Yet another post about plastic hats

DavidR said:

Since a poster calling himself Dave R has given the opinion that helmets
are a good idea, I want to put on record that this other poster called
DavidR is a non-believer.

(I'm the I-don't-recommend-drophandlebars poster, though).

Hmmm...so helmets and drops are a no-no? Next you'll be saying pneumatic
tyres are the work of the devil! 😄

Ian

"7@m3 G33k" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

DavidR said:

Since a poster calling himself Dave R has given the opinion that helmets
are a good idea, I want to put on record that this other poster called
DavidR is a non-believer.

(I'm the I-don't-recommend-drophandlebars poster, though).

Hmmm...so helmets and drops are a no-no? Next you'll be saying
pneumatic tyres are the work of the devil! 😄

If you insist. Pneumatic tyres are the work of the devil...
....the devil's work isn't all bad then.

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as DavidR
<[email hidden]> gently breathed:

Quoted message said:

"7@m3 G33k" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hmmm...so helmets and drops are a no-no? Next you'll be saying
pneumatic tyres are the work of the devil! 😄

Quoted message said:

If you insist. Pneumatic tyres are the work of the devil...
...the devil's work isn't all bad then.

Works of the devil are fine, he usually has all the best tunes after all.

It's the works of Stan you have to beware of...

--
- DJ Pyromancer, Black Sheep, Leeds. <http://www.sheepish.net>
Hard Rock, Leeds <http://www.hard-rock.org.uk>
Broadband, Dialup, Domains = <http://www.wytches.net> = The UK's Pagan ISP!
<http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk> <http://www.revival.stormshadow.com>

Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say:

Quoted message said:

Works of the devil are fine, he usually has all the best tunes after all.

.... and based upon the number of challenging hill climbs called "The
Devil's Elbow" (or similar), it would seem that He has all the best hills
as well?
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

Alistair Gunn said:

Pyromancer twisted the electrons to say:

Quoted message said:

Works of the devil are fine, he usually has all the best tunes after all.

... and based upon the number of challenging hill climbs called "The
Devil's Elbow" (or similar), it would seem that He has all the best hills
as well?

"The hills are aliiiive, with the sound of muuussiiiiiiiic. La laa
lala la, la la la la laaaa"

Alistair Gunn said:

... and based upon the number of challenging hill climbs called "The
Devil's Elbow" (or similar), it would seem that He has all the best hills
as well?

You see that's your mistake - the devil always gets such a bad name
because you insist on going *up* his hills rather than *down* them -
much more fun all round.

Of course then you'll also need a diabolic helmet which started this
load of bo**ox off in the first place - personally I recommend Giro.

Ian

7@m3 G33k said:

Alistair Gunn said:

... and based upon the number of challenging hill climbs called "The
Devil's Elbow" (or similar), it would seem that He has all the best hills
as well?

You see that's your mistake - the devil always gets such a bad name
because you insist on going *up* his hills rather than *down* them -
much more fun all round.

Of course then you'll also need a diabolic helmet which started this
load of bo**ox off in the first place - personally I recommend Giro.

Ian

Risk compensation, LOL! Why would you need or want a helmet? I can't
see a helmet doing much to save my life if I crash on a high speed
road descent.

LSMike said:

7@m3 G33k said:

Alistair Gunn wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

... and based upon the number of challenging hill climbs called "The
Devil's Elbow" (or similar), it would seem that He has all the best hills
as well?

Quoted message said:

You see that's your mistake - the devil always gets such a bad name
because you insist on going *up* his hills rather than *down* them -
much more fun all round.

Quoted message said:

Of course then you'll also need a diabolic helmet which started this
load of bo**ox off in the first place - personally I recommend Giro.

Quoted message said:

Ian

Risk compensation, LOL! Why would you need or want a helmet? I can't
see a helmet doing much to save my life if I crash on a high speed
road descent.

Ah, but if you're not wearing a helmet you might chicken out at 45mph
but with that "safe" feeling wearing a helmet you might actually make
it to the magic 50mph :-)

Tim.

"[email hidden]" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Ah, but if you're not wearing a helmet you might chicken out at 45mph
but with that "safe" feeling wearing a helmet you might actually make
it to the magic 50mph :-)

Quite the opposite. You would realise that you are above the speed where
the kinetic energy the helmet adds is greater than the energy it is
designed to absorb and so assiduously brake to stay under that speed ;-)

I did send a comment about that to Snell and got an interesting reply that
basically said the kinetic energy of the helmet doesn't feature in a crash
and people don't crash in the same way as helmets are tested so it will be
alright anyway. It has taken my view of Snell down many notches to the
point where I now think they are more justifying their own continuance than
acting as independent standard setters.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

"7@m3 G33k" <[email hidden]> wrote:
| You see that's your mistake - the devil always gets such a bad name
| because you insist on going *up* his hills rather than *down* them -
| much more fun all round.

