Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch]

I remember Irv Weisman from my days with the New York Cycle Club. When I 
knew him (early 90s) he was not known for his helmet, but more for his 
obsession with gearing that would not destroy his knees. As a relatively 
young speedster at that time, I looked at his charts with amusement. What 
with today's compacts, subcompacts, micro mini nano compacts, etc. he was 
obviously a man ahead of his time!

No doubt people on bikes fall down and hurt themselves. Even on an innocent 
low speed jaunt to the supermarket or a ride around the block. And no 
matter how good a rider you are, you can't eliminate the unforeseen such as 
an oil spill or a squirrely squirrel. Having a helmet on your head during 
one of these incidents might be helpful.

I've experienced a couple of high speed crashes while racing. One was 
particularly bad, in that I cannot remember the entire day--I recall my 
friend picking me up, then I was suddenly pulling back up to my block that 
night. Apparently I was involved in a crash on a slight downhill sprint to 
the finish at 40 plus mph, and got my head rattled pretty good.

Again, though, I never stated that cars were the reason helmets were 
invented. I simply said it is riding in traffic, not running into a 
squirrel, that hinders more people from getting on a bicycle. Advocacy 
groups have done surveys that support this conclusion. Anyway, as has been 
stated, mandatory helmet use equals less riders equals less driver 
awareness/concern. There are a number of places in the world where people 
generally forego helmets, and the bike accident/injury rate is lower than 
in the U.S. Though nobody would deny that people in those places sometimes 
fall off their bikes, and sometimes get injured or killed, and perhaps some 
of those injuries or deaths could have been prevented by a helmet.

As I said earlier, humans apply logic, use denial, are sometimes rational, 
sometimes not. I see the bicycle as, in Ivan Illich's words, a "convivial 
tool." It is a beautiful, near perfect machine. One reason I find myself 
feeling more and more out of sorts when I go out for the (now rare) fully 
kitted "recreational" ride, is that it loses some of that conviviality for 
me with all that "cycling specific" gear. My number one tool for safety is 
visibility items--I commute with lights and a pretty nerdy looking safety 
vest, day or night. That's so car drivers might catch me out of the corner 
of their eye while they are looking up fantasy football results on their 
"smart phone."

Unlike vocal helmet proponents, who can get mighty upset, dismissive, and 
occasionally downright rude about it, I don't know of many people who don't 
wear helmets, or sometimes choose to wear helmets (Grant is on record as 
being helmetless during daylight hours and donning one after dark) who get 
that hostile toward people who choose to wear helmets religiously.  I 
certainly respect riders equally, regardless of whether they wear a helmet 
or not. Happy Thanksgiving, y'all!




-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch]

P.S. I did not intend anecdote in any pejorative sense! Cheers.

*a short account of a particular incident or event, especially of an 
interesting or amusing **nature*. 


On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 4:36:46 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> As I pointed out in my 'anecdote,' concerns about lack of control or 
> existence of cars weren't the reason helmets were developed, and they 
> weren't the reason for the adoption of helmets by *your* local bike club, 
> back in the day.   
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Abcyclehank]

I am thankful to live in a country that is founded with a Constitution that 
supports FREEDOMS like SPEECH.  I am thankful for a group of "like-minded" 
cyclists who all share a personal conviction and passion for an activity they 
love.
I have read the aforementioned article and all corresponding posts and have 
experienced a full range of emotions as a result.
My "personal conclusion" is that I am essentially sure we will never achieve: 
world peace, an end to the abortion debate, or a helmet wearing consensus.  
Yet the passion and conviction all share is the correct point-of-view for each 
respective poster. It is their choice and their voice and not my place to 
condemn, shame, or persuade them to my perspective.
I am thankful to those who try to educate and pass on wisdom from their own 
life experiences without implying that any other perspective is wrong or flawed.
As a teacher for 26 years, most teaching Honors English to 15-16 year old 
sophomores I have learned that even very intelligent "future contributing 
members of society" have enormously different perspectives on every topic 
addressed; yet each feels their view is correct, incorrectly feel the majority 
share their point of view(not often the case), and believe that by presenting 
their "status quo" beliefs--others will see the light.
As my career wanes I have successfully adopted a new philosophy to challenge 
young adults to question everything "authorities" tell them, research both 
sides of issues, especially those they are most passionate about, and most 
importantly to live a life doing what is best for "themselves" not what others 
tell them they should do or be.

Sincerely,
Ryan "heading out for a cold Thankgiving ride in the rain to my wife's dismay" 
Hankinson 
N. Muskegon, MI

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/25/2015 10:21 AM, Lungimsam wrote:

For many years humans rode horses without helmets.
Even now people ride horses without helmets, except for the dressage 
peeps, I think.

I wonder if they have the same helmet issues as cyclists?


People died from falls from horses all the time.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Do you shame people who ride the wrong way against traffic? Or is that okay 
as long as they are wearing their helmet? Wearing a helmet is prudent. 
Again, I wear mine every time I ride. But it is the LEAST important safety 
measure that you can take behind (in order)  1. Bike Control,  2. Rule 
Compliance, 3. Lane Position, and 4. Hazard Avoidance. Each of these 
elements (1-4) have many details and procedures attached to them, and each 
of these details is much more important than wearing a helmet. It is MUCH 
safer to ride properly without a helmet than it is to ride with a helmet 
and violate 1-4 above. You like data? YES, the data says that 1-4 above are 
much more important to safety than wearing a helmet. MUCH more important.

So who should be shamed? Someone who rides properly without a helmet? Or 
someone who wears a helmet and rides improperly? I would take off my 
helmet, have three beers, and ride properly before I would wear a helmet 
and ride against traffic. I would be much safer riding helmet-less but 
properly after 3 beers than I would be riding against traffic sober wearing 
a full face motorcycle helmet. Yet wearing a helmet seems to be the only 
measure of bicycle safety and responsibility for the helmet zealots. We 
need to take a broader view.

Do you want to determine if an accident was the fault of a bicyclist so 
that you can properly shame him? If so, "Was he wearing a helmet?" should 
be the LAST question you ask, not the first.

Doug

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 6:11:10 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>
> If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose to 
> ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised? 
>
> Yours? For sure. 
>
> Your wife's, your children... well... maybe the shame label is 
> appropriate. I'll accept that opinion. 
>
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:37:13 PM UTC-6, Doug Williams wrote:
>>
>> Yes, and you also disrespect your family when you fail to wear a helmet 
>> in your car or while walking on the street, both of which are more 
>> dangerous than bicycling. This is just the kind of "helmet shaming" that I 
>> am talking about.
>>
>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 1:40:03 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>>>
>>> Kelly,
>>>
>>> I think there's another perspective that has not been mentioned here...
>>>
>>> When I was sitting outside the ER waiting for the Cat-Scans on my wife, 
>>> I realized that her injuries were not simply hers. Her injuries belonged to 
>>> our children, our parents, our neighbors... 
>>>
>>> The decision to wear, or not wear, a helmet isn't singular. We have 
>>> networks of family and friends who suffer when we are injured. The assumed 
>>> risk is not singular. Families and friends pick up the pieces. Jan Heine 
>>> was very fortunate to have a good friend drop everything to shepherd him 
>>> home from Taiwan. 
>>>
>>> The decision to mitigate risk should recognize those who will bear the 
>>> burden of loss. It's not about laws. It's about common sense. It's about 
>>> respect for your loved ones.  
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Lungimsam]

For many years humans rode horses without helmets.
Even now people ride horses without helmets, except for the dressage peeps, 
I think.
I wonder if they have the same helmet issues as cyclists?

