Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 08 Sep 2006 17:50:01
From: Gooserider
Subject: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.

http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html

Date: 17 Sep 2006 11:30:27
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Blair Maynard wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1157857413.790116.217890@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Will wrote:
> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>
> >> > Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
> >> > would have made a significant difference in this case?
> >>
> >> Well... Johnny Sunset, that xray was ugly enough for me. Statistics
> >> won't make it prettier. Maybe the helmet won't save you. Maybe it's
> >> like seat-belts, airbags or circuit breakers. Sometimes they don't
> >> work. All were considered statistically insignificant at one point in
> >> their manufacturing cycle.
> >>
> >> Or maybe it's like that pilot who lined up on the wrong runway last
> >> week. Statistics should have saved his ass. His compass heading was way
> >> wrong. The mandated lights weren't on. The tower controller looked the
> >> other way... What are the odds of three simple, and obvious, safety
> >> checks failing?
> >>
> >> You can have statistics. I'll settle for common sense. I figure this
> >> guy's pretty lucky. He barely missed being an organ donor or worse...
> >> he could have been drooling in a nursing home for the rest of his life.
> >
> > Much of conventional wisdom that was derived from "common sense" has
> > been proven decisively wrong by science. The amount of energy that can
> > be absorbed by a relatively thin layer of expanded polystyrene is not
> > that great, unless you believe that bicycle helmets have magical
> > properties.
> >
>
> Absorption of energy? I don't think you are taking the right approach.
>
> Body armor doesn't necessarily only absorb energy. Look at ballistic body
> armor. How much energy do you think a few layers of Kevlar absorbs? Not
> much. Instead it spreads out the energy so that it can be absorbed by the
> body over a greater area. Thus making it easier for the target to absorb
> the energy and stop the penetration of the object. Sure bicycle helmets are
> designed to absorb much more energy than ballistic vests, because
> penetration of the object and thickness of the protective material is
> usually not a problem, but they still also function to spread the energy
> which they can't absorb.
>
> Surely there have been a large number of tests done to show the
> effectiveness of helmets on many kinds of impacts.

Read the helmet testing standards - basically they address falling over
at very low speed, nothing more.

> I don't have time to do
> the research now, but why don't you cite your authority stating that bicycle
> helmets don't help bicyclists avoid injury or death because "the amount of
> energy that can be absorbed by a relatively thin layer of expanded
> polystyrene is not that great, unless you believe that bicycle helmets have
> magical properties"?

Well, it is obviously not in practice possible to have two identical
accidents except for the use of a foam hat on the rider's head, so we
have to fall back on statistical studies of the general cycling
population. No credible studies have shown that foam hats significantly
reduce serious head injuries and/or death.

>From a social point of view, it is the duty of those who wish to
mandate the wearing of foam hats while cycling to justify their cause.
So far, they have failed miserably, except in the court of public
opinion, which as we should all know can be a very poor judge of the
truth.

Cite a credible study proving the effectiveness of foam hats.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

Date: 18 Sep 2006 02:34:23
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1158517827.319310.139700@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
[...]
No credible studies have shown that foam hats significantly
> reduce serious head injuries and/or death.

There are also no credible studies to show that Mr. Sherman has the brains
to come in out of the rain but I know otherwise. Why the hell is he posting
to threads about helmets when everyone in the universe knows by now that
only idiots post to such threads.

>>From a social point of view, it is the duty of those who wish to
> mandate the wearing of foam hats while cycling to justify their cause.
> So far, they have failed miserably, except in the court of public
> opinion, which as we should all know can be a very poor judge of the
> truth.

The above is total nonsense since it runs counter to common sense, but that
is precisely the one thing that Mr. Sherman has never possessed in his
entire life.

> Cite a credible study proving the effectiveness of foam hats.

Why don't you cite yourself, you blooming idiot!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

> Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

PS. Actually, you are nowhere ever since you left the Quad Cities (Illinois
Side).

