slime is great and 'how many helmets ?'



Simon Brooke wrote on 10/04/2007 22:34 +0100:
>
> Everyone, just don't! I've no idea whether this guy is a troll or just an
> idiot, but we don't need to do the whole helmet thing again.
>

Erm, Simon, the thread died a couple of days ago before you resurrected
it this evening.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell
 
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:37:28 +0100, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

>in message <[email protected]>, Danny
>Colyer ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> Anyway, ISTM that the comment was probably intended to make Dundonald
>> think.  Which IMO is worthwhile.
>
>s/worthwhile/improbable/g

My point was that there had been about 20 responses to Mr Dundonald varying from
detailed and helpful to smug and sarcastic.

Having started a whiney thread some days ago about the arguments here Mr Raven
made a further post that added nothing new to the thread but could well have
caused Mr Dundonald (or, indeed, anyone else) to join in yet another flame war.
 
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:33:20 +0100, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:

>in message <[email protected]>,
>Dundonald ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> On 6 Apr, 22:36, Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> mr p wrote:
>>> > OK two posts in one here, sorry..
>>>
>>> > I was out cycling my MTB on the New Forest tracks today and I have
>>> > never seen so many other cyclists.. some days I can get around the
>>> > whole forest with out seeing another cyclist. I am wandering what this
>>> > obsession with helmets is these days though, it must be a fashion
>>> > thing from what I read !
>>>
>>> I think It is because they think cycling unsafe,
>>
>> It is! If you come off through your own actions or from an others,
>> and land on your head without a helmet, it's going to hurt and could
>> easily be fatal!
>
>Bollocks.
>
>I've fallen off mountain bikes certainly hundreds of times. The worst
>injury I've ever had in a mountain bike accident is a slightly gazed knee,
>and my head has very rarely even touched the ground.

The trouble is that we are carefully evolved to instinctively protect out heads.
It's so instinctive that we don't realise we're doing it (or how good we are at
doing it).

Some people (quite a few, I would imagine), don't realise that you're not very
likely to bang your head in an accident and thus (ignoring the vexed question of
their protective ability) vastly overestimate the benefit of bike helmets.
 
On 06/04/2007 22:36, Martin Dann said,

> I think It is because they think cycling unsafe, many of them will be
> weekend cyclists.

The phrase "New Forest tracks" in the OP implied off-road. I don't know
the area though, so I could be wrong.

Off-road, it is rare to see a cyclist *without* a helmet. The chances
of coming off the bike and needing protection against the sort of injury
that helmets can actually protect against are much higher, even if it's
just to deflect a low-hanging branch!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:03:55 +0100, Paul Boyd wrote:

> On 06/04/2007 22:36, Martin Dann said,
>
>> I think It is because they think cycling unsafe, many of them will be
>> weekend cyclists.
>
> The phrase "New Forest tracks" in the OP implied off-road. I don't know
> the area though, so I could be wrong.
>
> Off-road, it is rare to see a cyclist *without* a helmet. The chances
> of coming off the bike and needing protection against the sort of injury
> that helmets can actually protect against are much higher, even if it's
> just to deflect a low-hanging branch!

What you may well be seeing is the effect of pro-helmet propaganda. the
MTB fad has only been around for a few years now, and the seminal TRT study
(*spit*) was done in 1989. Anyone who started cycling after TRT has been
exposed, to some degree, to the life-saving helmet myth; and as the
manufacturers and sellers are careful to avoid the truth (why should they,
there's money to be made) a greater number of these cyclists are likely to
be found dressed in funny hats.
 
On 12/04/2007 19:55, _ said,

> What you may well be seeing is the effect of pro-helmet propaganda. the
> MTB fad has only been around for a few years now, and the seminal TRT study
> (*spit*) was done in 1989.

I started riding MTBs in 1986...

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul Boyd
[email protected] says...
> On 12/04/2007 19:55, _ said,
>
> > What you may well be seeing is the effect of pro-helmet propaganda. the
> > MTB fad has only been around for a few years now, and the seminal TRT study
> > (*spit*) was done in 1989.
>
> I started riding MTBs in 1986...
>
Jolly good, have a virtual Blue Peter badge.
 
On 13/04/2007 02:50, Rob Morley said,

> Jolly good, have a virtual Blue Peter badge.

The point I was making (and obviously failed!) is that MTB riding is not
a recent fad, and started well before the aforementioned report.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Paul Boyd
[email protected] says...
> On 13/04/2007 02:50, Rob Morley said,
>
> > Jolly good, have a virtual Blue Peter badge.
>
> The point I was making (and obviously failed!) is that MTB riding is not
> a recent fad, and started well before the aforementioned report.
>
>
It wasn't trendy back then - most people were still buying 3/5/6/10/12
speed bikes with pull-back or drop bars and skinny wheels, or BMXs for
kids.
 
