Loony letter in Reading Post

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

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,
Terry D ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Something along the lines of, perhaps:

Your sidebox to L Watsham's 'star letter' entitled 'If
Troy had worn a helmet he might be with us now' is
dangerously misleading and puts children at risk. Cycle
helmets sold in the UK are tested only for impacts up
to fifteen miles per hour. The probability of injury or
death increases with the fourth power of the speed of
impact, so if the car which hit Troy was travelling at
only thirty miles per hour, the helmet would have been
able to absorb only one sixteenth of the force.

Troy's nemesis was in fact travelling at 15 mph, not 30
mph:, and from the description of the accident it seems to
me that a helmet might well have made a difference.

However, the broken front brake was also a contributory
factor. Why isn't the "save the children" brigade calling
for mandatory MOTs for bikes?

From:

<thisishampshire.net3Open ↗
1/ANDOVER_NEWS_NE WS20ZM.html>

Quoted message said:

Troy died from serious head injuries caused when his bike
collided with a Smart car as it attempted to join the A343
from the Greenwich Way junction just after 7am on 21 May.

He wasn't wearing a helmet and the front brake on his BMX
was broken.

At an inquest into the 12-year-old's death on Wednesday,
Mr Burge said while Troy's death was an accident, certain
contributory factors had to be taken into consideration.

The inquest heard that due to poor visibility and no
barrier at the junction, neither Troy nor car driver Hazel
Branston, (who was only travelling at 15mph) <snip>

So, at that speed maybe a helmet would have saved his life
then....though since he was content to ride with broken
brakes, whether he'd ever had worn one is another matter.
--
Tumbleweed

email replies not necessary but to contact use;
tumbleweednews at hotmail dot com

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

Quoted message said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,
Terry D ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

Quoted message said:

Something along the lines of, perhaps:

Your sidebox to L Watsham's 'star letter' entitled 'If
Troy had worn a helmet he might be with us now' is
dangerously misleading and puts children at risk. Cycle
helmets sold in the UK are tested only for impacts up
to fifteen miles per hour. The probability of injury or
death increases with the fourth power of the speed of
impact, so if the car which hit Troy was travelling at
only thirty miles per hour, the helmet would have been
able to absorb only one sixteenth of the force.

Troy's nemesis was in fact travelling at 15 mph, not 30
mph:, and from the description of the accident it seems to
me that a helmet might well have made a difference.

However, the broken front brake was also a contributory
factor. Why isn't the "save the children" brigade calling
for mandatory MOTs for bikes?

From:

<thisishampshire.net3Open ↗
1/ANDOVER_NEWS_N EWS20ZM.html>

Quoted message said:

Troy died from serious head injuries caused when his bike
collided with a Smart car as it attempted to join the A343
from the Greenwich Way junction just after 7am on 21 May.

He wasn't wearing a helmet and the front brake on his BMX
was broken.

At an inquest into the 12-year-old's death on Wednesday,
Mr Burge said while Troy's death was an accident, certain
contributory factors had to be taken into consideration.

The inquest heard that due to poor visibility and no
barrier at the junction, neither Troy nor car driver Hazel
Branston, (who was only travelling at 15mph) could see
each other until the young cyclist rode out into the road
and collided with the nearside of the car.

[...]

He died at Southampton General Hospital eight days after
the accident, which caused a slow bleed on his brain.

The gist of the article was in fact slanted towards better
marked out cycle paths.

"Coroner backs bike campaign"

The "campaign" in question was for a barrier.

<quote>

The inquest heard that due to poor visibility and no barrier
at the junction, neither Troy nor car driver Hazel Branston,
(who was only travelling at 15mph) could see each other
until the young cyclist rode out into the road and collided
with the nearside of the car.

Mr Burge said: "It seems to me the local authority should
consider making it abundantly clear the path is for
pedestrians only and not for cyclists.

"Or if they acknowledge cyclists have, and will, continue to
use this particular walkway then steps need to be taken as a
matter of urgency to prevent any possible reoccurrence in
the future.

"I have been informed a temporary barrier has been put up in
response to a campaign and I wholly support and endorse
that." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

</quote>

It was Troy's mother who brought up the matter of helmets

<quote>

After Troy's death, his mother Carlie Annetts made a plea
for all cyclists to wear helmets and the Andover Advertiser
launched its Be Safe, Wear a Helmet Campaign.