One of the Good Lord Escher's more endearing creations is the escarpment.
If I can pass on just one cycling tip of any use to anyone else when I go,
it is that if you're cycling Oxford-Bath-Oxford it pays to go clockwise.
There are absolutely no hills on the way out and they're all down on the
way back.

In the past fifty years I've managed to go down about 850 feet more than
I've gone up. It worries me that there are only another 150 feet or so
before I get to the mean sea level at Newlyn (and that's almost three feet
below the mean sea level of the North Sea).

[email hidden] (Geraint Jones)
wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

One of the Good Lord Escher's more endearing creations is the
escarpment. If I can pass on just one cycling tip of any use to
anyone else when I go, it is that if you're cycling Oxford-Bath-Oxford
it pays to go clockwise. There are absolutely no hills on the way out
and they're all down on the way back.

There is another example in Bristol starting at Browns and going Queen's
Rd, Whiteladies Rd, Tyndall's Park Road, Woodland Rd, Park Row, Queen's Rd.

Its all flat until halfway along Woodland Rd where you get a long downhill
Park Row before starting off round again on the flat.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

Tony Raven said:

There is another example in Bristol starting at Browns and going Queen's
Rd, Whiteladies Rd, Tyndall's Park Road, Woodland Rd, Park Row, Queen's Rd.

Its all flat until halfway along Woodland Rd where you get a long downhill
Park Row before starting off round again on the flat.

Wow! Never mind the kinetic energy of your helmet Tony - on that route
it will have infinite potential energy! Perhaps this his how advanced
alien civilisations have mastered nuclear fusion and the creation of
mini black holes for games of inter-galactic billiards...

Damn...there I go talking rot again. However not as much rot as:
"cycling helmets offer no significant protection". A friend of mine
recently went over the handlebars after the cyclist in-front braked and
wobbled without warning. She landed on her head, shoulder and hip: badly
bruised hip, hairline fracture to the upper-arm, helmet in two pieces
and head completely unscathed.

Ian

7@m3 G33k said:

Damn...there I go talking rot again. However not as much rot as:
"cycling helmets offer no significant protection". A friend of mine
recently went over the handlebars after the cyclist in-front braked and
wobbled without warning. She landed on her head, shoulder and hip: badly
bruised hip, hairline fracture to the upper-arm, helmet in two pieces
and head completely unscathed.

No-one on the helmet-skeptic side says that helmets may not in some (albeit
very limited) circumstances offer some (albeit limited) protection. What
*is* said is that study after study shows that following large step-wise
increases in helmet-wearing no change in head injury rates occurs; and that
other changes which do occur are to the detriment of cyclists in particular
and public health in general. Your friend may or may not have benefitted in
that particular case from wearing a foam hat, but using an anecdote as
proof is

a) the talisman of the pro-helmet and pro-helmet-law brigade; and
b) rot.

_ said:

No-one on the helmet-skeptic side says that helmets may not in some (albeit
very limited) circumstances offer some (albeit limited) protection. What
*is* said is that study after study shows that following large step-wise
increases in helmet-wearing no change in head injury rates occurs; and that
other changes which do occur are to the detriment of cyclists in particular
and public health in general. Your friend may or may not have benefitted in
that particular case from wearing a foam hat, but using an anecdote as
proof is

a) the talisman of the pro-helmet and pro-helmet-law brigade; and
b) rot.

I'm not in any brigade thanks and I'm not in favour of helmets being
made compulsory. I'll do a deal with you: you don't make assumptions
about me and I won't make assumptions about you (like that you're a
cycling rights fundamentalist who believes that the only victory is to
expel motor vehicles from the roads altogether - because I'm sure that's
not you).

And I wasn't seeking to prove anything. Actually the real world is a
little more complex and subtle than you seem to believe from the kinds
of research that you cite. The vast majority of injuries (especially for
those not cycling on roads) that helmets prevent would not enter the
statistics as they are not likely to be serious enough to require a
formal encounter with professional medical services. As you love my
anecdotes so much here's another: I don't recall a single off-road ride
on which I haven't had some small knocks on my helmet from miscellaneous
low-hanging objects. That proves nothing other than that I like to come
home from a ride without minor scrapes and bruises on my scalp.

There are any number of explanations why the kind of research you cite
may be flawed. Driver aggression increasing over time? Vehicle
construction (and especially macho add-ons like bull bars) being less
safe for collisions with pedestrians and cyclist over time? I'd be much
more interested to hear about some comparative research between injured
cyclist wearing and not wearing helmets. Or some research that
demonstrates that wearing a helmet makes a cyclist less safe and more
prone to injury. Until then I'm happy with my anecdotes that prove
nothing because I *know* that I and plenty of cyclists of my
acquaintance have avoided more and less serious injuries by wearing a
good helmet.

