Helmet Survey

"Steve McGinty" <stephenmcginty@ntlworld_DOT_.com> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I don't want to start another thread on the rights and wrongs of helmets, but I thought you'd be
interested in the survey on helmet useage currently on the Scottish Cyclists Union website

scuonline.orgnews.aspOpen ↗

"Do you wear a cycling helmet? 241 votes casts (at time of posting)

Always - 61% (147)

Never whilst on the computer.

Quoted message said:

Never whilst on the computer.

But do you wear a tin foil hat to deflect that nasty electromagnetic radiation ;-)

Cheers, helen s

~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~

FWIW I fall into the sometimes category. I used to wear it for commuting & MTB-ing. I do neither now
so rarely wear it. Or you could say I am in the Only when racing category or never for that matter.

Daft question really.

"Steve McGinty" <stephenmcginty@ntlworld_DOT_.com> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I don't want to start another thread on the rights and wrongs of helmets, but I thought you'd be
interested in the survey on helmet useage currently on the Scottish Cyclists Union website

scuonline.orgnews.aspOpen ↗

"Do you wear a cycling helmet? 241 votes casts (at time of posting)

Always - 61% (147) Only when racing - 22% (52) Usually - 9% (22) Sometimes 5% (11) Never 4% (9)"

Cheers! Stephen

No but I wear my Oakleys to protect my eyes whilst computing. :-)

"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Never whilst on the computer.

But do you wear a tin foil hat to deflect that nasty electromagnetic

radiation

Quoted message said:

;-)

Cheers, helen s

~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending

a

Quoted message said:

reply!

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the

keyboaRRRDdd

Quoted message said:

~~~~~~~~~~

A tin foil had wont do anything unless it's grounded, i.i.e. plugged into earth. But you still have
a route through your neck into the brains soft tissue (Assuming your not a talking head in a jar - a
la Simpsons!). The perfect solution is to sit in a grounded metal mesh box or similar. However, I
find that a bit annoying & cumbersome.

I wonder if Knights of Olde were computer proof; all that armour & chain mail!

Niv (somewhat esoteric).

"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

No but I wear my Oakleys to protect my eyes whilst computing. :-)

Wrong - they are supposed to offer thermonuclear protection - only to be

worn

Quoted message said:

if Osmotic Bin Liner does the really nasty - no good for computer screens.

Tin

Quoted message said:

foil hats are much better ;-)

Cheers, helen s

~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending

a

Quoted message said:

reply!

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the

keyboaRRRDdd

Quoted message said:

~~~~~~~~~~

Niv said:

The perfect solution is to sit in a grounded metal mesh box or similar. However, I find that a bit
annoying & cumbersome.

If you mount a wheel on each corner and add an engine and a few other bits, it can be quite useful
for getting around though ;-)

Tony

--
raven-family.comraven-family.comOpen ↗

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to
adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George
Bernard Shaw

The question of a helmet is not daft. If I had a "choice," I wouldn't wear one but it is the law.

I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear one and had a single accident and fractured his jaw and
had other serious injuries. Just a couple of weeks ago I was climbing up a steep grade slowly and
lost my balance and fell against a lamppost. Wearing a helmet, no injuries.

All of that a side, the main reason most people wear a helmet, a side from possible safety, is
liability. Here in North America, if you aren't wearing a helmet where the law requires you to do
so, should you have reason to make a claim, insurance companies may ask the courts to deduct from
your award the expenses, short and long term, for injuries that might have been avoided had one
been wearing a helmet. In that sense you may lose big time, particularly should you have only
minimal or partial brain damage. Significant brain damage, it doesn't matter because you are too
far gone to care!

wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter said:

Quoted message said:

Never whilst on the computer.

But do you wear a tin foil hat to deflect that nasty electromagnetic radiation ;-)

Cheers, helen s

~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending a reply!

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the keyboaRRRDdd
~~~~~~~~~~

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

The question of a helmet is not daft. If I had a "choice," I wouldn't wear one but it is the law.

This is uk.rec.cycling you need to qualify the above sentence since here, the UK naturally, it
isn't the law. Yes, I know you mention North America below but that is several countries
encompassing many laws.

Colin

"wafflycathcsdirtycatlitter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The question of a helmet is not daft. If I had a "choice," I wouldn't wear one but it is the law.

I wear one over here in the UK whenever I'm cycling - and it isn't

required by

Quoted message said:

law. Still doesn't stop humour though 🙂

Cheers, helen s

~~~~~~~~~~
Flush out that intestinal parasite and/or the waste product before sending

a

Quoted message said:

reply!