Date: 19 Sep 2006 08:35:42
From: dgk
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 02:34:23 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:

>
>"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1158517827.319310.139700@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>[...]
> No credible studies have shown that foam hats significantly
>> reduce serious head injuries and/or death.
>
>There are also no credible studies to show that Mr. Sherman has the brains
>to come in out of the rain but I know otherwise. Why the hell is he posting
>to threads about helmets when everyone in the universe knows by now that
>only idiots post to such threads.
>
>>>From a social point of view, it is the duty of those who wish to
>> mandate the wearing of foam hats while cycling to justify their cause.
>> So far, they have failed miserably, except in the court of public
>> opinion, which as we should all know can be a very poor judge of the
>> truth.
>
>The above is total nonsense since it runs counter to common sense, but that
>is precisely the one thing that Mr. Sherman has never possessed in his
>entire life.
>

I suppose it is possible that Mr. Sherman never possessed total
nonsense, but just because something runs counter to common sense
doesn't mean too much. Common sense told people that the world was
flat for many years.

Date: 20 Sep 2006 06:55:08
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

"dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com > wrote in message
news:9tovg2dr53un2ko5s631lto6e520jec7nh@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 02:34:23 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:1158517827.319310.139700@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>[...]
>> No credible studies have shown that foam hats significantly
>>> reduce serious head injuries and/or death.
>>
>>There are also no credible studies to show that Mr. Sherman has the brains
>>to come in out of the rain but I know otherwise. Why the hell is he
>>posting
>>to threads about helmets when everyone in the universe knows by now that
>>only idiots post to such threads.
>>
>>>>From a social point of view, it is the duty of those who wish to
>>> mandate the wearing of foam hats while cycling to justify their cause.
>>> So far, they have failed miserably, except in the court of public
>>> opinion, which as we should all know can be a very poor judge of the
>>> truth.
>>
>>The above is total nonsense since it runs counter to common sense, but
>>that
>>is precisely the one thing that Mr. Sherman has never possessed in his
>>entire life.
>>
>
> I suppose it is possible that Mr. Sherman never possessed total
> nonsense, but just because something runs counter to common sense
> doesn't mean too much. Common sense told people that the world was
> flat for many years.

Do you not realize that almost every scientific concept that we now hold to
be true may be rendered totally ridiculous by succeeding generations. Did
the Big Bang actually happen or not? Is the universe expanding or not? Who
the hell knows!

The best rule of thumb is never presume to know anything for sure. Try to be
more humble like ME!

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 17 Sep 2006 11:25:26
From:
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Blair Maynard wrote:
> "Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1157857413.790116.217890@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Will wrote:
> >> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> >>
> >> > Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
> >> > would have made a significant difference in this case?
> >>
> >> Well... Johnny Sunset, that xray was ugly enough for me. Statistics
> >> won't make it prettier. Maybe the helmet won't save you. Maybe it's
> >> like seat-belts, airbags or circuit breakers. Sometimes they don't
> >> work. All were considered statistically insignificant at one point in
> >> their manufacturing cycle.
> >>
> >> Or maybe it's like that pilot who lined up on the wrong runway last
> >> week. Statistics should have saved his ass. His compass heading was way
> >> wrong. The mandated lights weren't on. The tower controller looked the
> >> other way... What are the odds of three simple, and obvious, safety
> >> checks failing?
> >>
> >> You can have statistics. I'll settle for common sense. I figure this
> >> guy's pretty lucky. He barely missed being an organ donor or worse...
> >> he could have been drooling in a nursing home for the rest of his life.
> >
> > Much of conventional wisdom that was derived from "common sense" has
> > been proven decisively wrong by science. The amount of energy that can
> > be absorbed by a relatively thin layer of expanded polystyrene is not
> > that great, unless you believe that bicycle helmets have magical
> > properties.
> >
> > --
> > Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
> >
>
> Absorption of energy? I don't think you are taking the right approach.
>
> Body armor doesn't necessarily only absorb energy. Look at ballistic body
> armor. How much energy do you think a few layers of Kevlar absorbs? Not
> much. Instead it spreads out the energy so that it can be absorbed by the
> body over a greater area. Thus making it easier for the target to absorb
> the energy and stop the penetration of the object. Sure bicycle helmets are
> designed to absorb much more energy than ballistic vests, because
> penetration of the object and thickness of the protective material is
> usually not a problem, but they still also function to spread the energy
> which they can't absorb.
>
> Surely there have been a large number of tests done to show the
> effectiveness of helmets on many kinds of impacts. I don't have time to do
> the research now, but why don't you cite your authority stating that bicycle
> helmets don't help bicyclists avoid injury or death because "the amount of
> energy that can be absorbed by a relatively thin layer of expanded
> polystyrene is not that great, unless you believe that bicycle helmets have
> magical properties"?