</quote>

And without wishing to be seen t be cynical, grieving
parents
(a) are hardly the most objective of judges, and (b) make
good campaign\human interest fodder for the Press.

The coroner fell in with this -

<quote>

Mr Burge added his support at Wednesday's hearing. He said:
"As a general warning to members of the public I think it is
appropriate to stress the importance of ensuring your
children do wear helmets whenever out on a bicycle and that
these bikes are maintained properly.

</quote>

Although he did add the rider about the bikes needing to be
properly maintained. Basically it's probably a bad move to
contradict grieving parents under any circumstances. More
especially in public. The only problem being when such
emotional reactions are very often exploited by the Press as
here, and lead to bad laws.

Curious

On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 00:13:02 +0100, "Nigel Randell"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Out of interest, do you have an attribution for the
injury/death risk being proportional to the fourth power of
impact speed (of the car, I assume)?

Joksch H. Velocity change and fatality risk in a crash: a
rule of thumb. Accid Anal Prev 1985;17:155–70

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 07:09:59 +0100, Marc Brett
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Troy's nemesis was in fact travelling at 15 mph, not 30
mph:, and from the description of the accident it seems to
me that a helmet might well have made a difference.

Whereas not riding off the pavement into the path of the car
definitely would have made a difference.

Quoted message said:

However, the broken front brake was also a
contributory factor.

Er, more "primary causative factor" actually.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 08:04:14 +0100, "Tumbleweed"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

So, at that speed maybe a helmet would have saved his life
then....though since he was content to ride with broken
brakes, whether he'd ever had worn one is another matter.

That is the curious thing. His mother has been persuaded,
presumably by BeHIT, that a helmet law would have allowed
her to force Troy to wear a helmet. In the circumstances, he
was already committing two offences (riding with defective
brakes and riding on the footway), so it seems naive to
expect him to obey a third (and remember his mother was not
present at the start of the ride). It also looks like
misdirection, since the two offences he was committing were
the cause of the crash, so making a third to mitigate the
effects is a very poor substitute for enforcing the laws
which would have prevented it happening. Especially since in
this case the car was apparently travelling at under half
the normal free-travelling speed of cars on urban roads; had
he survived it would have been blind luck.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On 1 Jul 2004 18:23:07 -0700, [email hidden] (James
Annan) wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Did anyone take a pdf copy of the original crook and fake?

Check your email.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On 2/7/04 10:04 am, in article [email hidden],

Just zis Guy said:

On 1 Jul 2004 18:23:07 -0700,
[email hidden] (James Annan) wrote in
message <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Did anyone take a pdf copy of the original crook
and fake?

Check your email.

I'd lost James' email otherwise he'd have been snowed under
with copies ;-)

..d

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

Quoted message said:

Just zis Guy said:

Experimenting with an alternative approach at:

I'd be inclined leave out the extra barb on Sheikh and
Bheikh for the sake of showing You're Nice and Keeping
It Snappy.

how about not worrying about refs in the bit "for
publication" but include a series or Notes for Editors at
the bottom as in a press release. Keep even these short to
avoid seeming too obsessive but it might be persuasive to an
editor to publish a snappy rebuttal if the simple points
have been demonstrated to him/her to be true

best wishes james

Just zis Guy said:

On Fri, 02 Jul 2004 07:09:59 +0100, Marc Brett

Quoted message said:

Troy's nemesis was in fact travelling at 15 mph, not 30
mph:, and from the description of the accident it seems to
me that a helmet might well have made a difference.

Whereas not riding off the pavement into the path of the
car definitely would have made a difference.

Quoted message said:

However, the broken front brake was also a
contributory factor.

Er, more "primary causative factor" actually.

Do you know if he tried to brake and failed? If he just rode
out into the road without thinking of stopping and looking,
a working front brake would have made no difference.

On 02 Jul 2004 14:24:17 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Alan
Braggins) wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Whereas not riding off the pavement into the path of the
car definitely would have made a difference.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

However, the broken front brake was also a contributory
factor.

Er, more "primary causative factor" actually.

