| |
Main
Date: 17 Sep 2007 12:06:07
From: Crescentius Vespasianus
Subject: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
Saul's new book "Tour de Life", is
structured so he'll be the new Lance.
Over coming traumatic brain injury. But
really shouldn't the book be about how
in the world did his helmet fail. If
the helmet would have done it's job, he
wouldn't have ended up in a coma. In
football they are also going through a
re-evaluation of the reliability of
their helmets. There is an opinion that
maybe they should be a third larger, but
the critics say it would change the
appearance of the players dramatically.
So are people to sustain traumatic
brain injuries because the helmets are
not fashionable? Shouldn't we have
helmets that do the job, they claim they
can do?
|
|
| |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 09:33:23
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
On Sep 17, 1:06 pm, Crescentius Vespasianus <jazzyb...@hotmail.com >
wrote:
snip...
> So are people to sustain traumatic
> brain injuries because the helmets are
> not fashionable?
Yes. That along with comfort and performance. Show me a bicycle
helpmet that will protect the head (the whole head - including the
face) in any kind of possible bicycle accident and I'll show you a
helmet that would never sell a single unit. It would be expensive,
big, hot, heavy, and fugly.
Fashion Kills.
--
Marty
|
| |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 15:37:15
From: Caroline
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
"Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:13et5fsn533ic94@corp.supernews.com...
> Saul's new book "Tour de Life", is structured so he'll be the new Lance.
> Over coming traumatic brain injury. But really shouldn't the book be
> about how in the world did his helmet fail. If the helmet would have done
> it's job, he wouldn't have ended up in a coma. In football they are also
> going through a re-evaluation of the reliability of their helmets. There
> is an opinion that maybe they should be a third larger, but the critics
> say it would change the appearance of the players dramatically. So are
> people to sustain traumatic brain injuries because the helmets are not
> fashionable? Shouldn't we have helmets that do the job, they claim they
> can do?
Do you have any idea how long and difficcult the battle was to get pro
cyclists to wear helmets? Football is probably not much different.
Athletes seem to prefer the gear that was in style when they were kids,
regardless of safety issues. They want to dress like their heroes.
Caroline
|
| | |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 15:57:25
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
"Caroline" <notreal@askforone.com > wrote in message
news:LaxHi.1967$oc2.1651@trnddc04...
> "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:13et5fsn533ic94@corp.supernews.com...
>> Saul's new book "Tour de Life", is structured so he'll be the new Lance.
>> Over coming traumatic brain injury. But really shouldn't the book be
>> about how in the world did his helmet fail. If the helmet would have
>> done it's job, he wouldn't have ended up in a coma. In football they are
>> also going through a re-evaluation of the reliability of their helmets.
>> There is an opinion that maybe they should be a third larger, but the
>> critics say it would change the appearance of the players dramatically.
>> So are people to sustain traumatic brain injuries because the helmets are
>> not fashionable? Shouldn't we have helmets that do the job, they claim
>> they can do?
>
>
> Do you have any idea how long and difficcult the battle was to get pro
> cyclists to wear helmets? Football is probably not much different.
> Athletes seem to prefer the gear that was in style when they were kids,
> regardless of safety issues. They want to dress like their heroes.
I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow MUST
add to someone's safety.
That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount of
head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has been
recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
collisions even those which penetrate the skull.
What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the large
vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due to the
compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to pass the
drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that doesn't
measure local forces, only total deceleration.
If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying to
force your idiotic beliefs on others.
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Sep 2007 21:27:27
From: Caroline
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote in message
news:13eu1ipqsuesi12@corp.supernews.com...
> "Caroline" <notreal@askforone.com> wrote in message
> news:LaxHi.1967$oc2.1651@trnddc04...
>> "Crescentius Vespasianus" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:13et5fsn533ic94@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Saul's new book "Tour de Life", is structured so he'll be the new Lance.
>>> Over coming traumatic brain injury. But really shouldn't the book be
>>> about how in the world did his helmet fail. If the helmet would have
>>> done it's job, he wouldn't have ended up in a coma. In football they
>>> are also going through a re-evaluation of the reliability of their
>>> helmets. There is an opinion that maybe they should be a third larger,
>>> but the critics say it would change the appearance of the players
>>> dramatically. So are people to sustain traumatic brain injuries because
>>> the helmets are not fashionable? Shouldn't we have helmets that do the
>>> job, they claim they can do?
>>
>>
>> Do you have any idea how long and difficcult the battle was to get pro
>> cyclists to wear helmets? Football is probably not much different.
>> Athletes seem to prefer the gear that was in style when they were kids,
>> regardless of safety issues. They want to dress like their heroes.
