WSJ: "Studies Show Helmet Laws Keep Bikers Safer"

[Bob]

On 10 Aug 2005 13:54:34 -0700, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Stop grasping at straws. It's more of a tongue-in-cheek comment than
>anything else. I understood it completely, and *my* science education
>has been an unqualified success.
>
>Not every remotely pro-helmet comment needs a rebuttal, Frank.


No, no, he's right. I'm going back to creationism and I'll let the
Pope decide if I need a helmet.

 

[Paul Cassel]

[email protected] wrote:
> Saw this in the Wall Street Journal. I'm not making any judgement, just
> bringing it to the groups attention.
>
Good thing too. The 'studies' don't control for many variables, but
common sense would indicate that helmets do save lives. Hurt and others
say you have a 30% better chance of decreased injury if you wear a hat
during a crash.

The opposition to motorcycle helmets claim they cause crashes, but even
they admit that if you are in a crash, the hat helps. So do you avoid
crashes by going bareheaded or avoid greater injury by wearing them in
anticipation of crashing? Or does wearing a helmet not enhance crash
incidence? Nobody knows.

I'm unclear if this has any application to bicycle hats.

 

[SMS]

Paul Cassel wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Saw this in the Wall Street Journal. I'm not making any judgement, just
>> bringing it to the groups attention.
>>
> Good thing too. The 'studies' don't control for many variables, but
> common sense would indicate that helmets do save lives. Hurt and others
> say you have a 30% better chance of decreased injury if you wear a hat
> during a crash.

The position of the AHZ's is that crashes are so rare, that
statistically there is no difference in the number of injuries and
fatalities before and after the implementation of an MHL. This line of
reasoning serves them well. What they ignore, or try to rationalize
away, are the studies that look solely at how helmeted versus
non-helmeted victims fare in head impact crashes.

If they want to argue that crashes are rare so helmets don't make a
measureable difference statistically, that's fine, no one will dispute
that. But if you are unfortunate enough to be one of the few that are
ever involved in a head impact crash, the statistics aren't going to
provide much protection.

 

[[email protected]]

SMS wrote:
>
>
> The position of the AHZ's is that crashes are so rare, that
> statistically there is no difference in the number of injuries and
> fatalities before and after the implementation of an MHL.

Steven, you are not qualified to state the position of helmet skeptics.
Your repeated attempts at lordly summaries have too frequently been
wrong. I suggest you restrain yourself to rebutting specific
statements, rather than straw men you invent.


> But if you are unfortunate enough to be one of the few that are
> ever involved in a head impact crash, the statistics aren't going to
> provide much protection.

And of course, neither will a fragile piece of Swiss-cheese styrofoam,
certified to protect only a decapitated head in a straight 14 mph
impact. As the MHL data shows.

But of course, I'm talking about bicycle helmets. Motorcycle helmets
really should be discussed in a different group.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Jay Beattie]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Saw this in the Wall Street Journal. I'm not making any
judgement, just
> bringing it to the groups attention.
>
> The Wall Street Journal, Tuesday, August 9th, 2005, page D6.
>
> "Studies Show Helmet Laws Keep Bikers Safer"
>
> "States that repeal laws requiring motorcycle riders to wear
helmets
> run the risk of increased deaths and mounting health care costs
for
> injured bikers, according to two studies released yesterday,
one by the
> government, the other by the insurance industry.
>
> "The first, by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration,
> found that in the three years following Florida's repeal of its
> mandatory helmet law in 2000, 933 motorcyclists were killed, an
81%
> increase from the 515 bikers killed from 1997 to 1999.
>
> "Even though the state requires helmet use by riders under age
21,
> fatalities among that group nearly tripled in the three years
after the
> repeal; 45% of those killed weren't wearing helmets. The cost
of
> hospital care for motorcycle injuries rose from $21 million to
$44
> million in the 30 months after the law changed; the figures
were
> adjusted for inflation.
>
> "The second study released yesterday, by the Insurance
Institute for
> Highway Safety, found that the death rate of motorcyclists from
2001-02
> increased 25% compared with the two years before the repeal of
helmet
> laws.