Dear Blair,

Here's a place to start:

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/Documents/maxi-faq-helmets?OpenDocument

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Date: 09 Sep 2006 20:03:33
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Date: 17 Sep 2006 18:11:44
From: Blair Maynard
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1157857413.790116.217890@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Will wrote:
>> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>>
>> > Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
>> > would have made a significant difference in this case?
>>
>> Well... Johnny Sunset, that xray was ugly enough for me. Statistics
>> won't make it prettier. Maybe the helmet won't save you. Maybe it's
>> like seat-belts, airbags or circuit breakers. Sometimes they don't
>> work. All were considered statistically insignificant at one point in
>> their manufacturing cycle.
>>
>> Or maybe it's like that pilot who lined up on the wrong runway last
>> week. Statistics should have saved his ass. His compass heading was way
>> wrong. The mandated lights weren't on. The tower controller looked the
>> other way... What are the odds of three simple, and obvious, safety
>> checks failing?
>>
>> You can have statistics. I'll settle for common sense. I figure this
>> guy's pretty lucky. He barely missed being an organ donor or worse...
>> he could have been drooling in a nursing home for the rest of his life.
>
> Much of conventional wisdom that was derived from "common sense" has
> been proven decisively wrong by science. The amount of energy that can
> be absorbed by a relatively thin layer of expanded polystyrene is not
> that great, unless you believe that bicycle helmets have magical
> properties.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain
>

Absorption of energy? I don't think you are taking the right approach.

Body armor doesn't necessarily only absorb energy. Look at ballistic body
armor. How much energy do you think a few layers of Kevlar absorbs? Not
much. Instead it spreads out the energy so that it can be absorbed by the
body over a greater area. Thus making it easier for the target to absorb
the energy and stop the penetration of the object. Sure bicycle helmets are
designed to absorb much more energy than ballistic vests, because
penetration of the object and thickness of the protective material is
usually not a problem, but they still also function to spread the energy
which they can't absorb.

Surely there have been a large number of tests done to show the
effectiveness of helmets on many kinds of impacts. I don't have time to do
the research now, but why don't you cite your authority stating that bicycle
helmets don't help bicyclists avoid injury or death because "the amount of
energy that can be absorbed by a relatively thin layer of expanded
polystyrene is not that great, unless you believe that bicycle helmets have
magical properties"?

Date: 09 Sep 2006 19:32:36
From: Will
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:

> Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
> would have made a significant difference in this case?

Well... Johnny Sunset, that xray was ugly enough for me. Statistics
won't make it prettier. Maybe the helmet won't save you. Maybe it's
like seat-belts, airbags or circuit breakers. Sometimes they don't
work. All were considered statistically insignificant at one point in
their manufacturing cycle.

Or maybe it's like that pilot who lined up on the wrong runway last
week. Statistics should have saved his ass. His compass heading was way
wrong. The mandated lights weren't on. The tower controller looked the
other way... What are the odds of three simple, and obvious, safety
checks failing?

You can have statistics. I'll settle for common sense. I figure this
guy's pretty lucky. He barely missed being an organ donor or worse...
he could have been drooling in a nursing home for the rest of his life.

Date: 10 Sep 2006 03:49:29
From: Bill Baka
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Will wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>> Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
>> would have made a significant difference in this case?
>
> Well... Johnny Sunset, that xray was ugly enough for me. Statistics
> won't make it prettier. Maybe the helmet won't save you. Maybe it's
> like seat-belts, airbags or circuit breakers. Sometimes they don't
> work. All were considered statistically insignificant at one point in
> their manufacturing cycle.
>
> Or maybe it's like that pilot who lined up on the wrong runway last
> week. Statistics should have saved his ass. His compass heading was way
> wrong. The mandated lights weren't on. The tower controller looked the
> other way... What are the odds of three simple, and obvious, safety
> checks failing?
>
> You can have statistics. I'll settle for common sense. I figure this
> guy's pretty lucky. He barely missed being an organ donor or worse...
> he could have been drooling in a nursing home for the rest of his life.
>
I think drooling in a nursing home is the worse. If that was to be the
outcome I would opt for what you call worse. I worked in a nursing home
for a while between high school and college, and man, was that a
depressing job. Saving my sanity made me quit that and never look back
on a medical career. I'll take the Steve Irwin path and go out doing
something I love. I go past a nursing home and there is one old lady who
gets out with a walker and a nurse and spends about an hour a day waving
at passing traffic. The truckers all honk for her now and I wave, but
that is no way to go.
Anyway, Blake's accident does make a case for more real protection from
bike helmets. They need to cover about 2" more on all sides since there
is still critical brain tissue in those areas. A broken skull in the
lower back of the brain is pretty much a death sentence since that is
where all the autonomic stuff is that controls your heart and everything
else that you don't think of.
Bill Baka

