Recumbent bicycles · Public discussion

Re: same old look at the helmet debate (was different...)

Started by Jon Meinecke · · Last activity · 1 post · 636 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Recumbent bicycles
Published
2 December 2004
Last activity
2 December 2004
Original author
Jon Meinecke
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
636
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. [newsgroups trimmed]

    "Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote

    Quoted message said:


    The problem, of course, is the population failing to conform to
    what is "obviously" true. Naughty population! Bad population!

    Human nature. We are notoriously poor at assessing 'obvious'
    risk and benefit. Which is more dangerous, a bear or a bee?
    It's not about the science or the statistics, it's about PR
    (public relations and *perceived* risk). We're sensing
    creatures who think, not thinking creatures who sense.

    Anyone seen the movie, _What the Bleep Do We Know!?_ ?
    http://www.whatthebleep.com/

    Recumbent content:

    We recumbent cyclists should be discussing hip protection
    if not hip waders (appropriate for wading though such
    "deep" USENET threads as bike h*lm*ts effectiveness
    exchanges inevitably turn out...) Several years ago an
    informal survey of ARBR suggested lower body injuries were
    most common bicycle-related injuries among newsgroup-
    posting recumbent cyclists...

    Jon Meinecke
    net.subtle-apteryx

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.