>
> I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow
> MUST add to someone's safety.
>
> That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount
> of head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has
> been recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
> spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
> injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
> collisions even those which penetrate the skull.
>
> What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the
> large vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due
> to the compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to
> pass the drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that
> doesn't measure local forces, only total deceleration.
>
> If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying
> to force your idiotic beliefs on others.
>
You are amazing, Mr. Kunich. You read what I wrote, then -- out of thin
air -- added a whole bunch of stuff I never said. Thank you. To reiterate,
I said nothing about helmets promoting or diminishing cycling safety. I
simply said that it was a very difficult battle trying to get pro-cyclists
to wear helmets. Period. And so it was.
Now, to expound my own opinions for myself, I do think there is a certain
safety value in helmets that outweighs the so called negatives you "cite,"
without giving a source for your "information." Do you know that 97.63
percent of statistics are made up by the person citing them on the spot?
Caroline
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Sep 2007 14:40:36
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
"Caroline" <notreal@askforone.com > wrote in message
news:3pXHi.6210$A72.5717@trnddc08...
>
> You are amazing, Mr. Kunich. You read what I wrote, then -- out of thin
> air -- added a whole bunch of stuff I never said. Thank you. To
> reiterate, I said nothing about helmets promoting or diminishing cycling
> safety. I simply said that it was a very difficult battle trying to get
> pro-cyclists to wear helmets. Period. And so it was.
And of course that implies nothing.
> Now, to expound my own opinions for myself, I do think there is a certain
> safety value in helmets that outweighs the so called negatives you "cite,"
> without giving a source for your "information." Do you know that 97.63
> percent of statistics are made up by the person citing them on the spot?
Tell me, exactly how many times do you need the data cited? How many times
do you need the papers cited? At what point does it become redundant that
your memory can hold more than "DUHHHHH HELMUT GOOD"?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 18 Sep 2007 22:45:54
From: Joe
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
> Tell me, exactly how many times do you need the data cited? How many times
> do you need the papers cited?
Ah yes, a true believer of 'repetition makes truth'.
global warming
wmd's
killer bees
etcetcetc
just joining in on the twisting other peoples words around crowd.
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 18:21:12
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
> I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow
> MUST add to someone's safety.
>
> That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount
> of head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has
> been recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
> spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
> injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
> collisions even those which penetrate the skull.
>
> What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the
> large vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due
> to the compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to
> pass the drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that
> doesn't measure local forces, only total deceleration.
>
> If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying
> to force your idiotic beliefs on others.
I know better than to add to a helmet thread. But I'm feeling stupid today.
Common sense is an odd thing. It cuts multiple ways... some people have it,
some people don't, and the common sense some have can be incredibly tainted
by their ability to rationalize.
For me, helmets pass the common sense test- that being I believe that I'm
better off with one, than without. I know they won't protect me from
everything; indeed, we had a customer who was killed last month on Sand Hill
Road, wearing a helmet. Nobody needed to work up all sorts of weird theories
for how the helmet must have made things worse; the impact and deceleration
were simply too great, and the attendant brain swelling too sudden, to allow
her to live. A full-body airbag probably would have saved her.
So the anti-helmet folk can say that it makes no difference, she died.
But I've road-tested helmets three times now. Twice, who knows, I came out
fine, the helmet cracked, maybe I would have been fine anyway. But one time
the helmet was worthwhile, even though it almost-certainly didn't save my
life. It was one of those freak things where a little girl runs out of a
campground into the road, I'm descending quickly, and to avoid her I end up
going down. On my side. And I can remember sliding along the ground and
hearing this awful loud noise, and wondering what it was.
After I picked myself up and surveyed the damage (not much, thankfully!), I
for some reason removed my helmet and looked at it. One side of it was
heavily scraped, from where it was sliding on the ground. That was the
noise. As I said, it wouldn't have been killed me, but it wouldn't have been
much fun losing all that skin either. That's good enough for me to wear one.
But... while I have no issues with clubs & ride requiring helmets, I don't
think there should be state or federally-mandated helmet laws, even for
kids. I think the safety benefits of cycling (being in shape, avoiding all
manner of diseases & conditions, sparing the planet of exhaust fumes etc)
outweigh the supposed dangers of cycling. And for kids, anything that might
keep them from riding a bike is, in my opinion, a very bad thing. I just
can't look at a kid out riding without a helmet and think he or she's an
outlaw. Rather, I think he or she is doing something cool... riding a bike.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Sep 2007 23:20:45
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
In article
<cKFHi.4725$7P7.3303@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net >,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > wrote:
> > I grow weary of those who believe that anything dubbed "safety" somehow
> > MUST add to someone's safety.
