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> --------
eilertech.comeilertech.comOpen ↗ --------

"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: geocities.comemail.htmOpen ↗

"It should be the policy of the United States to support ef-
forts 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.
truthnet.org47Open ↗

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
R: 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: geocities.comemail.htmOpen ↗

"It should be the policy of the United States to support ef-
forts 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.
truthnet.org47Open ↗

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
R: 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: geocities.comemail.htmOpen ↗

"It should be the policy of the United States to support ef-
forts 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.
truthnet.org47Open ↗

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
R: 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 cyclehelmets.orgcyclehelmets.orgOpen ↗ 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]