Oh and before you make any more assumptions I don't have any shares in
Giro - their helmets just happen to fit my funny shaped head better than
most :-p

Ian

7@m3 G33k wrote:
I'd be much

Quoted message said:

more interested to hear about some comparative research between injured
cyclist wearing and not wearing helmets.

There is that famous piece of american research that shows
that wearing a cycle helmet reduces the chances of leg
injuries by a significant amount.

Or some research that

Quoted message said:

demonstrates that wearing a helmet makes a cyclist less safe and more
prone to injury.

There is Dr Walkers research that drivers drive closer to
cyclists wearing a MFH, than to those not wearing a MFH.

There is research into risk compensation that shows
wearing a helmet makes you take more risks.

Quoted message said:

Until then I'm happy with my anecdotes that prove

Quoted message said:

nothing because I *know* that I and plenty of cyclists of my
acquaintance have avoided more and less serious injuries by wearing a
good helmet.

Remember that with good (expensive) helmets, you are often
just paying more for bigger holes.

"7@m3 G33k" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Damn...there I go talking rot again. However not as much rot as:
"cycling helmets offer no significant protection". A friend of mine
recently went over the handlebars after the cyclist in-front braked
and wobbled without warning. She landed on her head, shoulder and hip:
badly bruised hip, hairline fracture to the upper-arm, helmet in two
pieces and head completely unscathed.

Ian

And which troll are you?

PS The plural of anecdote is anecdotes and not data and helmets that
fracture have failed, not worked.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

Tony Raven said:

"7@m3 G33k" <[email hidden]> wrote innews:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Damn...there I go talking rot again. However not as much rot as:
"cycling helmets offer no significant protection". A friend of mine
recently went over the handlebars after the cyclist in-front braked
and wobbled without warning. She landed on her head, shoulder and hip:
badly bruised hip, hairline fracture to the upper-arm, helmet in two
pieces and head completely unscathed.

Quoted message said:

Ian

And which troll are you?

PS The plural of anecdote is anecdotes and not data and helmets that
fracture have failed, not worked.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

I was standing using a cash machine this morning, when there was the
crash of glass behind me. Somebody was refurbishing a first-floor flat
above the bank, and was taking out the remains of a broken window-
pane. Unfortunately they let a quarter of the pane drop outwards into
the street. Just think how my helmet could have saved my life, if it
hadn't been hanging idly from my packpack (and if the glass had not
missed me).
Well, it makes you think doesn't it?

"7@m3 G33k" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

And I wasn't seeking to prove anything. Actually the real world is a
little more complex and subtle than you seem to believe from the kinds of
research that you cite. The vast majority of injuries (especially for
those not cycling on roads) that helmets prevent would not enter the
statistics as they are not likely to be serious enough to require a
formal encounter with professional medical services. As you love my
anecdotes so much here's another: I don't recall a single off-road ride
on which I haven't had some small knocks on my helmet from miscellaneous
low-hanging objects. That proves nothing other than that I like to come
home from a ride without minor scrapes and bruises on my scalp.

As I started this thread saying I am a non-believer, I do wear a hat
off-road. If I hit an overhanging branch I do expect it to take some of the
sting away. Knowing this, a hat is therefore a performance enhancer. But
since it adds another inch to the top of the head, more hits are likely
because the brain is very good at knowing where the top of the head is. For
the same reason I also wear eye protection so that I don't have to dodge
holly bushes.

Quoted message said:

There are any number of explanations why the kind of research you cite
may be flawed. Driver aggression increasing over time? Vehicle
construction (and especially macho add-ons like bull bars) being less
safe for collisions with pedestrians and cyclist over time?

A helmet won't protect against head butting a motor vehicle. Even helmet
manufacturers say this.

Quoted message said:

I'd be much more interested to hear about some comparative research
between injured cyclist wearing and not wearing helmets.

The Dutch don't wear helmets. By all accounts they ought to be dropping
like flies.

Quoted message said:

Or some research that demonstrates that wearing a helmet makes a cyclist
less safe and more prone to injury. Until then I'm happy with my
anecdotes that prove nothing because I *know* that I and plenty of
cyclists of my acquaintance have avoided more and less serious injuries
by wearing a good helmet.

But what about on roads? If you are talking about roads (or pavement) why
do they keep falling off?

In article <[email hidden]>, 7@m3 G33k
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

A friend of mine
recently went over the handlebars after the cyclist in-front braked and
wobbled without warning. She landed on her head, shoulder and hip: badly
bruised hip, hairline fracture to the upper-arm, helmet in two pieces
and head completely unscathed.

All that proves is that the helmet hit something and broke.