> >
> > That simply isn't the case. Bicycle helmets provide such a meager amount
> > of head protection it's laughable. And the odd shape of these helmets has
> > been recognized as causing increased amounts of neck injuries. These same
> > spinning motions caused by "safety" helmets is likely to cause rotational
> > injuries which are a great deal more dangerous to riders than direct
> > collisions even those which penetrate the skull.
> >
> > What's more, there's a good chance that modern helmets with all of the
> > large vents may in fact ADD to the danger of head and/or neck injuries due
> > to the compressive foam padding needing to be extremely rigid in order to
> > pass the drop tests which are performed using an aluminum headform that
> > doesn't measure local forces, only total deceleration.
> >
> > If you wish to believe in magic, go right ahead. But spare me your trying
> > to force your idiotic beliefs on others.
>
> I know better than to add to a helmet thread. But I'm feeling stupid today.
>
> Common sense is an odd thing. It cuts multiple ways... some people have it,
> some people don't, and the common sense some have can be incredibly tainted
> by their ability to rationalize.
>
> For me, helmets pass the common sense test- that being I believe that I'm
> better off with one, than without. I know they won't protect me from
> everything; indeed, we had a customer who was killed last month on Sand Hill
> Road, wearing a helmet. Nobody needed to work up all sorts of weird theories
> for how the helmet must have made things worse; the impact and deceleration
> were simply too great, and the attendant brain swelling too sudden, to allow
> her to live. A full-body airbag probably would have saved her.
>
> So the anti-helmet folk can say that it makes no difference, she died.
There are no anti-helmet folk.
You are using gratuitous, divisive, polarizing, us-against-them talk.
--
Michael Press
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2007 19:25:09
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Saul Raisen - Tour de Life......
|
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > wrote in message
news:cKFHi.4725$7P7.3303@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>
> For me, helmets pass the common sense test- that being I believe that I'm
> better off with one, than without. I know they won't protect me from
> everything; indeed, we had a customer who was killed last month on Sand
> Hill Road, wearing a helmet. Nobody needed to work up all sorts of weird
> theories for how the helmet must have made things worse; the impact and
> deceleration were simply too great, and the attendant brain swelling too
> sudden, to allow her to live. A full-body airbag probably would have saved
> her.
Indeed. What's more the national statistics have shown NO changes in the
numbers of serious and fatal injuries sustained on bicycles since the
introduction of helmets until now when helmets are almost universal. That
ought to tell you something.
> But I've road-tested helmets three times now. Twice, who knows, I came out
> fine, the helmet cracked, maybe I would have been fine anyway. But one
> time the helmet was worthwhile, even though it almost-certainly didn't
> save my life. It was one of those freak things where a little girl runs
> out of a campground into the road, I'm descending quickly, and to avoid
> her I end up going down. On my side. And I can remember sliding along the
> ground and hearing this awful loud noise, and wondering what it was.
My brother also fell off and swears by his helmet. That doesn't mean that
the injuries you sustained would have been significantly worse without a
helmet. Do you suppose that had your head touched the ground that you
wouldn't have lifted it off? I mean, I crashed motorcycles at great speeds
off-road racing and road racing and never touched my helmet to the ground
until one time I thought, "Gee, the helmet is there and can protect me."
> After I picked myself up and surveyed the damage (not much, thankfully!),
> I for some reason removed my helmet and looked at it. One side of it was
> heavily scraped, from where it was sliding on the ground. That was the
> noise. As I said, it wouldn't have been killed me, but it wouldn't have
> been much fun losing all that skin either. That's good enough for me to
> wear one.
And that's why people who feel the need to wear one should be able to. But
the constant barrage of helmet saved my life stories are so preposterous
that it helps a bit to realize that there are more of those stories than
there ever were serious injuries.
BTW a "serious" injury is one in which you need to stay at least overnight
in the hospital. So a concussion may be thought a serious injury in some
hospitals and not others.
> But... while I have no issues with clubs & ride requiring helmets, I don't
> think there should be state or federally-mandated helmet laws, even for
> kids. I think the safety benefits of cycling (being in shape, avoiding all
> manner of diseases & conditions, sparing the planet of exhaust fumes etc)
> outweigh the supposed dangers of cycling. And for kids, anything that
> might keep them from riding a bike is, in my opinion, a very bad thing. I
> just can't look at a kid out riding without a helmet and think he or she's
> an outlaw. Rather, I think he or she is doing something cool... riding a
> bike.
Bicycling adds more years to your life by a factor of 50 or so than bicycle
accidents with or without a helmet take away.
Bicycle helmets are little more than a good luck charm and have almost the
same efficacy.
|
|