Rob Morley wrote on 13/04/2007 15:12 +0100:
> In article <[email protected]>, Paul Boyd
> [email protected] says...
>> On 13/04/2007 02:50, Rob Morley said,
>>
>>> Jolly good, have a virtual Blue Peter badge.
>> The point I was making (and obviously failed!) is that MTB riding is not
>> a recent fad, and started well before the aforementioned report.
>>
>>
> It wasn't trendy back then - most people were still buying 3/5/6/10/12
> speed bikes with pull-back or drop bars and skinny wheels, or BMXs for
> kids.

<SFX:cough> Rough Stuff Fellowship </SFX:cough>

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell
 
On 13/04/2007 15:18, Tony Raven said,

> <SFX:cough> Rough Stuff Fellowship </SFX:cough>

There was an article in one of the MTB mags about them a while ago. The
writers admitted that they thought it would be a chance to poke fun, but
came away impressed. The bit I liked was (to paraphrase) "I could tell
Roger was still behind me because of the rattling panniers". This was
written by someone on a full-sus MTB riding off-road. Perhaps it came
across better in the article :)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
[email protected]lid says...
> Rob Morley wrote on 13/04/2007 15:12 +0100:
> > In article <[email protected]>, Paul Boyd
> > [email protected] says...
> >> On 13/04/2007 02:50, Rob Morley said,
> >>
> >>> Jolly good, have a virtual Blue Peter badge.
> >> The point I was making (and obviously failed!) is that MTB riding is not
> >> a recent fad, and started well before the aforementioned report.
> >>
> >>
> > It wasn't trendy back then - most people were still buying 3/5/6/10/12
> > speed bikes with pull-back or drop bars and skinny wheels, or BMXs for
> > kids.
>
> <SFX:cough> Rough Stuff Fellowship </SFX:cough>
>

The rough-stuffers basically used touring/cross bikes mostly with drop
bars, not mountain bikes. When I was a lad we used to make scramblers
by putting motorcycle handlebars, knobbly tyres and big saddles on
stripped-down roadsters - they weren't mountain bikes either. A
rudimentary mountain bike has a strong light frame, low gears for the
uphill and balloon tyres and powerful brakes for the downhill.
Mountain bikes were first commercially produced in the early eighties,
and were generally available in the UK from around 1985, but sales
didn't take off for a couple of years. While they were certainly
popular in 1989, the boom hadn't really happened in 1986.
 
Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:

> Matthew Haigh wrote on 07/04/2007 00:41 +0100:
> >
> > On road the protective ability of a fleecy hat cannot be overstated in
> > the winter (I get very cold ears and head without a hat), during the
> > summer a light cotton cap helps protect from the sun's heat and glare.
> >
>
> And as Simon of this parish can attest, a cotton cycling cap can Save
> Your Lifeâ„¢ in a big crash.

yup riding to work about 10 years ago i hit a stone and thus slid along
the road into the nice soft stone wall. and yes my hat did save me from
gravel rash though didn't do much about the wall, which has given me a
few white hairs.

roger
 
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 12:19:00 +0100, Roger Merriman wrote:

> Tony Raven <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Matthew Haigh wrote on 07/04/2007 00:41 +0100:
>>>
>>> On road the protective ability of a fleecy hat cannot be overstated in
>>> the winter (I get very cold ears and head without a hat), during the
>>> summer a light cotton cap helps protect from the sun's heat and glare.
>>>
>>
>> And as Simon of this parish can attest, a cotton cycling cap can Save
>> Your Lifeâ„¢ in a big crash.
>
> yup riding to work about 10 years ago i hit a stone and thus slid along
> the road into the nice soft stone wall. and yes my hat did save me from
> gravel rash though didn't do much about the wall, which has given me a
> few white hairs.
>

Perhaps to be sure you should repeat the incident while wearing a MFH and
see if you get a rotational injury...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Slime and pinch flats
Replies
5
Views
324
UK and Europe
[email protected]
R
P
Slime inner tubes
Replies
10
Views
458
UK and Europe
Paul Boyd
P
K
Slime liner sliced my inner tube
Replies
21
Views
875
UK and Europe
Kooky45
K
D
Slime for road bikes?
Replies
4
Views
287
UK and Europe
Dave Larrington
D
P
Slime tubes - any good?
Replies
4
Views
338
UK and Europe
vernon
V
Top Bottom Back