Cute but...

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

I've just received the latest London Cyclist.

The front cover shows a yard full of kids on bicycles.

All but two have their heads covered. Some h*lm*ts are back to front,
many are to far back, many are far too loose, some sit askew on the
head. In fact, there don't seem to be many worn correctly.

Didja see the last "Cycle", where some numpty replied to my letter
in the previous issue saying not to sweep diverse things into
single categories and then went on to (a) sweep all off-road and
off-road cyclists into a single category where a helmet is a
"no-brainer" and (b) sweep all publications using RTA stats into a
single bin of useless rubbish with too many confounding factors?
The illustrative photo supplied (I don't know whether by the
letter's author or CTC) features a chap wearing his helmet inna too
far back on his head stylee...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Didja see the last "Cycle", where some numpty replied to my letter
in the previous issue saying not to sweep diverse things into
single categories and then went on to (a) sweep all off-road and
off-road cyclists into a single category where a helmet is a
"no-brainer" and (b) sweep all publications using RTA stats into a
single bin of useless rubbish with too many confounding factors?

I did. I was nearly almost tempted to write and point that out, but
so far have slumped into can't-be-bothered.

Quoted message said:

The illustrative photo supplied (I don't know whether by the
letter's author or CTC) features a chap wearing his helmet inna too
far back on his head stylee...

I assumed that was the correspondent. It was the observation that he
thinks helmets solve all wrongs even when you wear them so horribly
wrongly that was the deciding factor into pushing me into despair that
he'd get any sort of message.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Peter Clinch <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Didja see the last "Cycle", where some numpty replied to my letter
in the previous issue saying not to sweep diverse things into
single categories and then went on to (a) sweep all off-road and
off-road cyclists into a single category where a helmet is a
"no-brainer" and (b) sweep all publications using RTA stats into a
single bin of useless rubbish with too many confounding factors?
The illustrative photo supplied (I don't know whether by the
letter's author or CTC) features a chap wearing his helmet inna too
far back on his head stylee...

Yes.
Some things are so stupid I won't waste my time with them...

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Peter Clinch wrote on 02/10/2006 18:50 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Didja see the last "Cycle", where some numpty replied to my letter in
the previous issue saying not to sweep diverse things into single
categories and then went on to (a) sweep all off-road and off-road
cyclists into a single category where a helmet is a "no-brainer" and (b)
sweep all publications using RTA stats into a single bin of useless
rubbish with too many confounding factors? The illustrative photo
supplied (I don't know whether by the letter's author or CTC) features a
chap wearing his helmet inna too far back on his head stylee...

I did and was moved to rearrange some electrons into a reply

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Tony Raven said:

I did and was moved to rearrange some electrons into a reply

Good, hope others chime in too to give a bit of critical mass to the
point. I have been tempted but thus far have been unable to come up
with a form of words that doesn't look like a to and fro point scoring
match where I lack the grace not to be spectacularly rude...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch wrote on 03/10/2006 08:58 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

I did and was moved to rearrange some electrons into a reply

Good, hope others chime in too to give a bit of critical mass to the
point. I have been tempted but thus far have been unable to come up
with a form of words that doesn't look like a to and fro point scoring
match where I lack the grace not to be spectacularly rude...

Pete.

My response FWIW:

Adam Chambers is correct to note a distinction between helmets for on
and off road riding since, as far as I know, the research highlighting
the failure of helmets to protect cyclists is nearly all derived from
road and cycle path riding. However there are good indicators that
helmets may not be such a good idea off road either.
This year there have been reports of a steady flow of helmeted cyclists
from Seven Stanes into Scottish hospitals. Scotland on Sunday (Boom
sport's mounting injury toll, 7 May 2006) reported at least ten every
weekend to one hospital alone. There are indications that riders are
taking greater risks because they believe the helmet will protect them -
an example of the well known phenomenon of risk compensation.

Mr Chambers also points to his helmet saving him from serious injuries
off-road on numerous occasions. Like the counterpart road anecdotes of
"a helmet saved my life" he is undoubtedly attributing far more
protection to the helmet than it warrants. If it had saved him on
numerous occasions then all the un-helmeted cyclists, who would have had
similarly frequent accidents, would be in hospital with serious injuries
by now and we just don't see that happening. One therefore has to
conclude that either helmeted cyclists are uniquely prone to these sorts
of accidents or the helmet didn't really save them from anything much.

Yes the data is incomplete but in the absence of data to the contrary it
is unwise to assume it is unrepresentative. The hospital admissions
data is the best we have at the moment for serious injuries to both road
and off-road cyclists and there is little in there to give comfort to Mr
Chambers.

Dr Tony Raven

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Tony Raven said:

Mr Chambers also points to his helmet saving him from serious injuries
off-road on numerous occasions.

If the helmet was called on to protect him on numerous occasions, as
opposed to just the one, the severity of the earlier incidents could
not have been enough to cause serious injury or death. If any incident
was serious enough to attribute the saving of a life to the helmet, the
helmet would have been written off by the impact, and thus nolonger
available to save a life again.

Even if a helmet is apparently still intact, it should be discarded
after a hard enough blow.

David Lloyd at play, at work.

"Helen Deborah Vecht" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've just received the latest London Cyclist.

The front cover shows a yard full of kids on bicycles.

All but two have their heads covered. Some h*lm*ts are back to
front,
many are to far back, many are far too loose, some sit askew on the
head. In fact, there don't seem to be many worn correctly.

I seem to recall that the official policy for the magazine is to show
approximately the same number of people with helmets and without,
although that's not within just one picture.

I hope they haven't forgotten. I haven't really been looking.

Jeremy Parker