Re: Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience



Sorni wrote:
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:eek:[email protected]...
> > On 10 May 2006 15:39:54 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>The number of cyclists has risen
> >>dramatically in this area over the past 3-4 years,
> >> and almost everyone
> >>uses a helmet. Go figure!
>
> > It's marketing. They're Lance Armstrong wannabes.
>
> So getting lots of new people* into cycling is a bad thing?

I couldn't care what they wear, but if they are the sort of people who
hoot at you and tell you to get off the road, as the drive past with
their bikes on the back heading for a 'cycle trail' then I am not sure
they are not adding to the problem.

What is needed is more people using bikes for the everyday short
transport trip rather than for special dress up in fancy clothes and
ride a $$$$$ bike in a sporting activity. Cycling needs to be seen as
an everyday normal activity, not as a specialised recreation.

...d
 
41 wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>> jtaylor wrote:
>
>>>>> Would this have anything to do with the fact that you
>>>>> deliberately excluded instances where the result would have been
>>>>> negative?
>>>>
>>>> Do you mean the "I wasn't wearing a helmet and I didn't hit my
>>>> head, but if I had been wearing a helmet, I would ha ve hit my
>>>> head" claptrap?
>>>>
>
>>> Why do you call instances like those "claptrap"?
>
>>> Are you denying that they occur?
>>
>> Okay, your turn: tell everyone how you would determine that while you
>> didn't hit your head while not wearing a helmet, you know you would
>> have hit your head, in the same incident, if you were wearing a
>> helmet. And, please, be precise.
>
> I already did just that in earlier threads. I described a high speed,
> hard fall where I did not hit my head at all, but where the mark on
> the top of my shoulder (which I still have, almost two years later)
> proves that I hit the pavement almost exactly adjacent to my skull.
> Had I been wearing a helmet, which projects out what- you tell me how
> much, anything would have been enough- from the surface of my skull,
> I would have suffered an impact, and at a bad angle which would have
> swung my head around like a tether ball. No thanks.
<AOL>
I have also done that.
--
Ambrose
 
David Martin wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>
>>Richard wrote:
>>
>>>Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have no vested interest in a helmet
>>>>debate.
>>>
>>>Yet you claim to run a bike repair business. Promotion of helmets leads
>>>to reduced numbers cycling, which leads to reduced business for you.
>>>So, unless you are completely disinterested in the viability or
>>>otherwise of your business, I suggest you do in fact have a vested
>>>interest. I just find it peculiar as to why you should wish to run
>>>your own business into the ground by promoting helmets.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>What kinda weed you been smoking, Gunga Din? IMO, helmets are
>>inexpensive (unless one is a sucker),
>
> but non free
>
>>unobtrusive
>
> Hardly - helmet hair, sweat, heatstroke, somewhere to put the
> *&*&^&^$%£$%^*ing thing when you get to your destination.
>
>
>>and offer a positive,
>>if small, degree of added protection.
>
> Not according to whole population studies they don't.
>
>
>>The number of cyclists has risen
>>dramatically in this area over the past 3-4 years, and almost everyone
>>uses a helmet. Go figure!
>
>
> And how many are utility cyclists or are they just follwoing the latest
> sporting trends for recreation?
> How many kids cycle to school or the shops?
> The utility cyclists are the ones hit hardest by helmet overpromotion.
> It makes little odds if you are already getting changed to go cycling,
> a helmet is part of the dressing up routine. Bit different if you are
> just wanting to nip down to the shops, or go out for the evening, where
> 'special clothing' is not really the done thing, just get on and go.
>
> In the sport culture, helmets are part of the uniform. In utility
> cycling, they are an inconvenience.
>
> ..d
>

Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and sitting
behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and the crumple
zone.
Is it really THAT hard?
 
"Friday" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>> In the sport culture, helmets are part of the uniform. In utility
>> cycling, they are an inconvenience.
>
> Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and sitting
> behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and the crumple
> zone.
> Is it really THAT hard?

Yes. When I get into my car, the seatbelt is there. I can put it on while
waiting for other bits of the car to start. When I arrive at my destination,
the seatbelt stays inside the car.

When I go somewhere by bike, putting a helmet on is extra inconvenience,
riding with it is not as nice as without, and storing it while at my
destination is a problem.

You haven't really thought this through, have you?

clive
 
Friday wrote:

> Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and sitting
> behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and the crumple
> zone.

No it isn't: driving a car has all the power come from the car and the
extra weight is a non-issue. Because I only have to make small upper
body movements the restrictions of a seatbelt are minimal.
OTOH cycling on a hot, humid day with a polystyrene box on my head is a
major drag.
I /can/ do it, I did every cycling trip for over a decade before I
started reading the research. Now I don't, and I'm a lot more
comfortable and less inconvenienced as a result.