I don't buy the helmet-causes-rider-to-ride-more-risky idea either - there 
are a lot of other body parts I don't want hurt either, so I try to be 
careful all the time.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Will]

Geez Doug, I think this shaming business is getting a little too deep. 

My suggestion, most simply put, is that one wears a helmet to protect their 
family. It's not a personal decision, it's a communal decision. It's not 
about shame. It's about risk evaluation. 

I reached that conclusion via personal exposure to the vaguries of bike 
riding. My wife had a serious bike wreck. I admit bias. But it's not 
academic bias, or bias simply to argue x or y on bike groups, it's bias 
that was informed by 7 cat-scans. 

I don't rank riding habits.. so wearing a helment versis riding against 
traffic, not having a blinky, or drinking beer is not meaningful to me. I 
ride daily. My entire family rides daily. Our riding habits are highy 
skewed to safe behaviors. We have lights. We all wear those big Riv 
reflector triangles. Our pedals have reflectors. We wear helmets, etc...

Whether you wear a helmet is obviously your choice. I'm not advocating 
mandatory laws. I am simply making the case for recognizing that accidents 
are SHARED EVENTS. If you screw up, you family bears the weight. Your 
decision tree needs to include that contingency. 



On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 9:54:47 AM UTC-6, Doug Williams wrote:
>
> Do you shame people who ride the wrong way against traffic? Or is that 
> okay as long as they are wearing their helmet? Wearing a helmet is prudent. 
> Again, I wear mine every time I ride. But it is the LEAST important safety 
> measure that you can take behind (in order)  1. Bike Control,  2. Rule 
> Compliance, 3. Lane Position, and 4. Hazard Avoidance. Each of these 
> elements (1-4) have many details and procedures attached to them, and each 
> of these details is much more important than wearing a helmet. It is MUCH 
> safer to ride properly without a helmet than it is to ride with a helmet 
> and violate 1-4 above. You like data? YES, the data says that 1-4 above are 
> much more important to safety than wearing a helmet. MUCH more important.
>
> So who should be shamed? Someone who rides properly without a helmet? Or 
> someone who wears a helmet and rides improperly? I would take off my 
> helmet, have three beers, and ride properly before I would wear a helmet 
> and ride against traffic. I would be much safer riding helmet-less but 
> properly after 3 beers than I would be riding against traffic sober wearing 
> a full face motorcycle helmet. Yet wearing a helmet seems to be the only 
> measure of bicycle safety and responsibility for the helmet zealots. We 
> need to take a broader view.
>
> Do you want to determine if an accident was the fault of a bicyclist so 
> that you can properly shame him? If so, "Was he wearing a helmet?" should 
> be the LAST question you ask, not the first.
>
> Doug
>
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 6:11:10 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>>
>> If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose to 
>> ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised? 
>>
>> Yours? For sure. 
>>
>> Your wife's, your children... well... maybe the shame label is 
>> appropriate. I'll accept that opinion. 
>>
>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:37:13 PM UTC-6, Doug Williams wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, and you also disrespect your family when you fail to wear a helmet 
>>> in your car or while walking on the street, both of which are more 
>>> dangerous than bicycling. This is just the kind of "helmet shaming" that I 
>>> am talking about.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 1:40:03 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:

 Kelly,

 I think there's another perspective that has not been mentioned here...

 When I was sitting outside the ER waiting for the Cat-Scans on my wife, 
 I realized that her injuries were not simply hers. Her injuries belonged 
 to 
 our children, our parents, our neighbors... 

 The decision to wear, or not wear, a helmet isn't singular. We have 
 networks of family and friends who suffer when we are injured. The assumed 
 risk is not singular. Families and friends pick up the pieces. Jan Heine 
 was very fortunate to have a good friend drop everything to shepherd him 
 home from Taiwan. 

 The decision to mitigate risk should recognize those who will bear the 
 burden of loss. It's not about laws. It's about common sense. It's about 
 respect for your loved ones.  






>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

Is saying "You are riding on the wrong side of the road!" shaming? Is 
telling somebody who is wandering all over the road "Hold your line!" or 
"HEADS UP!" shaming?
How about ringing your bell when somebody coming towards you on the bike 
trail wanders over into your lane?  Is that shaming too?


On 11/25/2015 10:54 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
Do you shame people who ride the wrong way against traffic? Or is that 
okay as long as they are wearing their helmet? Wearing a helmet is 
prudent. Again, I wear mine every time I ride. But it is the LEAST 
important safety measure that you can take behind (in order)  1. Bike 
Control,  2. Rule Compliance, 3. Lane Position, and 4. Hazard 
Avoidance. Each of these elements (1-4) have many details and 
procedures attached to them, and each of these details is much more 
important than wearing a helmet. It is MUCH safer to ride properly 
without a helmet than it is to ride with a helmet and violate 1-4 
above. You like data? YES, the data says that 1-4 above are much more 
important to safety than wearing a helmet. MUCH more important.


So who should be shamed? Someone who rides properly without a helmet? 
Or someone who wears a helmet and rides improperly? I would take off 
my helmet, have three beers, and ride properly before I would wear a 
helmet and ride against traffic. I would be much safer riding 
helmet-less but properly after 3 beers than I would be riding against 
traffic sober wearing a full face motorcycle helmet. Yet wearing a 
helmet seems to be the only measure of bicycle safety and 
responsibility for the helmet zealots. We need to take a broader view.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Will,

I think we are on the same page. I don't think we should be shaming 
bicyclists for anything. I was just reacting to the people who say we 
should shame people for not wearing a helmet. But if not wearing a helmet 
is a decision that results in an accident that is a "shared event" that 
effects your family...then surely riding the wrong way against traffic and 
having an accident is also such a "shared event". As a bicycle safety 
instructor, I am tired of people labeling cyclists as "good" or "bad" 
solely on the basis of helmet use. Riding the wrong way against traffic is 
just one example of bad (and quite common) behavior, but it is WAY more 
dangerous than not wearing a helmet. Yet you rarely hear the helmet zealots 
shame someone for riding the wrong way, even though that behavior endangers 
both the wrong way cyclist and all the lawful cyclists who are often forced 
into the traffic lane to go around a "bike salmon".

In the media, "Was he or she wearing a helmet?" is always the first 
question. We had a bike fatality here recently in which a truck (going over 
50 MPH) crossed the center line and hit a cyclist, killing her instantly. 
The newspaper reported that the bicyclist was not wearing a helmet. Like a 
helmet would have saved her? Ok...it turns out that the bicyclist was hit 
HEAD ON because she was riding against traffic. But the newspaper said 
nothing of that. I'm not saying that she couldn't have been hit by a truck 
while riding WITH traffic, but clearly riding correctly would have saved 
her in this instance (because the truck crossed the median). But, according 
to the newspaper, she was a bad cyclist not because she was riding the 
wrong way, but because she didn't have a helmet.