Quoted message said:

Do you know if he tried to brake and failed? If he just
rode out into the road without thinking of stopping and
looking, a working front brake would have made no
difference.

OK, so the primary causative factor was riding off the
pavement into the path of a car on a bike with no brakes, a
situation in which I think we're all agreed that if a helmet
did save your life it would be blind luck, and if you do die
then lack of a helmet is not what killed you.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:41:26 +0100, "Dr Curious"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less): ...

Quoted message said:

Finally your claim "What killed Troy Parker was not failure
to wear a helmet, but riding a bicycle with broken brakes
off the pavement into the path of a car. As a parent I know
what lessons I draw from this incident."

...

That, all by itself, sounds like the ideal refutation
letter.

It's concise. It's clear. It's shorter than the stimulus
letter. It's very easy to understand.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 15:25:26 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 15:12:32 +0100, "Clive George"

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Guy - it's "sound bite" - the letter you're replying to
even has it right!

And there was I thinking it was derived from the computer
term "byte", being a small unit of information.

What do you think the derivation of 'byte' is?

(Not to mention the word for a 4-bit chunk, i.e. half-a-
byte. Who here can still remember the 'nybble'?)

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

Gawnsoft said:

What do you think the derivation of 'byte' is?

According to the Hacker's Jargon Lexicon
(info.astrian.net):Open ↗

"Historical note: The term was coined by Werner Buchholz in
1956 during the early design phase for the IBM Stretch
computer; originally it was described as 1 to 6 bits
(typical I/O equipment of the period used 6-bit chunks of
information). The move to an 8-bit byte happened in late
1956, and this size was later adopted and promulgated as a
standard by the System/360. The word was coined by mutating
the word `bite' so it would not be accidentally misspelled
as bit. See also nybble."

Quoted message said:

(Not to mention the word for a 4-bit chunk, i.e. half-a-
byte. Who here can still remember the 'nybble'?)

I came across them as "nibbles" in the manuals for Zortech
C++ a while ago now (ca. 1990).

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] dundee.ac.uk~pjclinchOpen ↗

Gawnsoft said:

What do you think the derivation of 'byte' is?

(Not to mention the word for a 4-bit chunk, i.e. half-a-
byte. Who here can still remember the 'nybble'?)

[Smoothes greying locks again]

To say nothing of the tayste, playte, chawmp, gawble and
even dynner...

--

Dave Larrington - legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uklegslarry.beerdrinkers.co.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
bhpc.org.ukbhpc.org.ukOpen ↗
===========================================================

in message <[email hidden]>, Gawnsoft

(') said:

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 15:25:26 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you
know?" <[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 15:12:32 +0100, "Clive George"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Guy - it's "sound bite" - the letter you're replying to
even has it right!

And there was I thinking it was derived from the computer
term "byte", being a small unit of information.

What do you think the derivation of 'byte' is?

(Not to mention the word for a 4-bit chunk, i.e. half-a-
byte. Who here can still remember the 'nybble'?)

Ha! I remember when proper computers has 27 bit words (1
mark bit, 2 type bits, 12 bit CAR, 12 bit CDR).

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

;; Human history becomes more and more a race
between ;; education and catastrophe.
H.G. Wells, "The Outline
of History"

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

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 14:41:26 +0100, "Dr Curious"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less): ...

Quoted message said:

Finally your claim "What killed Troy Parker was not
failure to wear a helmet, but riding a bicycle with
broken brakes off the pavement into the path of a car. As
a parent I know what lessons I draw from this incident."

...

That, all by itself, sounds like the ideal
refutation letter.

It's concise. It's clear. It's shorter than the stimulus
letter. It's very easy to understand.

...

Yes indeed. Its all the parents' fault.

Any newspaper is bound to print that.

But unfortunately not here on Planet Earth.

More especialy when another newspaper has launched a new
campaign on the strength of the grieving mother's sudden
enthusiasm for cycling helmets.

Curious

Quoted message said:

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.srOpen ↗
Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.netOpen ↗ Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)

html.dnsalias.netsmalltalkOpen ↗

Just zis Guy said:

[email hidden] (Alan Braggins) wrote in
message

Quoted message said:

Do you know if he tried to brake and failed? If he just
rode out into the road without thinking of stopping and
looking, a working front brake would have made no
difference.

