A Helmet saved my life

"paul" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance. Statistics are a rare and beautiful
brance of mathematics, but without context, you end up
with a group of meaninless numbers.

100% of people I've just polled agree.

Quoted message said:

Statistics presented as fact arew being presented either
by the dishonest or the ignorant

Excuse snipping the end of that sentence but I liked that.

Quoted post said:

posted by Paul

<...
Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance. Statistics are a rare and beautiful brance
of mathematics, but without context, you end up with a group
of meaninless numbers. Statistics is a complicated subject,
which is why people spend years studying them. It just isn't
possible for a non mathematican to appreciate the subtlety
concepts presented in statistical form. Statistics presented
as fact arew being presented either by the dishonest or the
ignorant, unless bothe the presenter and the audiance have a
common understanding of the basis of the figures.

These are my opinions. If you don't like them, I have
others.
...>

.paul

Statistics is not a branch of mathematics! (let alone, a "rare" one)
Statistics is not mathematics - do a google search using that phrase and see for yourself - statistics does use mathematics but that does not mean that it is mathematics.

<"There is absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance." ==> absolute, unmitigated rubbish!

<"Statistics is a complicated subject"
==> no it's not - if you think it's complicated then that's more of a statement about yourself than the subject.

<"It just isn't possible for a non mathematican to appreciate the subtlety concepts presented in statistical form."--> more rubbish.

<"These are my opinions. If you don't like them, I have others."-->
If I don't like them, you have others??? no, no please not more. I think you're confusing "opinions" with "drivel".

Roger

paul said:

I have to admit that I rememeber very little after the
thought 'I think I'm going a little fast for this corner'
then........

Quoted message said:

....... speed cameras are a differet matter. If people
could be educated and trusted to travel at appropriate
speeds to the conditions, then I beleive that speed limits
wouldn't be necessary.

So it sounds like we should have speed limits for bikes, or
do you consider yourself educated and to be trusted now?

Glad you are OK whatever it was that saved you.

Tony

RogerDodger said:

Statistics is not a branch of mathematics! (let alone, a
"rare" one) Statistics is not mathematics - do a google
search using that phrase and see for yourself - statistics
does use mathematics but that does not mean that it is
mathematics.

Errm Easily done, Google : statistics definition : top
definition :

statistics -- a branch of applied mathematics concerned with
the collection and interpretation of quantitative data and
the use of probability theory to estimate population
parameters

Should we treat the rest of your post as equally valid as
your first statement?

pk

PK said:

Errm Easily done, Google : statistics definition : top
definition :

statistics -- a branch of applied mathematics concerned
with the collection and interpretation of quantitative
data and the use of probability theory to estimate
population parameters

I think the fact I studied it first in detail in a "Further
Maths" AS level course, going into the serious maths behind
how and why it works, is pretty much a decider. No need for
Googling on this one for me.

The real problem is people who feed data into a stats
package and push buttons until something says
"Significant", and then think that that proves the
"conclusion" they'd decided on before they started. We all
know the worst offender, and his name starts with Paul and
ends with Smith... *That* isn't maths, but properly used
the systems *are*.

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 ↗

paul said:

Well, that's my opinion, and I was there. I have to admit
that I rememeber very little after the thought 'I think
I'm going a little fast for this corner' then the next
thought was 'ouch' followed by 'I'm cold' and 'who are all
these people, and why are they standing around me' and
finally, one of the clearest memories 'That#s cold' as the
scooped me of the floor with a metal 'scoop strecher'

My personal anecdote was traumatic enough that I don't
remember *anything* of the actual details, though they've
been reported to my by my friends who were just behind on
their tandem. I think there is a fair chance it saved me a
fractured skull, and almost certainly saved me a damn sight
more discomfort than I experienced, all good reasons for
being glad I was wearing it. But I will not say "my helmet
saved my life", period. There isn't really very good
evidence that it would have done, and if all it took to kill
someone was exiting the bike having lost it on a corner then
the figures would have shown complete carnage for many, many
years. They don't.

Quoted message said:

Then there was an ambulance ride with lights and things,
an examination, some xrays and then a taxi home!

I got all of those but a bed for the night as well! And
I still can't and won't say, hand on heart "my helmet
saved my life".

Quoted message said:

I don't agree with compulsory helmet wearing, you and
yours will be the only ones to suffer, and it's therefore
your perogitave. I will think you a fool if you don't wear
one, that's my perogative.

It is, but it's still the case that though you may very well
experience less danger in the event of an accident, you are
actually quite unlikely to have the accident to start with.
Your reasoning *should* apply equally to coming down stairs:
people suffer nasty head injuries doing that all the time,
simple falls in a domestic environment account for a fair
few A&E head injury entries. So if you think someone's a
fool for not wearing something that will possibly mean a
reduced injury in the event of an unlikely accident then you
should wear a helmet for a lot more than cycling. People are
killed getting in and out of the bath! It probably sounds
like I'm being facetious, but in the wake of my prang I
thought *exactly* the way you do now but subsequent mulling
over it shows my logic was *not* consistent.