Doug

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:29:04 AM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>
> Geez Doug, I think this shaming business is getting a little too deep. 
>
> My suggestion, most simply put, is that one wears a helmet to protect 
> their family. It's not a personal decision, it's a communal decision. It's 
> not about shame. It's about risk evaluation. 
>
> I reached that conclusion via personal exposure to the vaguries of bike 
> riding. My wife had a serious bike wreck. I admit bias. But it's not 
> academic bias, or bias simply to argue x or y on bike groups, it's bias 
> that was informed by 7 cat-scans. 
>
> I don't rank riding habits.. so wearing a helment versis riding against 
> traffic, not having a blinky, or drinking beer is not meaningful to me. I 
> ride daily. My entire family rides daily. Our riding habits are highy 
> skewed to safe behaviors. We have lights. We all wear those big Riv 
> reflector triangles. Our pedals have reflectors. We wear helmets, etc...
>
> Whether you wear a helmet is obviously your choice. I'm not advocating 
> mandatory laws. I am simply making the case for recognizing that accidents 
> are SHARED EVENTS. If you screw up, you family bears the weight. Your 
> decision tree needs to include that contingency. 
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 9:54:47 AM UTC-6, Doug Williams wrote:
>>
>> Do you shame people who ride the wrong way against traffic? Or is that 
>> okay as long as they are wearing their helmet? Wearing a helmet is prudent. 
>> Again, I wear mine every time I ride. But it is the LEAST important safety 
>> measure that you can take behind (in order)  1. Bike Control,  2. Rule 
>> Compliance, 3. Lane Position, and 4. Hazard Avoidance. Each of these 
>> elements (1-4) have many details and procedures attached to them, and each 
>> of these details is much more important than wearing a helmet. It is MUCH 
>> safer to ride properly without a helmet than it is to ride with a helmet 
>> and violate 1-4 above. You like data? YES, the data says that 1-4 above are 
>> much more important to safety than wearing a helmet. MUCH more important.
>>
>> So who should be shamed? Someone who rides properly without a helmet? Or 
>> someone who wears a helmet and rides improperly? I would take off my 
>> helmet, have three beers, and ride properly before I would wear a helmet 
>> and ride against traffic. I would be much safer riding helmet-less but 
>> properly after 3 beers than I would be riding against traffic sober wearing 
>> a full face motorcycle helmet. Yet wearing a helmet seems to be the only 
>> measure of bicycle safety and responsibility for the helmet zealots. We 
>> need to take a broader view.
>>
>> Do you want to determine if an accident was the fault of a bicyclist so 
>> that you can properly shame him? If so, "Was he wearing a helmet?" should 
>> be the LAST question you ask, not the first.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 6:11:10 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>>>
>>> If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose to 
>>> ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised? 
>>>
>>> Yours? For sure. 
>>>
>>> Your wife's, your children... well... maybe the shame label is 
>>> appropriate. I'll accept that opinion. 

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

   Read on if you like . . . for a good dose of self-justification .  

http://www.anweald.co.uk/cyclehelmets.html

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

  This so called "minimzing risk" misses the mark completely !  As if 
"some" risk is better than some "other" amount . As long as one believes 
one is even capable of harm , one is forever vulnerable and all the "safe 
measures" in the world are not and will never be enough to save anyone from 
themself .  "Reducing risk" forever misses the mark and in the end 
increases the sense of powerlessness which in turn one goes about trying 
even harder to find, promote and enforce "security" methods of endless 
sorts.  Constant and never ending double talk and self contradiction.

  I know only One way to be "free" is to BE Absolutley , is within oneself, 
the Heart.  To find this silly , too simple , too hard, void of power, 
impractical or that love is some 60's Beatles nonsense know nothing of 
Love. That's not Love at all.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/25/2015 01:46 PM, Doug Williams wrote:
As a bicycle safety instructor, I am tired of people labeling cyclists 
as "good" or "bad" solely on the basis of helmet use. Riding the wrong 
way against traffic is just one example of bad (and quite common) 
behavior, but it is WAY more dangerous than not wearing a helmet. Yet 
you rarely hear the helmet zealots shame someone for riding the wrong 
way, even though that behavior endangers both the wrong way cyclist 
and all the lawful cyclists who are often forced into the traffic lane 
to go around a "bike salmon".


Helmet zealots and anti-helmet zealots are the reason helmet discussions 
are banned on well-run lists.


Riding the wrong way against traffic is stupid, ignorant and dangerous, 
and it is the clearest possible sign that the person in question is no 
cyclist.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Clayton' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Here you go Ron Mc.  
  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation

How hard is it to use google? Sheeesh.

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 9:46:03 AM UTC-8, Clayton wrote:
>
> Ron, 
>
> Really? There is a *subconscious* mental process called 'Risk 
> Compensation'. When I was involved in professional mountain bike racing, I 
> studied all the mental aspects that can affect an athletes performance and 
> this was one of them. I have talked to psychologists about it. I also 
> learned about it in college, studying to become a Paramedic. It is real, 
> not stupid. I accept your apology. Please do some real research. Arrogance 
> and ignorance is unbecoming.
>
> Clayton
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 10:03:25 AM UTC-8, Ron Mc wrote:
>>
>> just like the projection on this thread.  It's simply about being 
>> sensible v. not.  It's totally stupid to say wearing a helmet makes you 
>> want to go faster or wantonly.  
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/25/2015 03:08 PM, Garth wrote:


  This so called "minimzing risk" misses the mark completely !  As if 
"some" risk is better than some "other" amount .


Of course a smaller risk is better than a greater risk.  If you wait for 
cars to pass before you walk across the road, you are reducing the risk 
of getting run over.  If you step out directly in front of one coming at 
you, you increase the risk to a certainty and you /will/ be run over.  
Which do you think is better?


As long as one believes one is even capable of harm , one is forever 
vulnerable


Even Superman is vulnerable to Kryptonite.  Do you think you are 
invulnerable?


and all the "safe measures" in the world are not and will never be 
enough to save anyone from themself .  "Reducing risk" forever misses 
the mark and in the end increases the sense of powerlessness which in 
turn one goes about trying even harder to find, promote and enforce 
"security" methods of endless sorts.  Constant and never ending double 
talk and self contradiction.


One of the more illuminating parts of Army Basic Training is when they 
have you low crawl across a course over which they are firing live 
machine gun rounds, aimed at about six foot height.  The "safe" measure 
is to get low, and it is quite effective.  The dumb move is to stand up 
and take one in the head.  You seem to think there is no difference, so 
I guess you'd be for standing up, because that way you get to keep your 
clothes clean, right?





  I know only One way to be "free" is to BE Absolutley , is within 
oneself, the Heart.  To find this silly , too simple , too hard, void 
of power, impractical or that love is some 60's Beatles nonsense know 
nothing of Love. That's not Love at all.

-



The only way to be free of risk is to be dead.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

As I pointed out in my 'anecdote,' concerns about lack of control or 
existence of cars weren't the reason helmets were developed, and they 
weren't the reason for the adoption of helmets by /your/ local bike 
club, back in the day.


In fact, I'll tell you another anecdote.  I started wearing a hockey 
helmet in 1972, after my wife fainted on a bike ride, crashed and hit 
her head.  (I'll tell you that story another time.)  In the spring of 
1973, I went on my first bike rally, CoNYMA, held in a location near the 
CT/NY/MA border.   I was wearing a hockey helmet, and so was a fellow I 
met there, Irv Weisman, who was then the Technical Editor of the League 
of American Wheelmen Bulletin, LAW's monthly magazine.  At the start of 
the first ride, he and I took a lot of ribbing from attendees.  Halfway 
through the ride, a couple of guys crashed and one of them had his scalp 
peeled right from his head.  It was pretty gruesome.  For the entire 
second half of the ride, people kept riding up to us and asking where 
did we get those helmets.


I've been riding with bike clubs for over 40 years.  In that time, I've 
crashed a number of times.  Not one had anything to do with a car.  I've 
crashed because of black ice, sand on the road, a pothole, a fallen tree 
limb, an eroded exposed tree root, a crack between lanes on a concrete 
road, and more than once I've had inattentive riders crash into me when 
I stopped for a stop sign or traffic light.  I've been on rides where 
people have crashed on gravel, on an oil slick, on the base of a safety 
cone, on wet leaves or on railroad tracks, and have ridden off the 
roadway and crashed when they tried to ride back up on the edge and 
slipped off, and I crashed once in a similar situation myself.   I came 
within a half-second of crashing when an animal rode out in front of me, 
I've met people who hit a deer and crashed, and a friend of mine died 
when an animal ran in front of him as he was making a high speed descent.