Date: 10 Sep 2006 03:34:17
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Will wrote: (rest snipped)

> You can have statistics. I'll settle for common sense.

How DARE you! (Oh, wait...this isn't RBT.)

Never mind.

<eg >

Date: 09 Sep 2006 10:33:06
From: Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Will wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > Gooserider wrote:
> > > Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
> > >
> > > http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html
> >
> > I'm amazed that the "article" (?) doesn't say whether he was lidded.
> >
> > Either way... Wow.
>
> I showed that blog entry to my boys. The helmet protests and discussion
> IS OVER.

Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
would have made a significant difference in this case?

Magic Foam Hats [TM] may well reduce superficial injuries in some
cases, but there is no overall evidence (as determined by multiple
studies) that foam bicycles hats significantly reduce the rates of
death or brain damage for cyclists that use them.

Do you and your family wear a helmet while traveling in motor vehicles
- that would be a more logical course if you are worried about serious
head injuries occurring?

--
Tom Sherman - Behind the Cheddar Curtain

Date: 10 Sep 2006 00:30:39
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

"Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1157823186.106455.149470@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Will wrote:
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> > Gooserider wrote:
>> > > Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
>> > >
>> > > http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html
>> >
>> > I'm amazed that the "article" (?) doesn't say whether he was lidded.
>> >
>> > Either way... Wow.
>>
>> I showed that blog entry to my boys. The helmet protests and discussion
>> IS OVER.
>
> Where is your analysis showing that an expanded polystyrene foam hat
> would have made a significant difference in this case?

Another poster asked Surly whether Blake was wearing a helmet. The reply was
that he was, but his head hit a rock just below the bottom of his helmet. If
that's the case, then he would have needed a skate/BMX/downhill helmet. He
may still have suffered a concussion but it's unlikely his skull would have
been dented. But how many people want to wear one of those heavy, hot
helmets? This is just a freak accident. He's lucky to be alive, helmet or no
helmet.

Date: 09 Sep 2006 09:53:48
From:
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Gooserider wrote:
> Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
>
> http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html

Dear GR,

Here's the reply to my email asking whether Blake was wearing a helmet:

Date: 09 Sep 2006 18:01:28
From: greggery peccary
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

<carlfogel@comcast.net > wrote in message
news:1157820828.079798.32880@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> Gooserider wrote:
> > Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
> >
> > http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html
>
> Dear GR,
>
> Here's the reply to my email asking whether Blake was wearing a helmet:
>
>

Date: 08 Sep 2006 18:20:13
From: Will
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Bill Sornson wrote:
> Gooserider wrote:
> > Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
> >
> > http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html
>
> I'm amazed that the "article" (?) doesn't say whether he was lidded.
>
> Either way... Wow.

I showed that blog entry to my boys. The helmet protests and discussion
IS OVER.

Date: 09 Sep 2006 02:42:30
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Date: 08 Sep 2006 12:56:05
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 17:50:01 GMT, "Gooserider"
<Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > wrote:

>Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
>
>http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html
>

That's a radical looking body modification.
Vegetables are credited with having saved his life.

What I enjoyed was the earlier blog entry showing an Xtracycle with a
sidehack and Stokemonkey! I was earlier this week discussing and
sketching the possibility of rigging up a chair for my new Xtracycle.

Thanks.
--
zk

Date: 08 Sep 2006 18:00:32
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Blake at Surly fractured his skull in a race

Gooserider wrote:
> Holy crap. He had a dent in his head.
>
> http://www.surlybikes.com/surlyblog.html

I'm amazed that the "article" (?) doesn't say whether he was lidded.

Either way... Wow.