Any speeliong mistake$ aR the resiult of my cats sitting on the

keyboaRRRDdd

Quoted message said:

~~~~~~~~~~

I wear one too, but ain't gettin' into that ole arguement about pros&cons...more interestingly I'm
convinced that the recently purchased hi-viz vest is what actually 'saved my life' several times on
my recent John O' Groats to Lands End <yawn> trip.....broke both head & tail lights on day 1, had
spare headlight but took 6 days to sort tail light out. On most days, due to mileage, I ended up
cycling after dark for a short while, in some instances on very busy dual carriageways. In each case
motorists not only gave me 'plenty room', but also never, not once, blew their horns at me to
highlight the fact I didn't have a rear light. Can only think they were so dazzled by the reflective
vest / backpack / bike reflectors, they didn't actually notice!! Dave. (scary, I know and I won't be
doing it again!!)

In article said:

The question of a helmet is not daft. If I had a "choice," I wouldn't wear one but it is the law.

Not, it's not. This is uk.rec.cycling.

Quoted message said:

I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear one and had a single accident and fractured his jaw

Obviously a helmet would have protected him from jaw injuries, yes. Doesn't everyone wear them on
their chin?

Quoted message said:

couple of weeks ago I was climbing up a steep grade slowly and lost my balance and fell against a
lamppost. Wearing a helmet, no injuries.

Whereas no-one has ever survived such an impact unhelmeted, as we know.

Quoted message said:

All of that a side, the main reason most people wear a helmet, a side from possible safety, is
liability. Here in North America, if you aren't wearing a helmet where the law requires you to do
so, should you have reason to make a claim, insurance companies may ask the courts to deduct from
your award the expenses,

_Here_ in the UK the CTC have been successful in putting a stop to such contributory
negligence claims.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

Dave said:

I wear one too, but ain't gettin' into that ole arguement about pros&cons...more interestingly I'm
convinced that the recently purchased hi-viz vest is what actually 'saved my life' several times on
my recent John O' Groats to Lands End <yawn> trip.....broke both head & tail lights on day 1, had
spare headlight but took 6 days to sort tail light out.

I think in many cases reflectives are as effective as lights; unlike lights they obviously only work
if the motorists' headlights illuminate you, but OTOH they are omnidirectional if well-designed (and
visibility from the side is an ongoing concern of mine) and can appear very bright in bright car
headlights. I wear a reflective vest, have reflective patches fore and aft on my panniers, mount 2
rear reflectors, and have sowed reflective strips onto my winter gloves for more effective
signalling at night; but I am considering mounting reflective material on the bike to protect
against approaches from the side. It is unfortunate that most reflectors (including the contentious
pedal reflectors) operate primarily in the fore-aft direction where one's lights already do a good
job. I suspect the "signal ring" around the edge of the Bisy headlight also provides some lateral
protection.

Not that I would advocate riding without a taillight; LED taillights are dirt cheap and light, so I
always have at least 2 exactly to guard against this type of failure. (Currently I have a third,
running off the dynamo.)
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

drifter said:

I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear one and had a single accident and fractured his jaw
and had other serious injuries. Just a couple of weeks ago I was climbing up a steep grade slowly
and lost my balance and fell against a lamppost. Wearing a helmet, no injuries.

This is anecdotal evidence, which isn't statistically useful. I rode into a lamppost more than once
when I was a kid, well before helmets were regarded as any sort of "normal" for cycling, and I
didn't sustain any head injuries. That anecdote doesn't prove anything any more than yours: in
short, anecdotes, whether "for" or "against" aren't really useful data. I know of someone who was
killed when he slipped and fell and banged his head getting out the bath, but that doesn't make it a
Really Good Idea to wear helmets in the bath and shower. I was quite possibly saved a fractured
skull by a cycle helmet once, but due to the unusual nature of the accident (hit by a car spinning
out from a collision on a road I wasn't even cycling on at the time) I could've had the same result
had I been a pedestrian. I don't see people wearing them as pedestrians, so if it isn't a cast-iron
reason to do that, it isn't a cast-iron reason to wear it on the bike either.

Quoted message said:

All of that a side, the main reason most people wear a helmet, a side from possible safety, is
liability.

"Safety" can be taken in more than one way. I quite often wear a helmet, but I don't think it makes
me particularly less likely to sustain a serious head injury. I think it's quite possibly going to
save me a bloody awful headache and a nasty graze but that's not really safety, that's a comfort
tradeoff. Short trips the helmet comfort isn't an issue, so I wear it to offset a possible headache.
Longer trips the helmet comfort is more of an issue, so I tend not to wear one as much for long
days, especially in hot weather.

Liability is a non-issue in the UK, helmets aren't compulsory here.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden]
dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

drifter <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear one and had a single accident and fractured his jaw
and had other serious injuries.

<snip>

Is this meant to be a pro-helmet argument? Just wondering because normal helmets are designed to
protect your skull, not your jaw. Unless your dentist friend was wearing one of those full face
helmets, but in that case he'd have increased the chances of injuring his neck.

Graeme

David Damerell said:

In article said:

The question of a helmet is not daft. If I had a "choice," I wouldn't wear one but it is the law.

Not, it's not. This is uk.rec.cycling.

Quoted message said:

I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear one and had a single accident and fractured his jaw

Obviously a helmet would have protected him from jaw injuries, yes. Doesn't everyone wear them on
their chin?

I've noticed a couple of people round here wearing what seem to be lightweight (I hope) versions of
motorcross helmets - full face jobs. And I'm talking about commuting here!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

couple of weeks ago I was climbing up a steep grade slowly and lost my balance and fell against a
lamppost. Wearing a helmet, no injuries.

Whereas no-one has ever survived such an impact unhelmeted, as we know.

I've never worn a helmet and have had mishaps over the years - plenty that would get the 'head
injuries' box ticked on a form (ie minor bruises, grazes, blood etc). Probably would have mashed a
helmet had I been wearing one.

I hate helmets.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

All of that a side, the main reason most people wear a helmet, a side from possible safety, is
liability. Here in North America, if you aren't wearing a helmet where the law requires you to do
so, should you have reason to make a claim, insurance companies may ask the courts to deduct from
your award the expenses,

_Here_ in the UK the CTC have been successful in putting a stop to such contributory
negligence claims.

"drifter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

All of that a side, the main reason most people wear a helmet, a side from possible safety,
is liability. Here in North America, if you aren't wearing a helmet where the law requires
you to do so,

Where in NA does a law require an adult to do so?

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear one and had a single accident and fractured his jaw
and had other serious injuries. Just

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

couple of weeks ago I was climbing up a steep grade slowly and lost

my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

balance and fell against a lamppost. Wearing a helmet, no injuries.

Quoted message said:

This is anecdotal evidence, which isn't statistically useful. I rode into a lamppost more than
once when I was a kid, well before helmets were regarded as any sort of "normal" for cycling, and
I didn't

sustain

Quoted message said:

any head injuries. That anecdote doesn't prove anything any more than yours: in short, anecdotes,
whether "for" or "against" aren't really useful data.

And I know a child -- Corinne Low, pictured and with a link to her essay from
users.bestweb.netlather.htmOpen ↗ -- who had a bike accident wearing a helmet, but landed
on her unprotected face and got cut pretty badly. Which makes me wonder why they don't have face
shields like motorcylce helmets, or are those useless in impact situations too?

Quoted message said:

I know of someone who was killed when he slipped and fell and banged

his

Quoted message said:

head getting out the bath, but that doesn't make it a Really Good Idea to wear helmets in the bath
and shower. I was quite possibly saved a fractured skull by a cycle helmet once, but due to the
unusual nature

of

Quoted message said:

the accident (hit by a car spinning out from a collision on a road I wasn't even cycling on at the
time) I could've had the same result had

I

Quoted message said:

been a pedestrian. I don't see people wearing them as pedestrians, so if it isn't a cast-iron
reason to do that, it isn't a cast-iron reason to wear it on the bike either.

In 1991 went to Calif. to visit my sister, and was amused to see my little niece & nephew put on
helmets to bicycle ride or roller skate -- neither of which caused them to move faster than I walk,