I'm concerned with each and every one of those road hazard situations, 
and they -- and not fear of cars -- are the reason I wear a helmet.  And 
by the way, none of those situations provide a reason to wear a helmet 
while out walking.


I can't say much about why people won't ride, other than my sister -- 
who crashed on gravel when she was a child, and went through such a 
gruesome and painful process of gravel extraction and wound debriding 
she decided never to risk riding again.


On 11/25/2015 04:14 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote:
Your anecdote is interesting, but it has nothing to do with the 
statement I made. I believe a. many more people would ride bikes if 
cars were more under control, and b. many of them would not be 
concerned about a helmet.


On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 9:32:14 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar 
wrote:




On 11/24/2015 10:30 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote:

Can someone tell me how being killed by a motor vehicle on a
bicycle is any different than being killed by a motor vehicle
while walking? If it can save you in a bike/car collision, it can
save you in a person/car collision. Leaving aside any "data" that
proves or disproves the safety value of helmets, I would hazard a
guess that the existence of cars is the major reason most
cyclists wear helmets.


It's not even the reason for the existence of helmets.

Back in 1972 I met the guy responsible for prodding Bell and MSR
into manufacturing bike helmets.  He was an engineer living in
Rochester NY.  He'd been introduced to cycling by a close friend
who was president of the local cycling club. The two of them were
riding a century when a dog ran out in front of his friend; the
two tangled and the cyclist went down, struck his head and died of
a brain injury.   He told us about his campaign to convince helmet
manufacturers to produce something light and cool enough that a
cyclist could wear it but that still would have kept his friend alive.

A couple of years later, when I was chairing the workshops
committee for GEAR 1974 in Poughkeepsie, he'd succeeded: MSR
introduced a bike helmet based on its rock climbing helmet, and he
did a workshop at that rally demonstrating the new helmet.  The
most striking part of it was when at the front of a classroom full
of people, he put on the MSR helmet and struck himself over the
head with an indian club, and then asked the group, "Who would
like to try that with your leather hairnet?"

A few of the members of our club, the Mid-Hudson Bicycle Club,
purchased the new MSR helmets.  Later that year, one of the
members, a gifted cyclist and agile athlete - an engineer at IBM -
crashed at night riding home from work when he rode over what he
thought was a shadow but turned out to be a downed tree limb.  His
helmet broke into many pieces, but all he got was a slight

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Your anecdote is interesting, but it has nothing to do with the statement I 
made. I believe a. many more people would ride bikes if cars were more 
under control, and b. many of them would not be concerned about a helmet.

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 9:32:14 AM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/24/2015 10:30 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote:
>
> Can someone tell me how being killed by a motor vehicle on a bicycle is 
> any different than being killed by a motor vehicle while walking? If it can 
> save you in a bike/car collision, it can save you in a person/car 
> collision. Leaving aside any "data" that proves or disproves the safety 
> value of helmets, I would hazard a guess that the existence of cars is the 
> major reason most cyclists wear helmets.
>
>
> It's not even the reason for the existence of helmets.
>
> Back in 1972 I met the guy responsible for prodding Bell and MSR into 
> manufacturing bike helmets.  He was an engineer living in Rochester NY.  
> He'd been introduced to cycling by a close friend who was president of the 
> local cycling club.  The two of them were riding a century when a dog ran 
> out in front of his friend; the two tangled and the cyclist went down, 
> struck his head and died of a brain injury.   He told us about his campaign 
> to convince helmet manufacturers to produce something light and cool enough 
> that a cyclist could wear it but that still would have kept his friend 
> alive.
>
> A couple of years later, when I was chairing the workshops committee for 
> GEAR 1974 in Poughkeepsie, he'd succeeded: MSR introduced a bike helmet 
> based on its rock climbing helmet, and he did a workshop at that rally 
> demonstrating the new helmet.  The most striking part of it was when at the 
> front of a classroom full of people, he put on the MSR helmet and struck 
> himself over the head with an indian club, and then asked the group, "Who 
> would like to try that with your leather hairnet?"   
>
> A few of the members of our club, the Mid-Hudson Bicycle Club, purchased 
> the new MSR helmets.  Later that year, one of the members, a gifted cyclist 
> and agile athlete - an engineer at IBM - crashed at night riding home from 
> work when he rode over what he thought was a shadow but turned out to be a 
> downed tree limb.  His helmet broke into many pieces, but all he got was a 
> slight headache.  The doctors at the ER told him without a doubt he would 
> have been killed outright without the helmet.  The club organized a group 
> buy and by next spring everyone in the club was wearing a helmet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Will wrote:
>
> *If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose to 
> ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised? Yours? For sure.* 
>
> That is simply putting your values onto another person. Compared to not 
> existing for the last 13.82 billion years, and not existing till the end of 
> time, we're all here for a really, really really short visit, whether that 
> be 1 month or 100 years. To some degree, we all get to choose the risks we 
> are willing to live with (ha ha) during our little frolic. Skydiving. 
> Bathtub gin. Getting married. Pulling the tags off your mattress. Then 
> there is fate. And the government--obviously the sheer number of deaths 
> from automobile accidents before seatbelts was costing society a lot of 
> money. It still does--about 871 billion a year 
> 
>  
> as of 2010. Because now we have seatbelts--and phones, and movies, and 
> internet, and typing, in a car.  But then, we humans do weird stuff. Like 
> the war on terror. That cost trillions, and all it did was create more 
> terrorists. We're not very good at addressing root causes. We prefer 
> ineffective band-aids that usually not only add unnecessary complexity, but 
> also make things an order of magnitude worse. The idea that we must all run 
> around with helmets is like blaming the victim. Most of the people behind 
> these types of studies have some kind of agenda, and not always the one you 
> would think. 
>
> People ignore "data" all the time. For instance, there is plenty of data 
> available that cars are a factor in climate change, among numerous other 
> ills they cause, including sprawl, huge infrastructure costs, etc. etc. 
> etc. Using a 2-3,000 pound object to move around a single human being? Now 
> *that* is compromising all of us. Insisting everyone wear helmets, 
> thereby reducing the number of people who bicycle? Nah. What we should 
> really be doing is not designing "better" helmets. We should be designing 
> cars that can't maim people. Better, we should be encouraging people not to 
> use cars. What we should be doing is insisting those caught texting or 
> phoning and causing harm in a car go to jail. Every time. For a long time. 
> But we are not only good at ignoring data, we are champions 

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Clayton' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Ron, 

Really? There is a *subconscious* mental process called 'Risk 
Compensation'. When I was involved in professional mountain bike racing, I 
studied all the mental aspects that can affect an athletes performance and 
this was one of them. I have talked to psychologists about it. I also 
learned about it in college, studying to become a Paramedic. It is real, 
not stupid. I accept your apology. Please do some real research. Arrogance 
and ignorance is unbecoming.