Beyond which there is no really good evidence it actually does anything
worth my while, unlike a seat belt (and that's before we get into risk
compensation territory).

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Clive George wrote:
> "Friday" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>> In the sport culture, helmets are part of the uniform. In utility
>>> cycling, they are an inconvenience.
>>
>> Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and
>> sitting behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and
>> the crumple zone.
>> Is it really THAT hard?
>
> Yes. When I get into my car, the seatbelt is there. I can put it on
> while waiting for other bits of the car to start. When I arrive at my
> destination, the seatbelt stays inside the car.
>
> When I go somewhere by bike, putting a helmet on is extra
> inconvenience, riding with it is not as nice as without, and storing
> it while at my destination is a problem.
>
> You haven't really thought this through, have you?

Shoelaces are a real pain in the ass, too. Most people have learned to
adapt to and accept it. Others just wear flipflops with their tuxedos.

PRETTY SOON THERE MIGHT BE MANDATORY SHOELACE LAWS! THIS MUST BE STOPPED!
 
"Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>>>> In the sport culture, helmets are part of the uniform. In utility
>>>> cycling, they are an inconvenience.
>>>
>>> Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and
>>> sitting behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and
>>> the crumple zone.
>>> Is it really THAT hard?
>>
>> Yes. When I get into my car, the seatbelt is there. I can put it on
>> while waiting for other bits of the car to start. When I arrive at my
>> destination, the seatbelt stays inside the car.
>>
>> When I go somewhere by bike, putting a helmet on is extra
>> inconvenience, riding with it is not as nice as without, and storing
>> it while at my destination is a problem.
>>
>> You haven't really thought this through, have you?
>
> Shoelaces are a real pain in the ass, too. Most people have learned to
> adapt to and accept it. Others just wear flipflops with their tuxedos.
>
> PRETTY SOON THERE MIGHT BE MANDATORY SHOELACE LAWS! THIS MUST BE STOPPED!

Y'know, this really isn't helping your argument one bit. Would a fair
summary of your position be that you think helmets are a good thing, and
can't be bothered to look any further than that?

clive
 
Clive George wrote:
> "Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>>>> In the sport culture, helmets are part of the uniform. In utility
>>>>> cycling, they are an inconvenience.
>>>>
>>>> Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and
>>>> sitting behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and
>>>> the crumple zone.
>>>> Is it really THAT hard?
>>>
>>> Yes. When I get into my car, the seatbelt is there. I can put it on
>>> while waiting for other bits of the car to start. When I arrive at
>>> my destination, the seatbelt stays inside the car.
>>>
>>> When I go somewhere by bike, putting a helmet on is extra
>>> inconvenience, riding with it is not as nice as without, and storing
>>> it while at my destination is a problem.
>>>
>>> You haven't really thought this through, have you?
>>
>> Shoelaces are a real pain in the ass, too. Most people have learned
>> to adapt to and accept it. Others just wear flipflops with their
>> tuxedos. PRETTY SOON THERE MIGHT BE MANDATORY SHOELACE LAWS! THIS MUST
>> BE
>> STOPPED!
>
> Y'know, this really isn't helping your argument one bit.

Neither is whining that a helmet is inconvenient helping yours.

> Would a fair
> summary of your position be that you think helmets are a good thing,
> and can't be bothered to look any further than that?

For the type of cycling that I do, yes I think wearing a helmet is a smart
thing to do. Sorry you find that so objectionable.
 
"Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Clive George wrote:
>> "Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>>>> In the sport culture, helmets are part of the uniform. In utility
>>>>>> cycling, they are an inconvenience.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just like getting into a car and putting on your seat belt, and
>>>>> sitting behind the colapsable steering wheel with the airbags, and
>>>>> the crumple zone.
>>>>> Is it really THAT hard?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. When I get into my car, the seatbelt is there. I can put it on
>>>> while waiting for other bits of the car to start. When I arrive at
>>>> my destination, the seatbelt stays inside the car.
>>>>
>>>> When I go somewhere by bike, putting a helmet on is extra
>>>> inconvenience, riding with it is not as nice as without, and storing
>>>> it while at my destination is a problem.
>>>>
>>>> You haven't really thought this through, have you?
>>>
>>> Shoelaces are a real pain in the ass, too. Most people have learned
>>> to adapt to and accept it. Others just wear flipflops with their
>>> tuxedos. PRETTY SOON THERE MIGHT BE MANDATORY SHOELACE LAWS! THIS MUST
>>> BE
>>> STOPPED!
>>
>> Y'know, this really isn't helping your argument one bit.
>
> Neither is whining that a helmet is inconvenient helping yours.

Not whining. It's a very important part of my argument. Inconvenience and
comfort are the primary reasons I don't wear one.

>> Would a fair
>> summary of your position be that you think helmets are a good thing,
>> and can't be bothered to look any further than that?
>
> For the type of cycling that I do, yes I think wearing a helmet is a smart
> thing to do. Sorry you find that so objectionable.