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance. Statistics are a rare and beautiful
brance of mathematics, but without context, you end up
with a group of meaninless numbers. Statistics is a
complicated subject, which is why people spend years
studying them. It just isn't possible for a non
mathematican to appreciate the subtlety concepts presented
in statistical form. Statistics presented as fact arew
being presented either by the dishonest or the ignorant,
unless bothe the presenter and the audiance have a common
understanding of the basis of the figures.

Though I agree with much of the above, saying people
shouldn't present statistical evidence assumes that none of
the people involved know what they're talking about. It's
just possible that some of them do... And the simple
statistic that numbers of folk dying from cycling related
head injuries is, and has been, a pretty low number doesn't
require much insight into higher maths to appreciate.

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 ↗

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

Quoted message said:

Well, that's my opinion, and I was there. I have to admit
that I rememeber very little after the thought 'I think
I'm going a little fast for this corner' then the next
thought was 'ouch' followed by 'I'm cold' and 'who are all
these people, and why are they standing around me' and
finally, one of the clearest memories 'That#s cold' as the
scooped me of the floor with a metal 'scoop strecher'

Then there was an ambulance ride with lights and things,
an examination, some xrays and then a taxi home!

I bought a new helmet straigh away (no choice really, my
old one was now to big) I was uncoscious for a while (5
mins? they'd called an ambulanc and the police had
arrived!) the bike was a mess and my beauty wasn't
improved.

I don't agree with compulsory helmet wearing, you and
yours will be the only ones to suffer, and it's therefore
your perogitave. I will think you a fool if you don't wear
one, that's my perogative.

speed cameras are a differet matter. If people could be
educated and trusted to travel at appropriate speeds to
the conditions, then I beleive that speed limits wouldn't
be necessary. However, it just isn't possible to educate
or trust people sufficiently, so speed cameras will remain
a fact of motoring life.

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance. Statistics are a rare and beautiful
brance of mathematics, but without context, you end up
with a group of meaninless numbers. Statistics is a
complicated subject, which is why people spend years
studying them. It just isn't possible for a non
mathematican to appreciate the subtlety concepts presented
in statistical form. Statistics presented as fact arew
being presented either by the dishonest or the ignorant,
unless bothe the presenter and the audiance have a common
understanding of the basis of the figures.

These are my opinions. If you don't like them, I
have others.

No, thanks. I don't like these and I don't want to hear your
others. What made you think anyone did in the first place?

In "]news:[email hidden],
paul <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance.

Except of course if you say clearly what you're measuring,
your null hypothesis, the fact that correlation is not
causation, etc, etc,

(Disclaimer: Any use of stats I've made has not involved
people or their behaviour, and I am not an expert.)

In "]news:[email hidden],
paul <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance.

Except of course if you say clearly what you're measuring,
your null hypothesis, the fact that correlation is not
causation, etc, etc,

(Disclaimer: Any use of stats I've made has not involved
people or their behaviour, and I am not an expert.)

In "]news:[email hidden],
Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

People are killed getting in and out of the bath! It
probably sounds like I'm being facetious, but in the wake
of my prang I thought *exactly* the way you do now but
subsequent mulling over it shows my logic was *not*
consistent.

What's more, helmets would help the head float and stay
above water in such cases, reducing the risk of drowning. 🙂

In "]news:[email hidden],
Peter Clinch <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

People are killed getting in and out of the bath! It
probably sounds like I'm being facetious, but in the wake
of my prang I thought *exactly* the way you do now but
subsequent mulling over it shows my logic was *not*
consistent.

What's more, helmets would help the head float and stay
above water in such cases, reducing the risk of drowning. 🙂

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

Quoted message said:

[snip]

Statistics is not a branch of mathematics! (let alone, a
"rare" one) Statistics is not mathematics - do a google
search using that phrase and see for yourself - statistics
does use mathematics but that does not mean that it is
mathematics.

Is there any point in telling you your wrong? no,
thought not

Quoted message said:

<"There is absolutly no point in citing statistics in
support of a political stance." ==> absolute, unmitigated
rubbish!

<"Statistics is a complicated subject"
==> no it's not - if you think it's complicated then
==> that's more of a statement about yourself than
==> the subject.

I suppose if all you've done is GCSE data handling, thenno
it's not complicated. But even the stats that my wife did
for her psychology devree were complicated. I've seen
simpler physics equations

Quoted message said:

<"It just isn't possible for a non mathematican to
appreciate the subtlety concepts presented in statistical
form."--> more rubbish.

Are you a mathematician? given the above I doubt it, as you
are not aware of the subtleties

Quoted message said:

<"These are my opinions. If you don't like them, I have
others."--> If I don't like them, you have others??? no,
no please not more. I think you're confusing "opinions"
with "drivel".

No, whether or not it's drivel, it's still a valid opinion,
and its mine.

Quoted message said:

Roger

--

--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

In article <[email hidden]>,
junk@raven- family.com says...

Quoted message said:

paul said:

I have to admit that I rememeber very little after the
thought 'I think I'm going a little fast for this
corner' then........

Quoted message said:

....... speed cameras are a differet matter. If people
could be educated and trusted to travel at appropriate
speeds to the conditions, then I beleive that speed
limits wouldn't be necessary.