Clayton


On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 10:03:25 AM UTC-8, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> just like the projection on this thread.  It's simply about being sensible 
> v. not.  It's totally stupid to say wearing a helmet makes you want to go 
> faster or wantonly.  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Rod Holland]

Michael, 

Good point about what helmets are designed to prevent. Last summer, during 
an otherwise pleasant off-road ride, I had a low speed crash 
that
 
resulted in the crown of my head squarely strike a steel rail. I got a 
little inconsequential cervical compression from that, and my trusty Giro 
helmet cracked audibly. I was able to ride away from that, and figured my 
helmet had died for my sins, and needed to be replaced. I reflexively 
bought another Giro, but also pulled the trigger on a POC Trabec Race MIPS 
helmet. The "MIPS" (Multi-dimensional Impact Protection System) designation 
refers to an an anti-concussion system in which a certain amount of 
rotational slip between the helmet liner and the helmet casing is designed 
in. Turns out that most concussions result from oblique head strikes, 
causing sudden torque on the brain in the skull (at least, if I've 
understood what I've read; this may explain why I didn't suffer a 
concussion from smacking the railroad track dead, er, head on). The MIPS 
design is supposed to mitigate that, and provide a measure of concussion 
prevention. How well this actually works is apparently a matter of dispute, 
and I hope never to verify it experimentally, but I do wear the POC MIPS 
helmet more often than the traditional Giro, especially in off-road or icy 
road situations. The Giro gets the nod for long road rides, or very hot 
days (it's lighter and cooler).

rod

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 8:38:50 AM UTC-5, Michael Hechmer wrote:
>
> ...
>
> Bicycle helmets are specked to prevent open head injuries.  They are not 
> specked to prevent concussions.  The probability of getting an open head 
> injury in a slow speed fall from a bicycle is extremely small.  The 
> probability when hit and thrown from the bike is significant enough to 
> warrant helmet use, at a minimum whenever riding on a busy road or 
> expecting to do high speed descents.  The probability of having an open 
> head injury while riding on a bicycle path is so small as to be irrelevant. 
>  So I would question what the study under discussion defined as an 
> accident, all accidents or just those that involved another vehicle? ...
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Will]

Nah... it's OK. It's getting cold out. We have snow and ice in the Midwest 
(I am in Wisconsin), so a bit of civilized debating isn't out of order. 

Hanging the bike on the hooks for a few months is tough. 

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> You are never going to hear, oops my bad, I was wearing my helmet and 
> gloves and shouldn't have been.  Helmet and gloves are the basic equipment 
> you need to ride a bike, and there is no downside to them.  
> Been witnessing this topic for years on several boards, but this is by far 
> the dumbest it has ever achieved - if you say it enough it becomes the 
> truth is the antithesis of intelligence.  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

You are never going to hear, oops my bad, I was wearing my helmet and 
gloves and shouldn't have been.  Helmet and gloves are the basic equipment 
you need to ride a bike, and there is no downside to them.  
Been witnessing this topic for years on several boards, but this is by far 
the dumbest it has ever achieved - if you say it enough it becomes the 
truth is the antithesis of intelligence.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

if you ride in pedestrians and deer, you should add a bell.  If you ride in 
traffic you should have lights (the pedestrians like a solid headlight, too 
- they thank me all the time for my light and bell)

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> You are never going to hear, oops my bad, I was wearing my helmet and 
> gloves and shouldn't have been.  Helmet and gloves are the basic equipment 
> you need to ride a bike, and there is no downside to them.  
> Been witnessing this topic for years on several boards, but this is by far 
> the dumbest it has ever achieved - if you say it enough it becomes the 
> truth is the antithesis of intelligence.  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

if you haven't fallen off your bike yet, you will - that is the event that 
makes you ride with trepidation.  

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:19:28 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> if you ride in pedestrians and deer, you should add a bell.  If you ride 
> in traffic you should have lights (the pedestrians like a solid headlight, 
> too - they thank me all the time for my light and bell)
>
> On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>>
>> You are never going to hear, oops my bad, I was wearing my helmet and 
>> gloves and shouldn't have been.  Helmet and gloves are the basic equipment 
>> you need to ride a bike, and there is no downside to them.  
>> Been witnessing this topic for years on several boards, but this is by 
>> far the dumbest it has ever achieved - if you say it enough it becomes the 
>> truth is the antithesis of intelligence.  
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/25/2015 08:23 AM, Ron Mc wrote:
if you haven't fallen off your bike yet, you will - that is the event 
that makes you ride with trepidation.


You bet.  Even the most experience and the greatest care won't keep this 
from happening.  Random chance: a couple of months ago, a guy in our 
bike club who has been riding for decades, never went down and the last 
time he had a scab was when he was in elementary school, crashed on a 
ride when the group turned onto a road that was unexpectedly covered 
with oil, dumped there from a truck that had a leaking container of 
waste oil among the other garbage on board. When the local fire dept 
arrived one of the guys said, "Oh, yeah, we saw that earlier this 
morning but didn't think it was anything to worry about."   Road rash, a 
broken rib and compressed-foam-says-it's-time-for-a-replacement-helmet.  
And nobody at all in the group was heard to say "Gee, too bad he was 
wearing a helmet," nor did anyone say "If only there were more cyclists 
around here this would never have happened."




On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:19:28 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:

if you ride in pedestrians and deer, you should add a bell.  If
you ride in traffic you should have lights (the pedestrians like a
solid headlight, too - they thank me all the time for my light and
bell)

On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:

You are never going to hear, oops my bad, I was wearing my
helmet and gloves and shouldn't have been.  Helmet and gloves
are the basic equipment you need to ride a bike, and there is
no downside to them.
Been witnessing this topic for years on several boards, but
this is by far the dumbest it has ever achieved - if you say
it enough it becomes the truth is the antithesis of intelligence.




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Michael Hechmer]

Wow.  I almost never say anything out loud about wearing a helmet and I 
almost never post to a topic with more than 25 previous entries, but here I 
go with both some personal points of observation and perhaps some 
clarification of what we mean by accident.

First, for disclosure.  I almost (95% +) always wear a helmet.  Under 
certain conditions I don't.  I worked for 13 years as an interfaith 
chaplain at a major teaching hospital with a level 1 trauma center with a 
50+ bed ICU.  I commuted 30 miles round trip by bicycle, about half of that 
on urban streets.

Very few cyclist ended up in the ICU.  Their number was dwarfed by 
motorcyclist, skiers, snowboarders, snowmobilers, all terrain vehicle 
accidents, tractors, lawnmowers and pedestrians.  I have seen NHSA data 
that supports the conclusion that fatalities per mile are significantly 
lower for cycling than for any other mode of transportation, including 
walking.  About 2-4 cyclist a year are killed here in Vermont, almost all 
of them from car collisions with drunk drivers.  I'm not aware of any where 
anyone thought a helmet might have made a difference.

Bicycle helmets are specked to prevent open head injuries.  They are not 
specked to prevent concussions.  The probability of getting an open head 
injury in a slow speed fall from a bicycle is extremely small.  The 
probability when hit and thrown from the bike is significant enough to 
warrant helmet use, at a minimum whenever riding on a busy road or 
expecting to do high speed descents.  The probability of having an open 
head injury while riding on a bicycle path is so small as to be irrelevant. 
 So I would question what the study under discussion defined as an 
accident, all accidents or just those that involved another vehicle?

I have had any number of "accidents" on my bike.  Ranked by speed at time 
of accident.  One. At 25 mph on a blistering hot day I hit a rain rut on a 
dirt road and went down faster than you could say hello.  No helmet on a 
blistering hot day.  Results: road rash on leg, shoulder, and face; huge 
lump over eye & precautionary trip to ER.  Two.  Hit by car  in rear end. 
 I remember sliding down the road, listening to the sound of the car 
sliding behind me and thinking that if I stop sliding before that sound 
goes away I am in big trouble.  Results: lots of road rash and bike damage. 
 I am glad I was wearing a helmet although I don't remember hitting my 
head.  Three.  Going down hill toward a T intersection & light when I 
reached for my brakes and had the HB rotate away from me (my bad).  I made 
the instantaneous decision to jettison.  Results:  Lots of road rash.  I 
don't remember hitting my head (I fall gracefully) but am glad I was 
wearing a helmet.   Four.  I hit an old fashion storm grate at very slow 
speed and went over the handlebars.  Rolled, landed on my back, reached up 
and caught  the bike before it hit the ground.  Got up, was happy I didn't 
have a CF fork and rode home.  Again, glad I was wearing a helmet although 
I don't think it made a difference.

