, either.

Hyperbole is a two-way street -- it's both ways or neither.
 
On 29 Jul 2006 07:00:19 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
<[email protected]> wrote:


>helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>injury...


Yeah. Wristguards 'may" help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for
wrist injuries. That's why smart cyclists use them. Same with chin
guards.

You never know what could happen out there, so be safe.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On 29 Jul 2006 07:00:19 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
> <[email protected]> wrote:



>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>> injury...


> Yeah. Wristguards 'may" help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for
> wrist injuries. That's why smart cyclists use them. Same with chin
> guards.


Typical sloppy attempt. Wristguards CAN hurt -- not only re. comfort but by
interfering with the hands' movements (working the brakes, gear shifts,
etc.). That's why essentially NO cyclists ever wear them. (Unlike, say...
oh yeah, helmets!)

Someone also posted that wristguards have been shown to be ineffective at
preventing injuries of rollerbladers, because they seldom just "slap" their
wrists against the ground in a fall, and instead instinctively stick out
their arms -- thus breaking hands, collar bones, shoulders, etc.

Finally, of course, one seldom hears the phrase "traumatic /wrist/ injury".

Other than those things, you really scored with your scathingly pinpoint
post.

<eg>

> You never know what could happen out there, so be safe.


Just don't be stupid about it (i.e., wearing equipment ill-suited you your
chosen activity).
 
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Benjamin Lewis wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

>
>>>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>>>> injury...

>
>>> Man, we could have used a short and sweet summary like THAT about
>>> three months ago! Might have saved a /lot/ of bandwidth...

>
>> It *might* have if "don't hurt" were changed to "are a minor
>> inconvenience and may contribute to inflated perceptions of the risks
>> inherent in cycling".
>>
>> ... and I don't even want to start with the theories regarding risk
>> compensation, rotational injuries, etc.!

>
> So Peter, who knows just about everything about cycling (albeit with a
> decidedly Campy slant), picked /this exact issue/ about which to make a
> categorically incorrect statement.


If you say so. I didn't think it was categorically incorrect, if that's
what you're implying.

> Sorry, I think he pretty much nailed it. (Hell, he even said they /may/
> help -- isn't THAT lukewarm enough for you guys?)


You may note that I did not take issue with that part of his statement.

> Just as helmets don't "save lives" except in extremely rare
> circumstances, they don't "hurt" (as in make cycling more dangerous)
> except in extremely rare circumstances, either.


Absolutely. However, I think it's worth noting that "added risk" is not
the only potential disadvantage, and that "doesn't hurt" has various
possible interpretations.

> Hyperbole is a two-way street -- it's both ways or neither.


I don't see any hyperbole in my, Peter's, *or* your comments above.

--
Benjamin Lewis
 
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:59:50 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> On 29 Jul 2006 07:00:19 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
>>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>>> injury...

>
>> Yeah. Wristguards 'may" help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for
>> wrist injuries. That's why smart cyclists use them. Same with chin
>> guards.

>
>Typical sloppy attempt. Wristguards CAN hurt -- not only re. comfort but by
>interfering with the hands' movements (working the brakes, gear shifts,
>etc.). That's why essentially NO cyclists ever wear them. (Unlike, say...
>oh yeah, helmets!)


And you're saying helmets don't hurt in any way? No comfort issues,
no weight issues, no visibility issues, no cost issues?

Wow.

JT

PS - I've seen cyclists with wristgaurds. It's exceedingly rare, but
I've seen riders with them.

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
Benjamin Lewis wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Benjamin Lewis wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

>>
>>>>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>>>>> injury...

>>
>>>> Man, we could have used a short and sweet summary like THAT about
>>>> three months ago! Might have saved a /lot/ of bandwidth...

>>
>>> It *might* have if "don't hurt" were changed to "are a minor
>>> inconvenience and may contribute to inflated perceptions of the
>>> risks inherent in cycling".
>>>
>>> ... and I don't even want to start with the theories regarding risk
>>> compensation, rotational injuries, etc.!


>> So Peter, who knows just about everything about cycling (albeit with
>> a decidedly Campy slant), picked /this exact issue/ about which to
>> make a categorically incorrect statement.


> If you say so. I didn't think it was categorically incorrect, if
> that's what you're implying.


He stated categorically that helmets don't hurt. You took issue with that.

That's all.
 
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:59:50 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> >> On 29 Jul 2006 07:00:19 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:

> >
> >
> >>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
> >>> injury...

> >
> >> Yeah. Wristguards 'may" help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for
> >> wrist injuries. That's why smart cyclists use them. Same with chin
> >> guards.

> >
> >Typical sloppy attempt. Wristguards CAN hurt -- not only re. comfort but by
> >interfering with the hands' movements (working the brakes, gear shifts,
> >etc.). That's why essentially NO cyclists ever wear them. (Unlike, say...
> >oh yeah, helmets!)

>
> And you're saying helmets don't hurt in any way? No comfort issues,
> no weight issues, no visibility issues, no cost issues?
>
> Wow.
>
> JT
>
> PS - I've seen cyclists with wristgaurds. It's exceedingly rare, but
> I've seen riders with them.


Yikes touy would think this is about the Arab-Israeli conflict or
abortion or something...it's about a plastic hat on your head while you
use that toy called a bicycle...
 
Quoting Hell and High Water <[email protected]>:
>I, on the other hand, would clearly be dead, had I not had one on that
>day.


Who volunteered for you repeating the experiment with a control unhelmeted
head?

Or, in other words, "clearly", nothing. Like everyone else with a "saved
my life" story, you're almost certainly deluded. You suffered non-fatal
injuries to the rest of the body - why suppose that the injuries to the
very toughest part of the body would have been fatal?
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!
Today is Second Epithumia, July - a weekend.
 
On 31 Jul 2006 06:06:56 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:59:50 GMT, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> >> On 29 Jul 2006 07:00:19 -0700, "Qui si parla Campagnolo"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>> helmets...'may' help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for head
>> >>> injury...
>> >
>> >> Yeah. Wristguards 'may" help, don't hurt but are not a panacea for
>> >> wrist injuries. That's why smart cyclists use them. Same with chin
>> >> guards.
>> >
>> >Typical sloppy attempt. Wristguards CAN hurt -- not only re. comfort but by
>> >interfering with the hands' movements (working the brakes, gear shifts,
>> >etc.). That's why essentially NO cyclists ever wear them. (Unlike, say...
>> >oh yeah, helmets!)

>>
>> And you're saying helmets don't hurt in any way? No comfort issues,
>> no weight issues, no visibility issues, no cost issues?
>>
>> Wow.
>>
>> JT
>>
>> PS - I've seen cyclists with wristgaurds. It's exceedingly rare, but
>> I've seen riders with them.

>
>Yikes touy would think this is about the Arab-Israeli conflict or
>abortion or something...it's about a plastic hat on your head while you
>use that toy called a bicycle...


If it's not a a big deal, why do you feel compelled to respond? Why
do you have to post about it at all?

Also, I know you're into bike art and I'm into bicycle sport, but the
fundamental role of the bicycle in society is for transportation.
It's a toy to some of us, but first and foremost it's for
transportation.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************