Do you want to answer the other part of my question?

clive
 
jtaylor wrote:
> "Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> For the type of cycling that I do, yes I think wearing a helmet is a
>> smart thing to do.
>
> Why?

Because it brings out the gold flecks in my eyes.
 
Sorni wrote:
> jtaylor wrote:
> > "Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> For the type of cycling that I do, yes I think wearing a helmet is a
> >> smart thing to do.
> >
> > Why?
>
> Because it brings out the gold flecks in my eyes.

And all the population studies prove gold flecks lower risk and
increase safety. ;-)
 
Ozark,

you haven't voted in the "new helmet poll" thread. Any particular reason
why not?

"Ozark Bicycle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Sorni wrote:
>> jtaylor wrote:
>> > "Sorni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...
>> >>
>> >> For the type of cycling that I do, yes I think wearing a helmet is a
>> >> smart thing to do.
>> >
>> > Why?
>>
>> Because it brings out the gold flecks in my eyes.
>
> And all the population studies prove gold flecks lower risk and
> increase safety. ;-)
>
 
Burt wrote:
> Ozark,
>
> you haven't voted in the "new helmet poll" thread. Any particular reason
> why not?

Probably because you only posted it to urc and Ozark is reading rbt.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"There is a wicked pretense that one has been informed. But no
such thing has truly occurred! A mere slogan, an empty litany.
No arguments are heard, no evidence is weighed. It isn't news at
all, only a source of amusement for idlers." (Gibson-Sterling,
The Difference Engine)
 
Burt wrote:
> Ozark,
>
> you haven't voted in the "new helmet poll" thread. Any particular reason
> why not?
>

"New helmet poll"? Do you mean this one, or something else?
 
Don Whybrow wrote:
> Burt wrote:
> > Ozark,
> >
> > you haven't voted in the "new helmet poll" thread. Any particular reason
> > why not?
>
> Probably because you only posted it to urc and Ozark is reading rbt.
>
> --

Ya think?
 
On Thu, 11 May 2006 14:09:11 +0100, "Clive George"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Friday" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>> [about wearing helmet] Is it really THAT hard?
>
>Yes. When I get into my car, the seatbelt is there. I can put it on while
>waiting for other bits of the car to start. When I arrive at my destination,
>the seatbelt stays inside the car.
>
>When I go somewhere by bike, putting a helmet on is extra inconvenience,
>riding with it is not as nice as without, and storing it while at my
>destination is a problem.

Plus if you ride vigorously and sweat it needs to be cleaned. I
finally started using multiple helmets (not all at once) so I have a
clean one ready.

But it's not *very* hard to deal with -- just an inconvenience. So I
look at the helment proponents this way: if they say "I use one
whenever I can because it might help and it's not so hard for me" I
think "Cool."

But if they say "I always where one" or "I never ride without one" I
think "Theyre an idiot." Seriously. If you can't conceive of a
situation where you might ride without one (forgot helmet, it's very
dirty, etc) you've got a problem. If you wouldn't get on your bike
because you don't have a helmet with you, you've got a problem.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
 
"41" <[email protected]> writes:

> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>
>> > > Okay, your turn: tell everyone how you would determine that while you
>> > > didn't hit your head while not wearing a helmet, you know you would
>> > > have hit your head, in the same incident, if you were wearing a helmet.
>> > > And, please, be precise.
>>
>> IOW, you can not provide an example, can you? You are pulling this
>> stuff out of your ass.
>
> I told you and provided exactly this precise example, but you chose to
> ignore it.
>

There was nothing to comment on. All sorts of strange **** happens in
accidents : sounds like you were lucky because you didnt have a helment
- thank your lucky stars! In the same way that the woman who reversed
into the harbour was glad that she didnt have her seatbelt on. Doesnt
really alter the general truth though.

Thankfully laws arent made based on statistical anomalies.
 
Hadron Quark wrote:

> There was nothing to comment on. All sorts of strange **** happens in
> accidents : sounds like you were lucky because you didnt have a helment
> - thank your lucky stars! In the same way that the woman who reversed
> into the harbour was glad that she didnt have her seatbelt on. Doesnt
> really alter the general truth though.

While it is generally accepted that in A Given Crash in a car you're on
balance much better off in a seatbelt, there's no such degree of
consensus concerning cycle helmets.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Re: How big is big? (was: Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience)
Replies
35
Views
790
UK and Europe
Bill Sornson
B
S
Re: Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience
Replies
0
Views
344
UK and Europe
Sorni
S
J
Re: Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience
Replies
10
Views
372
UK and Europe
Mike Causer
M
S
Re: Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience
Replies
0
Views
282
UK and Europe
Sorni
S
S
Re: Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience
Replies
0
Views
281
UK and Europe
Sorni
S
Top Bottom Back