So, as a policy, I always wear a helmet when riding into town; I always 
wear a helmet when riding in the mountains; and I always wear a helmet when 
riding with my grandchildren, since they are mandated.  I generally don't 
wear a helmet on a bike path, and may not wear one while riding isolated 
dirt roads in either brutal heat or cold.

For every cyclist I see in town without a helmet I will see 10 doing 
something way more dangerous - riding on the wrong side of the road, riding 
at night without a light, weaving in traffic, wearing earphones, riding on 
the sidewalk, running traffic lights.  I doubt that helmets will save them.

Finally, someone posted that women are more likely to wear helmets than 
men.  Perhaps, but they are also far more likely to wear them wrong, as if 
they were a bonnet.

Conclusion:  There's lots to do to improve bicycle safety that are much 
more important than upping helmet usage on bicycle paths.

Michael
Happy Thanksgiving & Happy riding.


On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:25:50 PM UTC-5, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that cycling is that dangerous, but I'd like to see the data showing 
> that "walking on the street" is more dangerous than riding a bike. On a 
> personal level, I've lost several friends/acquaintances over the past year, 
> killed by motor vehicles while riding their bikes. I can't think of a 
> single incident among my friends, fatal or otherwise, that happened while 
> they were "walking on the street." 
>
> More info, please.
>
> --Eric N
> www.CampyOnly.com 
> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com 
> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>
> On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Doug Williams  > wrote:
>
> Yes, and you also disrespect your family when you fail to wear a helmet in 
> your car or while walking on the street, both of which are more dangerous 
> than bicycling. This is just 

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/24/2015 10:30 PM, 'Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch wrote:
Can someone tell me how being killed by a motor vehicle on a bicycle 
is any different than being killed by a motor vehicle while walking? 
If it can save you in a bike/car collision, it can save you in a 
person/car collision. Leaving aside any "data" that proves or 
disproves the safety value of helmets, I would hazard a guess that the 
existence of cars is the major reason most cyclists wear helmets.


It's not even the reason for the existence of helmets.

Back in 1972 I met the guy responsible for prodding Bell and MSR into 
manufacturing bike helmets.  He was an engineer living in Rochester NY.  
He'd been introduced to cycling by a close friend who was president of 
the local cycling club.  The two of them were riding a century when a 
dog ran out in front of his friend; the two tangled and the cyclist went 
down, struck his head and died of a brain injury.   He told us about his 
campaign to convince helmet manufacturers to produce something light and 
cool enough that a cyclist could wear it but that still would have kept 
his friend alive.


A couple of years later, when I was chairing the workshops committee for 
GEAR 1974 in Poughkeepsie, he'd succeeded: MSR introduced a bike helmet 
based on its rock climbing helmet, and he did a workshop at that rally 
demonstrating the new helmet.  The most striking part of it was when at 
the front of a classroom full of people, he put on the MSR helmet and 
struck himself over the head with an indian club, and then asked the 
group, "Who would like to try that with your leather hairnet?"


A few of the members of our club, the Mid-Hudson Bicycle Club, purchased 
the new MSR helmets.  Later that year, one of the members, a gifted 
cyclist and agile athlete - an engineer at IBM - crashed at night riding 
home from work when he rode over what he thought was a shadow but turned 
out to be a downed tree limb.  His helmet broke into many pieces, but 
all he got was a slight headache.  The doctors at the ER told him 
without a doubt he would have been killed outright without the helmet.  
The club organized a group buy and by next spring everyone in the club 
was wearing a helmet.









Will wrote:
/If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose 
to ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised?

Yours? For sure./

That is simply putting your values onto another person. Compared to 
not existing for the last 13.82 billion years, and not existing till 
the end of time, we're all here for a really, really really short 
visit, whether that be 1 month or 100 years. To some degree, we all 
get to choose the risks we are willing to live with (ha ha) during our 
little frolic. Skydiving. Bathtub gin. Getting married. Pulling the 
tags off your mattress. Then there is fate. And the 
government--obviously the sheer number of deaths from automobile 
accidents before seatbelts was costing society a lot of money. It 
still does--about 871 billion a year 
 
as of 2010. Because now we have seatbelts--and phones, and movies, and 
internet, and typing, in a car.  But then, we humans do weird stuff. 
Like the war on terror. That cost trillions, and all it did was create 
more terrorists. We're not very good at addressing root causes. We 
prefer ineffective band-aids that usually not only add unnecessary 
complexity, but also make things an order of magnitude worse. The idea 
that we must all run around with helmets is like blaming the victim. 
Most of the people behind these types of studies have some kind of 
agenda, and not always the one you would think.


People ignore "data" all the time. For instance, there is plenty of 
data available that cars are a factor in climate change, among 
numerous other ills they cause, including sprawl, huge infrastructure 
costs, etc. etc. etc. Using a 2-3,000 pound object to move around a 
single human being? Now /that/ is compromising all of us. Insisting 
everyone wear helmets, thereby reducing the number of people who 
bicycle? Nah. What we should really be doing is not designing "better" 
helmets. We should be designing cars that can't maim people. Better, 
we should be encouraging people not to use cars. What we should be 
doing is insisting those caught texting or phoning and causing harm in 
a car go to jail. Every time. For a long time. But we are not only 
good at ignoring data, we are champions of rationalizing irrational 
beliefs and behaviors.


Meanwhile, much more relevant, my Clementine is due Monday!



On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:45:55 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:


On 11/24/2015 09:25 PM, Eric Norris wrote:

Not that cycling is that dangerous, but I'd like to see the data
showing that "walking on the street" is more dangerous than
riding a bike.



Or that walking on the street presents a danger 

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

  "self justification is the voice of hell"  - William Blake 

  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Yes, and you also disrespect your family when you fail to wear a helmet in 
your car or while walking on the street, both of which are more dangerous 
than bicycling. This is just the kind of "helmet shaming" that I am talking 
about.

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 1:40:03 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>
> Kelly,
>
> I think there's another perspective that has not been mentioned here...
>
> When I was sitting outside the ER waiting for the Cat-Scans on my wife, I 
> realized that her injuries were not simply hers. Her injuries belonged to 
> our children, our parents, our neighbors... 
>
> The decision to wear, or not wear, a helmet isn't singular. We have 
> networks of family and friends who suffer when we are injured. The assumed 
> risk is not singular. Families and friends pick up the pieces. Jan Heine 
> was very fortunate to have a good friend drop everything to shepherd him 
> home from Taiwan. 
>
> The decision to mitigate risk should recognize those who will bear the 
> burden of loss. It's not about laws. It's about common sense. It's about 
> respect for your loved ones.  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Patrick Moore]

Moderator! We need you!

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[dougP]

Come to think of it, hasn't nearly every helmet thread similarly 
degenerated?  

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 4:35:29 PM UTC-8, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> Moderator! We need you!
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Will]

If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose to 
ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised? 

Yours? For sure. 

Your wife's, your children... well... maybe the shame label is appropriate. 
I'll accept that opinion. 

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 5:37:13 PM UTC-6, Doug Williams wrote:
>
> Yes, and you also disrespect your family when you fail to wear a helmet in 
> your car or while walking on the street, both of which are more dangerous 
> than bicycling. This is just the kind of "helmet shaming" that I am talking 
> about.
>
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 1:40:03 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>>
>> Kelly,
>>
>> I think there's another perspective that has not been mentioned here...
>>
>> When I was sitting outside the ER waiting for the Cat-Scans on my wife, I 
>> realized that her injuries were not simply hers. Her injuries belonged to 
>> our children, our parents, our neighbors... 
>>
>> The decision to wear, or not wear, a helmet isn't singular. We have 
>> networks of family and friends who suffer when we are injured. The assumed 
>> risk is not singular. Families and friends pick up the pieces. Jan Heine 
>> was very fortunate to have a good friend drop everything to shepherd him 
>> home from Taiwan. 
>>
>> The decision to mitigate risk should recognize those who will bear the 
>> burden of loss. It's not about laws. It's about common sense. It's about 
>> respect for your loved ones.  
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Eric Norris]

Not that cycling is that dangerous, but I'd like to see the data showing that 
"walking on the street" is more dangerous than riding a bike. On a personal 
level, I've lost several friends/acquaintances over the past year, killed by 
motor vehicles while riding their bikes. I can't think of a single incident 
among my friends, fatal or otherwise, that happened while they were "walking on 
the street." 

More info, please.

--Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

> On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:37 PM, Doug Williams  wrote:
> 
> Yes, and you also disrespect your family when you fail to wear a helmet in 
> your car or while walking on the street, both of which are more dangerous 
> than bicycling. This is just the kind of "helmet shaming" that I am talking 
> about.
> 
>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 1:40:03 PM UTC-8, Will wrote:
>> Kelly,
>> 
>> I think there's another perspective that has not been mentioned here...
>> 
>> When I was sitting outside the ER waiting for the Cat-Scans on my wife, I 
>> realized that her injuries were not simply hers. Her injuries belonged to 
>> our children, our parents, our neighbors... 
>> 
>> The decision to wear, or not wear, a helmet isn't singular. We have networks 
>> of family and friends who suffer when we are injured. The assumed risk is 
>> not singular. Families and friends pick up the pieces. Jan Heine was very 
>> fortunate to have a good friend drop everything to shepherd him home from 
>> Taiwan. 
>> 
>> The decision to mitigate risk should recognize those who will bear the 
>> burden of loss. It's not about laws. It's about common sense. It's about 
>> respect for your loved ones.  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/24/2015 09:25 PM, Eric Norris wrote:
Not that cycling is that dangerous, but I'd like to see the data 
showing that "walking on the street" is more dangerous than riding a 
bike.



Or that walking on the street presents a danger that is specifically 
addressed by the wearing of a helmet.



On a personal level, I've lost several friends/acquaintances over the 
past year, killed by motor vehicles while riding their bikes. I can't 
think of a single incident among my friends, fatal or otherwise, that 
happened while they were "walking on the street."


There are plenty of pedestrians run down by motor vehicles, many of whom 
are killed each year.  However, it's unlikely that wearing a helmet 
would have saved many.   It's basically a specious argument.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

which is why such discussions are called "helmet wars"

On 11/24/2015 08:42 PM, dougP wrote:
Come to think of it, hasn't nearly every helmet thread similarly 
degenerated?


On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 4:35:29 PM UTC-8, Patrick Moore wrote:

Moderator! We need you!




--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Edwin W]

Eric,

The numbers are something like 600 deaths a year from cycling, 4000 a year from 
walking and 30,000 a year from motor vehicles. The numbers doing these 
activities vary wildly of course. If you know several people who were killed on 
bikes last year, you know several of the 600 or so who were killed. I think 
most people recognize that biking is more dangerous (in the U.S.) per mile, but 
it is closer per hour in this mode of transport. I think biking sober, slowly 
(under 15 mph) and with traffic laws is a very safe mode of transport. Safer 
with a helmet. Like these other fairly safe modes of transport. 
Think of the 30,000 deaths and 280,000 brain injuries from the relatively safe 
practice of driving. Many would have benefitted from a helmet even though it 
seems nuts to recommend it for all drivers. Many of them have loved ones that 
are caring for them. My sons teacher hit a deer and the antlers pierced her 
daughter's skull. She is well now, thank goodness. That is one type of injury 
that would have been prevented by a helmet, but ice never heard it suggested. 
I think the same for bikers: not so dangerous to need a helmet if done 
according to traffic laws (including lights at night) on city streets and 
sober. 
I think it is best to advocate for more safety measures for vulnerable 
populations and in more dangerous environments. Does everyone think that bike 
riders in the Netherlands should all don helmets, in the safest cycling 
environment in the world? Some may, but most would admit that biking can be 
done safely without a helmet in certain situations, but others are riskier and 
a helmet may be considered. Jonathan Brandt's picture the other day, leaning in 
hard and going fast without a helmet reminded me that most doing that then 
didn't wear helmets and most doing it now do. Probably should. 

Everything in moderation! Now the moderators can shit this thread down before I 
post any more!

Wishing you all the safest of travels, regardless of the mode or helmet status,
Edwin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Edwin W]

Please excuse all the typos and autocorrects! Some more Freudian than others. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Can someone tell me how being killed by a motor vehicle on a bicycle is any 
different than being killed by a motor vehicle while walking? If it can 
save you in a bike/car collision, it can save you in a person/car 
collision. Leaving aside any "data" that proves or disproves the safety 
value of helmets, I would hazard a guess that the existence of cars is the 
major reason most cyclists wear helmets.
Will wrote:

*If data indicates that helmets mitigate head damage and if you choose to 
ignore that data... whose lives have you compromised? Yours? For sure.* 

That is simply putting your values onto another person. Compared to not 
existing for the last 13.82 billion years, and not existing till the end of 
time, we're all here for a really, really really short visit, whether that 
be 1 month or 100 years. To some degree, we all get to choose the risks we 
are willing to live with (ha ha) during our little frolic. Skydiving. 
Bathtub gin. Getting married. Pulling the tags off your mattress. Then 
there is fate. And the government--obviously the sheer number of deaths 
from automobile accidents before seatbelts was costing society a lot of 
money. It still does--about 871 billion a year 

 
as of 2010. Because now we have seatbelts--and phones, and movies, and 
internet, and typing, in a car.  But then, we humans do weird stuff. Like 
the war on terror. That cost trillions, and all it did was create more 
terrorists. We're not very good at addressing root causes. We prefer 
ineffective band-aids that usually not only add unnecessary complexity, but 
also make things an order of magnitude worse. The idea that we must all run 
around with helmets is like blaming the victim. Most of the people behind 
these types of studies have some kind of agenda, and not always the one you 
would think. 

People ignore "data" all the time. For instance, there is plenty of data 
available that cars are a factor in climate change, among numerous other 
ills they cause, including sprawl, huge infrastructure costs, etc. etc. 
etc. Using a 2-3,000 pound object to move around a single human being? Now 
*that* is compromising all of us. Insisting everyone wear helmets, thereby 
reducing the number of people who bicycle? Nah. What we should really be 
doing is not designing "better" helmets. We should be designing cars that 
can't maim people. Better, we should be encouraging people not to use cars. 
What we should be doing is insisting those caught texting or phoning and 
causing harm in a car go to jail. Every time. For a long time. But we are 
not only good at ignoring data, we are champions of rationalizing 
irrational beliefs and behaviors. 

Meanwhile, much more relevant, my Clementine is due Monday!