OK, so the primary causative factor was riding off the
pavement into the path of a car on a bike with no brakes

Yes, but is "with no brakes" the primary causative factor of
him riding off the pavement, or merely an incidental detail
in an accident caused by inattention? Do we know? (This
makes no difference at all to the whether a helmet might
have helped and how inappropriate it is to use his death to
campaign for helmet laws instead of, for example, better
cyclist training. I'm just curious. I narrowly avoided a
cyclist not long ago, and the problem wasn't that her brakes
weren't working, it was that she turned right across the
front of my car without looking or signalling.)

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

Quoted message said:

Just zis Guy said:

[email hidden] (Alan Braggins) wrote in
message

Quoted message said:

Do you know if he tried to brake and failed? If he just
rode out into

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

road without thinking of stopping and looking, a working
front brake

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

have made no difference.

OK, so the primary causative factor was riding off the
pavement into the path of a car on a bike with no brakes

Yes, but is "with no brakes" the primary causative factor
of him riding off the pavement, or merely an incidental
detail in an accident caused by inattention? Do we know?

According to the original article in the Andover Post there
was a "misunderstanding" on the boy's part as to the nature
of the "path" he was riding along.

<thisishampshire.net3Open ↗
1/ANDOVER_NEWS_N EWS20ZM.html>

<quote>

The inquest heard that due to poor visibility and no barrier
at the junction, neither Troy nor car driver Hazel Branston,
(who was only travelling at 15mph) could see each other
until the young cyclist rode out into the road and collided
with the nearside of the car.

Mr Burge [The Coroner] said: "It seems to me the local
authority should consider making it abundantly clear the
path is for pedestrians only and not for cyclists.

"Or if they acknowledge cyclists have, and will, continue to
use this particular walkway then steps need to be taken as a
matter of urgency to prevent any possible reoccurrence in
the future.

"I have been informed a temporary barrier has been put up
in response to a campaign and I wholly support and
endorse that."

<references to other factors - faulty brake, Coroners
support for Mother's subsequent enthusism for helmets
snipped>

</quote>

Basically this would be a good line to follow in response to
the Mother's subsequent plea for compulsory helmet
legislation as it places the blame, whether rightly or
wrongly, firmly on the shoulders of the Council. Who are
never the most popular organisations at the best of times,
and can easily evade individual responsibility. by passing
the buck amongst themselves.i.e. no individuals are likely
to be traumatised as a result.

Quoted message said:

(This makes no difference at all to the whether a helmet
might have

helped

Quoted message said:

and how inappropriate it is to use his death to campaign
for helmet laws instead of, for example, better cyclist
training. I'm just curious. I

narrowly

Quoted message said:

avoided a cyclist not long ago, and the problem wasn't
that her brakes

weren't

Quoted message said:

working, it was that she turned right across the front of
my car without looking or signalling.)

Curious

you know? said:

It's official: any of us who are against compulsion are
irrational, obsessive and offensive, and rely on soundbytes
taken out of context. Whereas BeHIT, presumably, are a
model of decorum, and the claim of 28,000 serious injuries
which later turned out to be under 500 was just a slip.
Like the doubling of the fatality figures. And so on.

<url:http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/Docume-
nts/Evening_Post>

Guy

Is the original letter available to read anywhere online?

Thanks, Steven.

you know? said:

On 02 Jul 2004 14:24:17 +0100 (BST),
[email hidden] (Alan Braggins) wrote in
message <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Whereas not riding off the pavement into the path of the
car definitely would have made a difference.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>However, the broken front brake was also a contributory
>factor.
Er, more "primary causative factor" actually.

Quoted message said:

Do you know if he tried to brake and failed? If he just
rode out into the road without thinking of stopping and
looking, a working front brake would have made no
difference.

OK, so the primary causative factor was riding off the
pavement into the path of a car on a bike with no brakes, a
situation in which I think we're all agreed that if a
helmet did save your life it would be blind luck, and if
you do die then lack of a helmet is not what killed you.

Guy, AIUI Troy was actually injured in the face. Is this
correct, and do you happen to know which part of his face?

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain