OK, gotta ask this one.

Trudi Marrapodi said:

This happened to me the other day. I was biking around putting up signs
for my yard sale, and was stopped at a corner taping one of the signs to a
pole.

This is funny - trying to introduce through this backdoor kind of new way of
propaganda: Some evil guys wanted to confuse Mr. Harmless! Smelling like
minor irritation as well: Since we know that, in order to wear such kinds of
'foamed nothing' on one's head, it needs permanent posititive feedback, we
can assure as well that this positive feedback might be expected mainly from
users of motorized vehicles [*]. It needs positive feedback, to signal
acceptance of such latest accessoires in fashion, since, if one would start
to think by oneself instead, one could find oneself too easily having been
trapped into consumer world nonsense.

But now, goes the story, even those motorized contemporaries are found to
give negative feedback. Sure, everyone will immediately be sorry of Mr.
Harmless. Doesn't this smell too much like yet one more flavour of
propaganda?

(Even more, as if, in the end, everyone should know, how high the risk of
head injuries is, during putting up signs in the neighbourhood. And everyone
should have accepted happily this risk to be made highly significant, by
wearing a big colourfull sign on one's head?)

[*] maybe, when seeking to compensate for alienation - when it comes to
know, how to make use of one's own body for transportation. This might be
too complicated a recursion into its own, for normal consumer world
inhabitants - when making use of one's own body for transportation of one's
own body. So there ist as well alleviation of insight, when allowing for a
little detour: in fact, it is more straightforward to see the effect of
transportation of a little 'foamed nothing' on the head of that one who is
involved in performing the transportation. And the effect of transportation
of the owner of that 'foamed nothing' is just happening by chance, as a
special side effect. Now, this is not any more propaganda but consumer world
logic - alleviation of insight has to have a good price.

=v= I've had little kids call me "walnut head," but that's
about it. I've also had comments about wearing the helmet
while not on the bike ... but we'll see who's laughing when
The Big One hits!
<_Jym_>

P.S.: I am not a crackpot.
-- Grampa Simpson

Trudi Marrapodi wrote, in part:
Lengthy online posts from anti-helmet
advocates don't count.

They never do.
Bill, riding bent in Florida
(hence the screen name)

I may be old and fat, but by golly,

I'm Slow!

To e-mail, remove undies

Trudi Marrapodi said:

OK, this is something I just have to ask, because it strikes me as so dumb:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet? Live and in person, I mean. Lengthy online posts from anti-helmet
advocates don't count. I mean, has anyone ever come across you while you
were biking and laughed specifically at your helmet?

Only tangentially...

You see, I have my own (Classic) G.I. Joe-sized action figure of Me! I
tailor-made it out of the comic-book hero "Mage", whom I closely
resemble. And I put him on a bicycle (actually, a Ghost Rider
Flame-Cycle), and I put a helmet on him (actually, a Pepsi bottle cap),
and I displayed him at work.

And so, I got the question one day, "Why are you wearing a blue bucket
on your head?" I answered, "Because it makes me safer". I'm not
*quite* sure they were talking about my action figure instead of me... B{D>

Quoted message said:

Two idiots whose pickup was stopped at the light yelled "Nice helmet" at
me. When I ignored them, they yelled "HEY!" as if to make sure that I
understood that they were ridiculing ME and got the message. "We *said*:
THAT'S A NICE HELMET! HA HA HA HA HA!"

I got yelled at by an idiot too, last Friday night. While I was riding
along the right side of the right lane of a *very* lightly travelled
four-lane divided roadway, some high school future-frat-boy stuck his
head out of the passenger side window of a Soccer-Mom-SUV in the left
lane to scream wordlessly at me, apparently just to startle me and see
what happens.

Fortunately, I usually ride with a Walkman tape player and stereo
headphones. All this idiot did was convince me, a Walkman *is* a
bicycle *safety device*.

Suffice it to say, the idiots don't care about our helmets, they're just
saying "PING!" as noisily as they can.

--
-------- Scott Eiler B{D> -------- http://www.eilertech.com/ --------

"It seemed an unlikely spot for a sensitive songwriter from Greenwich
Village... She ordered the 20-ounce steak."
-- Lin Brehmer, Chicago DJ, describing his meeting in a steakhouse
with Suzanne Vega.

Trudi Marrapodi said:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet?

I've been made fun of for getting out of the car at a club ride
while wearing one. (I should have been made fun of for driving
a car to a club ride, but that's another matter)

I've also been made fun of for not wearing one while on a club
ride. And then the self-appointed parents running the club
decided to exempt riders without helmets from the club's ride
incentive program, so I dropped out of the club. Pretty much
the same sort of people who would insult me for wearing a
helmet in a car. I no longer pay attention to fools who feel
they have any right to comment on another person's headgear,
unless they try to legislate their choices onto others.

Mitch.

[email hidden] (Trudi Marrapodi) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

OK, this is something I just have to ask, because it strikes me as so dumb:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet? Live and in person, I mean.

Not since the 70s when I was one of very few people wearing a helmet
around Louisville, Kentucky. It only happened once and it was a
couple of teenaged girls who thought I was being overly cautious.

About 10 years ago I suffered a concussion from a fall that shattered
my helmet. Now, I don't know how much protection the helmet provided
or if my injury would have been worse without the helmet, but I am
glad I had it on.

[censored] Durbin
Tallahassee

Trudi Marrapodi said:

OK, this is something I just have to ask, because it strikes me as so
dumb:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet? Live and in person, I mean. Lengthy online posts from
anti-helmet advocates don't count. I mean, has anyone ever come
across you while you were biking and laughed specifically at your
helmet?

This happened to me the other day. I was biking around putting up
signs for my yard sale, and was stopped at a corner taping one of the
signs to a pole. (I didn't see the amount of time I was going to be
spending off the bike taping up the sign to be worth removing the
helmet for. And, for the record, it's a plain old Bell helmet with
red, black and white streaks on it--nothing that particularly stands
out.)

Two idiots whose pickup was stopped at the light yelled "Nice helmet"
at me. When I ignored them, they yelled "HEY!" as if to make sure
that I understood that they were ridiculing ME and got the message.
"We *said*: THAT'S A NICE HELMET! HA HA HA HA HA!"

Of course, I didn't pay them any attention, but I came away from the
encounter still not getting it. What was the point? Did they think it
was hysterical that I was wearing a helmet to put up yard-sale signs?
Did they think I was the equivalent of a conspiracy theorist in a
tinfoil hat? Or did they just think it was hysterically stupid that
someone riding a bike should wear a helmet? And if so, why did they
feel the need to tell me so? I mean, these guys didn't look like
serious anti-helmet advocates. They just looked like a couple of
idiots, possibly drunk, riding around in a pickup on a Friday evening
with nothing better to do than ridicule strangers on the street.

I don't know. If you guys can't come up with a better explanation, I
guess I'm going to have to file this one under "Couple of Drunk
Idiots Riding Around In a Pickup On a Friday Evening." Who might
think that helmet-wearing is ridiculous under any circumstances, even
traveling in outer space--simply because they themselves have nothing
inside their skulls that needs protection, and are unaware that
anyone else might harbor any notion to attempt to protect the
contents of their own.

Shoulda just head-butted the idiots. Even they would get the idea.

On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 08:18:28 -0400, [email hidden]
(Trudi Marrapodi) mumbled incoherently:

Quoted message said:

OK, this is something I just have to ask, because it strikes me as so dumb:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet? Live and in person, I mean.

Personally, I have not.

Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department®
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

"It should be the policy of the United States to
support efforts to remove the regime headed by
Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote
the emergence of a democratic government to replace
that regime,"
--1998 Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338)
signed by Bill Clinton

When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads
till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of
the rest, make fast the fetters.
http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Quran/Rodwell/47/

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.

spammers can send mail to [email hidden]

On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 14:21:42 GMT, Ewald Pfau <[email hidden]> mumbled
incoherently:

Quoted message said:

Trudi Marrapodi said:

This happened to me the other day. I was biking around putting up signs
for my yard sale, and was stopped at a corner taping one of the signs to a
pole.

This is funny - trying to introduce through this backdoor kind of new way of
propaganda: Some evil guys wanted to confuse Mr. Harmless! Smelling like
minor irritation as well: Since we know that, in order to wear such kinds of
'foamed nothing' on one's head, it needs permanent posititive feedback, we
can assure as well that this positive feedback might be expected mainly from
users of motorized vehicles [*]. It needs positive feedback, to signal
acceptance of such latest accessoires in fashion, since, if one would start
to think by oneself instead, one could find oneself too easily having been
trapped into consumer world nonsense.

But now, goes the story, even those motorized contemporaries are found to
give negative feedback. Sure, everyone will immediately be sorry of Mr.
Harmless. Doesn't this smell too much like yet one more flavour of
propaganda?

(Even more, as if, in the end, everyone should know, how high the risk of
head injuries is, during putting up signs in the neighbourhood. And everyone
should have accepted happily this risk to be made highly significant, by
wearing a big colourfull sign on one's head?)

[*] maybe, when seeking to compensate for alienation - when it comes to
know, how to make use of one's own body for transportation. This might be
too complicated a recursion into its own, for normal consumer world
inhabitants - when making use of one's own body for transportation of one's
own body. So there ist as well alleviation of insight, when allowing for a
little detour: in fact, it is more straightforward to see the effect of
transportation of a little 'foamed nothing' on the head of that one who is
involved in performing the transportation. And the effect of transportation
of the owner of that 'foamed nothing' is just happening by chance, as a
special side effect. Now, this is not any more propaganda but consumer world
logic - alleviation of insight has to have a good price.

My advice: stick with decaf.

Cordially,

Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department®
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

"It should be the policy of the United States to
support efforts to remove the regime headed by
Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote
the emergence of a democratic government to replace
that regime,"
--1998 Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338)
signed by Bill Clinton

When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads
till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of
the rest, make fast the fetters.
http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Quran/Rodwell/47/

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.

spammers can send mail to [email hidden]

On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 08:18:28 -0400, [email hidden]
(Trudi Marrapodi) mumbled incoherently:

Quoted message said:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet? Live and in person, I mean.

Just wanted to add one thing, I can't recall ever been made
fun of while riding a bike for any reason. While running? Yes, a few
times. Maybe people on Long Island are more courteous?

Cheers,
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department®
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

"It should be the policy of the United States to
support efforts to remove the regime headed by
Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote
the emergence of a democratic government to replace
that regime,"
--1998 Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338)
signed by Bill Clinton

When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads
till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of
the rest, make fast the fetters.
http://www.truthnet.org/islam/Quran/Rodwell/47/

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.

spammers can send mail to [email hidden]

In article
<[email hidden]>,

(Trudi Marrapodi) said:

OK, this is something I just have to ask, because it strikes me as so dumb:

Has anyone else here ever actually been made FUN of for wearing a bike
helmet? Live and in person, I mean. Lengthy online posts from anti-helmet
advocates don't count. I mean, has anyone ever come across you while you
were biking and laughed specifically at your helmet?

A co-worker called it my "Tron Helmet" when he first saw it. I don't
count that as making run, really, because I could not stop laughing for
the rest of the day.

-b

[email hidden] ([censored] Durbin) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Now, I don't know how much protection the helmet provided

Quoted message said:

or if my injury would have been worse without the helmet, but I am
glad I had it on.

[censored] Durbin
Tallahassee

Over here in Australia it's illegal not to wear helmets. Civil liberty
issues aside, I've never really understood why you wouldn't.
I've devised a test for seeing if they work:

Have a friend (or enemy, it doesn't matter) hit you, with a bat, on
the head with moderate to hard force. Try it twice; once with the
helmet then once without. It's important not to do it in reverse
order. When you wake after the second hit, you can compare the
relative value of wearing the helmet as opposed to not.

Cheers

PS. I'm aware that a cycling accident is a lot more complicated than
this, but I'd rather hit the road (pun not intended) with it on. Oh
yeah, feel free to use this test to demonstrate to the next pickup
driving nutbags you see...

"blah" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Have a friend (or enemy, it doesn't matter) hit you, with a bat, on
the head with moderate to hard force. Try it twice; once with the
helmet then once without. It's important not to do it in reverse
order. When you wake after the second hit, you can compare the
relative value of wearing the helmet as opposed to not.

If being hit on the head with a bat is a part of the normal bike riding
experience, I'd tend to agree with you.

Pete

blah said:

Have a friend (or enemy, it doesn't matter) hit you, with a bat, on
the head with moderate to hard force. Try it twice; once with the
helmet then once without.

Before doing something this dangerous, just set a helmet on the
ground and give it a whack, and watch the bat bounce off. (if
the bat reduces it to powder, than you know you had a foam hat,
not a helmet)

Mitch

(blah) said:

[email hidden] ([censored] Durbin) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Now, I don't know how much protection the helmet provided

Quoted message said:

or if my injury would have been worse without the helmet, but I am
glad I had it on.