and both of which they did on the sidewalk -- and then took them off to climb on monkey bars & other
structures in a playground! Apparently they were following some arbitrary rules that wheels required
helmets, and absence of wheels required they not be worn, regardless of the actual danger of the
situation.

Producing more serious head injuries than either of those situations are falls on stairs, and next
to that accidents in cars. Yet somehow wearing helmets in cars other than during races has not
caught on, nor has wearing them in buildings.

BTW, I'm in the Bronx, NY, and have never worn them. I didn't wear a scrum cap to play rugby,
either. Of course that was some years ago, before they had the headgear that's popular now. I played
a little American tackle football way back too, but never with any of that body armor, although a
cousin bought me a helmet; I'd've been afraid to play in a formal game with others wearing such.

In any situation where head injury might come up, I'm actually more afraid of neck injury. There are
conceivable things that could be worn to prevent neck injury but AFAICT they'd severely limit head
movement. In cars I go for lap & shoulder belts, although one consultant told me they contribute to
as many deaths or injuries as they prevent; I can only imagine that in certain crash situations they
prevent one from ducking an object coming at your head, but I haven't seen enough confirmatory data
to dissuade me from wearing them. (A few years ago, however, a statistic quoted by NY Auto Club
supposedly to boost wearing of belts actually showed they had no effect on frequency of fatalities
among front seat occupants in New York City.)

Robert

On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 09:52:54 -0500, "Robert Goodman" <[email hidden]> wrote:

SNIP

Quoted message said:

And I know a child -- Corinne Low, pictured and with a link to her essay from
users.bestweb.netlather.htmOpen ↗ -- who had a bike accident wearing a helmet, but
landed on her unprotected face and got cut pretty badly. Which makes me wonder why they don't have
face shields like motorcylce helmets, or are those useless in impact situations too?

Ye Gods. You could also wear full body armour like the downhillers do; just to be on the safe side,
you know. You can never have too much safety. For the sake of the children etc etc etc.

Alternatively you could (a) stay at home and die of heart failure or
(b) commute by car and be lethal danger to those around you.

SNIP

On Fri, 04 Apr 2003 11:27:49 GMT, drifter scrawled: ) I know of a dental surgeon that didn't wear
one and had a single ) accident and fractured his jaw and had other serious injuries. Just a )
couple of weeks ago I was climbing up a steep grade slowly and lost my ) balance and fell against a
lamppost. Wearing a helmet, no injuries.

There seems to be lots of *anecdotal* evidence about how helmets *do* help to reduce the severity of
crashes. Both a friend and I have had crashes where there's no doubt that the presence of a helmet
resulted in minor injuries to me, and only a grazed cheek to my friend.

"But the helmet looks more damaged than the crash would really warrant, because that's what they do:
they soak up the shock and turn into a polyrystene mess." Not so: I only gauge how hard we hit the
ground by the damage to other objects that struck it the same time. My (very strong, for reasons
involving wallops to previous frames) glasses frames were smashed to the extent that, at the very
least, it would've resulted in concussion for me had I not been prevented from hitting the ground by
my helmet and glasses. The helmet, although a write-off, wasn't so badly damaged as I've heard: just
a serious dent.

With that in mind, I'd be interested in (reasonable, un-Damerell i.e. open to discussion) theories
as to why this anecdotal evidence somehow doesn't affect the statistics. I wonder why helmets don't
seem to change the overall severity of accidents, even when in individual accidents that I hear
about, there's often no doubt that a helmet has done some real good.

Personally I swear by helmets: from very personal experience. But I want to understand why the stats
seem to prove me wrong for "the average cyclist." Who is having the near-death experiences that make
up for my narrow squeaks? And isn't he or she getting sick of it? Do helmets encourage more reckless
behaviour in some cyclists, or even in some motorists?

J-P

On Fri, 04 Apr 2003 14:21:09 +0100, Peter Clinch scrawled: ) Liability is a non-issue in the UK,
helmets aren't compulsory here.

Neither are parts of the Highway Code; yet they still translate into liability. Is it really
different for helmets, given the HC recommends wearing them?

J-P
--
Emmanuel Goldstein: During the recent troubles, 2600 got lots of email urging them to attack China,
all of it from Hotmail accounts. Hotmail records the sender's address in an X-Originating-IP field,
so 2600 checked these up. They were *all* from .mil domains.