Let's not get into another helmet thread. If you want to get
outraged, let's talk about why I am getting about 30 Performance
catalogues, flyers, brochures and notices every month. Nashbar
takes a close second, followed by Supergo. What a burden on the
recyclers and landfills, and the glossy paper does not even burn
well for heat during the winter months. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[C]

In article <[email protected]>,
Jay Beattie <[email protected]> wrote:
>Let's not get into another helmet thread. If you want to get
>outraged, let's talk about why I am getting about 30 Performance
>catalogues, flyers, brochures and notices every month. Nashbar
>takes a close second, followed by Supergo. What a burden on the
>recyclers and landfills, and the glossy paper does not even burn
>well for heat during the winter months. -- Jay Beattie.

Are you really getting 30 catalogs a month or is that a silly exageration?
Did you try calling the company and asking to get taken off their mailing list?

 

[Eric Hill]

C wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Jay Beattie <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Let's not get into another helmet thread. If you want to get
>>outraged, let's talk about why I am getting about 30 Performance
>>catalogues, flyers, brochures and notices every month. Nashbar
>>takes a close second, followed by Supergo. What a burden on the
>>recyclers and landfills, and the glossy paper does not even burn
>>well for heat during the winter months. -- Jay Beattie.
>
>
> Are you really getting 30 catalogs a month or is that a silly exageration?
> Did you try calling the company and asking to get taken off their mailing list?

Funny, a friend and I were talking about this just the other day. He
gets several PerNashGo catalogs every week, but I get one per month,
*maybe*. The only difference in our relationships to this particular
conglomerate? I had bought only from a Performance Bike retail store and
he had bought from their website.

-eric

 

[Pat Lamb]

Jay Beattie wrote:
>
> Let's not get into another helmet thread. If you want to get
> outraged, let's talk about why I am getting about 30 Performance
> catalogues, flyers, brochures and notices every month. Nashbar
> takes a close second, followed by Supergo. What a burden on the
> recyclers and landfills, and the glossy paper does not even burn
> well for heat during the winter months. -- Jay Beattie.

(A) I don't think you can kill helmet threads. Although there are days
I'm tempted to round up the contributors, put helmets on their heads (or
not), and thrown them off a roof. Head first.

(B) Place two orders within three months from Land's End if you want to
see the catalogs roll in. They're worse than Time-Life books!

Pat

 

[Jay Beattie]

"C" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Jay Beattie <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Let's not get into another helmet thread. If you want to get
> >outraged, let's talk about why I am getting about 30
Performance
> >catalogues, flyers, brochures and notices every month. Nashbar
> >takes a close second, followed by Supergo. What a burden on
the
> >recyclers and landfills, and the glossy paper does not even
burn
> >well for heat during the winter months. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> Are you really getting 30 catalogs a month or is that a silly
exageration?
> Did you try calling the company and asking to get taken off
their mailing list?

It's a gross overstatement, but not that gross. This is not
about the burden on me. The act of throwing away junk mail is
not that time consuming, but it pains me to see all that wasted
paper. I doubt I could get Nashbar, Supergo and Performance to
send me only some of their mailings. I think you are either on
the list or off, and I don't want to be entirely off -- just
mostly off. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 9 Aug 2005 19:31:36 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>"States that repeal laws requiring motorcycle riders to wear helmets
>run the risk of increased deaths and mounting health care costs for
>injured bikers, according to two studies released yesterday, one by the
>government, the other by the insurance industry.

Compare what a motorcycle helmet looks like to what a bicycle helmet looks
like.

Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 9 Aug 2005 19:31:36 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>"The second study released yesterday, by the Insurance Institute for
>Highway Safety,

Incidentally, I want to know who funds this Institute. There are lots of
"Institutes" with names that have nothing to do with their funding or
their principals. Like an 'air safety' institute funded by Boeing that
publishes press releases on Airbus failures.

Jasper