[censored] Durbin
Tallahassee

Over here in Australia it's illegal not to wear helmets. Civil liberty
issues aside, I've never really understood why you wouldn't.

So you don't take your helmet off at the end of a ride?

So the test I ask people to take is this....

- Put your feet together, stand straight up, facing forward, hands at your
sides....

- Close your eyes.

- Put your head down, chin to your chest.

- Now, without moving your feet, start to lean/tilt forward. You'll likely
get off balance soon, but keep your hands at your sides and resist the
temptation to stop tilting forward or to put your hands out to stop your
fall.

- Keep leaning till your head impacts the cement.

- That's from standing still. Now imagine being on a bike, a foot or so
higher off the ground, with any type of forward momentum on top of that.

No one I know has ever actually done this till they fell, but it drives the
point home.

Dave

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

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] ([censored] Durbin) wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Now, I don't know how much protection the helmet provided

Quoted message said:

or if my injury would have been worse without the helmet, but I am
glad I had it on.

[censored] Durbin
Tallahassee

Over here in Australia it's illegal not to wear helmets. Civil liberty
issues aside, I've never really understood why you wouldn't.
I've devised a test for seeing if they work:

Have a friend (or enemy, it doesn't matter) hit you, with a bat, on
the head with moderate to hard force. Try it twice; once with the
helmet then once without. It's important not to do it in reverse
order. When you wake after the second hit, you can compare the
relative value of wearing the helmet as opposed to not.

Cheers

PS. I'm aware that a cycling accident is a lot more complicated than
this, but I'd rather hit the road (pun not intended) with it on. Oh
yeah, feel free to use this test to demonstrate to the next pickup
driving nutbags you see...

"Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

- Now, without moving your feet, start to lean/tilt forward. You'll

likely

Quoted message said:

get off balance soon, but keep your hands at your sides and resist the
temptation to stop tilting forward or to put your hands out to stop your
fall.

You ride with your hands locked at your side, unmoving?

Pete

Dave said:

So the test I ask people to take is this....

- Put your feet together, stand straight up, facing forward, hands at your
sides....

- Close your eyes.

- Put your head down, chin to your chest.

- Now, without moving your feet, start to lean/tilt forward. You'll likely
get off balance soon, but keep your hands at your sides and resist the
temptation to stop tilting forward or to put your hands out to stop your
fall.

- Keep leaning till your head impacts the cement.

- That's from standing still. Now imagine being on a bike, a foot or so
higher off the ground, with any type of forward momentum on top of that.

No one I know has ever actually done this till they fell, but it drives the
point home.

Dave

Hmm. Seems that test applies VERY precisely to people walking.

Have you convinced many pedestrians to wear helmets?

(After all, their fatality numbers dwarf those of cyclists, so it sounds
like a good idea!)

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

blah said:

Over here in Australia it's illegal not to wear helmets. Civil liberty
issues aside, I've never really understood why you wouldn't.

a) Because wearing one isn't really necessary.

b) Because the best data indicates that they don't work as advertised.

Visit http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ and learn to understand.

Quoted message said:

I've devised a test for seeing if they work:

Have a friend (or enemy, it doesn't matter) hit you, with a bat, on
the head with moderate to hard force. Try it twice; once with the
helmet then once without. It's important not to do it in reverse
order. When you wake after the second hit, you can compare the
relative value of wearing the helmet as opposed to not.

And an alternate test: Get your friend to swing that bat so it misses
your skull by precisely 1/2 inch. In this case, make the first trial
without the helmet. The second trial should be helmeted.

If it misses your skull by 1/2" you'll be fine in the first trial. If
it misses your skull by 1/2" in the second trial, it will impact your
helmet.

The glancing blow will tend to impart rotational acceleration to your
head. Your skull will tend to rotate while the mass of the brain itself
will lag behind. If your friend is strong enough - or if your "friend"
is actually a speeding vehicle, or the passing road - you can severely
damage blood vessels in the brain.

With luck, you may survive that second trial. Or, perhaps not.

Helmets offer slight protection against linear impacts. They are not
tested nor designed to offer protection against glancing impacts, and
may actually make such impacts more damaging. Perhaps this is one
reason that Australia's cycling head injuries fell LESS than Australia's
bicycle use, once those laws of yours were enacted.

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]