So it sounds like we should have speed limits for
bikes, or do you consider yourself educated and to be
trusted now?

Well, I consider myself educated enough to realise that
speed of itself when used in appropriate locations and
conditions won't cause an accident. However, if you do have
an accident, the outcome IS going to be worse as the speed
is increased. Whether I consider myself trusted is not the
point, I think like most people, if there are time
pressures on me, I am more likely to travel faster than the
posted speed.

Quoted message said:

Glad you are OK whatever it was that saved you.

Thankyou.

Quoted message said:

Tony

--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

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

Quoted message said:

paul wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Then there was an ambulance ride with lights and things,
an examination, some xrays and then a taxi home!

I got all of those but a bed for the night as well! And I
still can't and won't say, hand on heart "my helmet saved
my life".

Ok. so I admit to a bit of melodrama there. I think the
helmet PROBABLY reduced the level of my injuries 🙂

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't agree with compulsory helmet wearing, you and
yours will be the only ones to suffer, and it's
therefore your perogitave. I will think you a fool if
you don't wear one, that's my perogative.

It is, but it's still the case that though you may very
well experience less danger in the event of an accident,
you are actually quite unlikely to have the accident to
start with. Your reasoning *should* apply equally to
coming down stairs: people suffer nasty head injuries
doing that all the time, simple falls in a domestic
environment account for a fair few A&E head injury
entries. So if you think someone's a fool for not wearing
something that will possibly mean a reduced injury in the
event of an unlikely accident then you should wear a
helmet for a lot more than cycling. People are killed
getting in and out of the bath! It probably sounds like
I'm being facetious, but in the wake of my prang I thought
*exactly* the way you do now but subsequent mulling over
it shows my logic was *not* consistent.

It all comes down to personal risk analysis. It would
require some quite sufisticated stats ananlysis to say
that there is more or less risk involved in any given
activity, but MY perceived wisdom is that cycling is more
hazardous than many of the daily activities I indulge in.
If you add risk compensation into the equation, then I
conceed that it possibly balances out. Besides, I've got
three children, and I want them to wear helmets, so it's a
lead by example thing 🙂

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance. Statistics are a rare and beautiful
brance of mathematics, but without context, you end up
with a group of meaninless numbers. Statistics is a
complicated subject, which is why people spend years
studying them. It just isn't possible for a non
mathematican to appreciate the subtlety concepts
presented in statistical form. Statistics presented as
fact arew being presented either by the dishonest or the
ignorant, unless bothe the presenter and the audiance
have a common understanding of the basis of the figures.

Though I agree with much of the above, saying people
shouldn't present statistical evidence assumes that none
of the people involved know what they're talking about.
It's just possible that some of them do... And the simple
statistic that numbers of folk dying from cycling related
head injuries is, and has been, a pretty low number
doesn't require much insight into higher maths to
appreciate.

Ok, maybe I'm being a little pedantic, but I did ad the
dishoesty clause to cover those that know what they are
doing. My main grip, I suppose, is tabloid journolists using
stats to sensationalise issues without explaining the
background.

Quoted message said:

Pete.

--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

In article <uYm4c.4430$2s5.1671@news-
binary.blueyonder.co.uk>, [email hidden]
says...

Quoted message said:

No, thanks. I don't like these and I don't want to hear
your others. What made you think anyone did in the
first place?

Ego? or possibly beer.
--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

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

Quoted message said:

In "]news:[email hidden],
paul <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance.

Except of course if you say clearly what you're measuring,
your null hypothesis, the fact that correlation is not
causation, etc, etc,

I thought I'd covered that by implication, but yes I agree.

Quoted message said:

(Disclaimer: Any use of stats I've made has not involved
people or their behaviour, and I am not an expert.)

Nor am I, but I quite anjoy stats analysis. I must get
out more 🙂

Quoted message said:

--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

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

Quoted message said:

In "]news:[email hidden], Peter Clinch
<[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

People are killed getting in and out of the bath! It
probably sounds like I'm being facetious, but in the
wake of my prang I thought *exactly* the way you do now
but subsequent mulling over it shows my logic was *not*
consistent.

What's more, helmets would help the head float and stay
above water in such cases, reducing the risk of
drowning. 🙂

Nah, the bouancy is at the back, so it would turn you round
and put you face down. I mean 72.6% of all people who drown
in the bath do so on a week day 🙂
--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

People are killed getting in and out of the bath! It
probably sounds like I'm being facetious, but in the
wake of my prang I thought *exactly* the way you do now
but subsequent mulling over it shows my logic was *not*
consistent.

What's more, helmets would help the head float and stay
above water in such cases, reducing the risk of
drowning. 🙂

And should you end up in hospital anyway, you can use the
upturned helmet as a fruit bowl.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-
virus system (grisoft.comgrisoft.comOpen ↗). Version: 6.0.619 /
Virus Database: 398 - Release Date: 10/03/2004

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

Quoted message said:

Statistics are another one of my soapboxes. There is
absolutly no point in citing statistics in support of a
political stance.

This is the universal argument of people attempting to argue
a position that is not supported be evidence.