On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:45:55 PM UTC-5, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
>
> On 11/24/2015 09:25 PM, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that cycling is that dangerous, but I'd like to see the data showing 
> that "walking on the street" is more dangerous than riding a bike. 
>
>
>
> Or that walking on the street presents a danger that is specifically 
> addressed by the wearing of a helmet.
>
>
> On a personal level, I've lost several friends/acquaintances over the past 
> year, killed by motor vehicles while riding their bikes. I can't think of a 
> single incident among my friends, fatal or otherwise, that happened while 
> they were "walking on the street."
>
>
> There are plenty of pedestrians run down by motor vehicles, many of whom 
> are killed each year.  However, it's unlikely that wearing a helmet would 
> have saved many.   It's basically a specious argument.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Mark in Beacon' via RBW Owners Bunch]

Yes, the tendency toward dual thinking --must be either this or that--that 
pervades most of modern thought, is particularly on display in certain 
areas. In cycling, it generally involves chain lube and helmet wearing. I 
believe iBob no longer allows these types of discussions. The main problem 
is that with this kind of issue, most people do not enter into the 
discussion with the idea that they might, just might, be persuaded to 
change their minds. With minds sewn shut like that, it sets the pattern for 
a thread to unravel into incivility at some point. (Sorry.)

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 8:42:39 PM UTC-5, dougP wrote:
>
> Come to think of it, hasn't nearly every helmet thread similarly 
> degenerated?  
>
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 4:35:29 PM UTC-8, Patrick Moore wrote:
>>
>> Moderator! We need you!
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Kelly]

For those wondering why helmet laws were brought up.  The below quote is in 
the article and why I brought it up.  

"As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider and Joseph said that the next 
step is to create injury prevention programs to increase helmet use among 
bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop and enforce 
stricter laws for helmet use. They said that they already participate in 
many prevention programs in Tucson, which is a very bike-friendly city. 

“That’s where future efforts need to focus in on—making helmets that really 
make a difference,” Dr. Joseph said. “Ultimately, the important message is 
patient care and how we can make our patients safer and more protected. We 
need to take this data and take it to the next level and move forward with 
policy and injury prevention, especially for the younger age groups.”


I'm not against helmets, I'm against you telling me or forcing me or 
instructing me to wear a helmet because you think it's the safe way to 
live.  :) 


Kelly
- See more at: 
https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider#sthash.3coagyR5.dpuf

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:02:05 PM UTC-6, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
>
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
> times on this forum.
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com 
> www.campyonly.com
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

  https://youtu.be/AV8nl8zzvQE?t=45s


  > ---woosh -- >
  
  "Steve" 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

   So let's see, we are talking about an effort to "prevent" a future which 
does not exist .  Seems to me such effort then would be an "enslavement" . 
Bound by that "might happen" in some other now, but are not present here 
and now.  If I have not now I have nothing as there is nothing else but 
now, the Whole is Now . Thus there is no-where to go , no future to be, no 
past that was. Just Wholly Now !  How Glorious ! 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Will]

Kelly,

I think there's another perspective that has not been mentioned here...

When I was sitting outside the ER waiting for the Cat-Scans on my wife, I 
realized that her injuries were not simply hers. Her injuries belonged to 
our children, our parents, our neighbors... 

The decision to wear, or not wear, a helmet isn't singular. We have 
networks of family and friends who suffer when we are injured. The assumed 
risk is not singular. Families and friends pick up the pieces. Jan Heine 
was very fortunate to have a good friend drop everything to shepherd him 
home from Taiwan. 

The decision to mitigate risk should recognize those who will bear the 
burden of loss. It's not about laws. It's about common sense. It's about 
respect for your loved ones.  





On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 3:13:57 PM UTC-6, Kelly wrote:
>
> For those wondering why helmet laws were brought up.  The below quote is 
> in the article and why I brought it up.  
>
> "As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider and Joseph said that the next 
> step is to create injury prevention programs to increase helmet use among 
> bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop and enforce 
> stricter laws for helmet use. They said that they already participate in 
> many prevention programs in Tucson, which is a very bike-friendly city. 
>
> “That’s where future efforts need to focus in on—making helmets that 
> really make a difference,” Dr. Joseph said. “Ultimately, the important 
> message is patient care and how we can make our patients safer and more 
> protected. We need to take this data and take it to the next level and move 
> forward with policy and injury prevention, especially for the younger age 
> groups.”
>
>
> I'm not against helmets, I'm against you telling me or forcing me or 
> instructing me to wear a helmet because you think it's the safe way to 
> live.  :) 
>
>
> Kelly
> - See more at: 
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider#sthash.3coagyR5.dpuf
>
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:02:05 PM UTC-6, Eric Norris wrote:
>>
>> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
>> perhaps of interest to some:
>>
>> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>>
>> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
>> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
>> times on this forum.
>>
>> --Eric Norris
>> campyo...@me.com
>> www.campyonly.com
>> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/24/2015 04:13 PM, Kelly wrote:
For those wondering why helmet laws were brought up.  The below quote 
is in the article and why I brought it up.


"As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider and Joseph said that the 
next step is to create injury prevention programs to increase helmet 
use among bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop 
and enforce stricter laws for helmet use. They said that they already 
participate in many prevention programs in Tucson, which is a very 
bike-friendly city.




and so, their opinions and not part of the research


“That’s where future efforts need to focus in on—making helmets that 
really make a difference,” Dr. Joseph said.




I don't think anyone would complain about efforts to make helmets better 
and more effective.  Note the wide-spread interest in MIPS.




“Ultimately, the important message is patient care and how we can make 
our patients safer and more protected. We need to take this data and 
take it to the next level and move forward with policy and injury 
prevention, especially for the younger age groups.”





Are helmet laws for children controversial?   (I honestly have no idea.  
Many local jurisdictions around where I live have them, and if people 
have complained I haven't noticed.)


I'm not against helmets, I'm against you telling me or forcing me or 
instructing me to wear a helmet because you think it's the safe way to 
live.  :)





I'm against criminalizing non-use too.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Daniel D.]

If I thought bicycling was such a daredevil activity and a crash where a 
helmet may or may not help me was likely, I'd stay on the couch.  But after 
twenty years of wearing one I'll stick to it out of habit, peer pressure, 
and if something bad does happen don't want the newspaper article reporting 
about my lack of helmet use :p.  But riding without is hardly the russian 
roulette some like to make it out to be :henny penny:

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Daniel D.]

I'd probably ride more gingerly if I found myself on a long steep mountain 
descent without a helmet for some reason.  You'd ride it the same helmet or 
no helmet?  

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 10:03:25 AM UTC-8, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> just like the projection on this thread.  It's simply about being sensible 
> v. not.  It's totally stupid to say wearing a helmet makes you want to go 
> faster or wantonly.  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Scott Henry]

Lets remember that we are all adults here.   We all should be able to
make our own choices and I would hope that we don't have to stoop to
name calling.

Wear what you wear.   Please don't preach.
Cheers,
Scott

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Ron Mc  wrote:
> conspiracy theories?  seriously?  this simply about smart choice v. dumb
> choice.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

That's what I have been saying all along. I choose to wear a helmet.  I 
encourage others to wear a helmet. But I don't support mandatory helmet laws 
and I don't insult or shame those who choose not to wear a helmet. That reduces 
ridership. Reduced ridership hurts everyone.

Just Ride! 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

The IQ of the counter-helmet arguments continues to plummet.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Benz brings up a very good point, and we should listen to him because he 
has experience in these things. Yes, many such “studies” are political in 
nature and funded by special interests. So…I don’t know about this study, 
but many such studies have been funded by the automobile insurance industry 
and auto interest groups such as AAA. They don’t get insurance premium 
payments from bicyclists and their members don’t like having to steer 
around bicyclists on the road. So they have an interest in getting 
bicyclists off of the road. Hence…mandatory helmet laws! Mandatory helmet 
laws have proven to be an extremely effective way to reduce ridership. So 
any “study” that recommends mandatory helmet laws without addressing the 
reduced ridership that such laws would cause is immediately suspect.


Bottom line, anybody who recommends mandatory helmet laws without 
acknowledging that mandatory helmet laws reduce bicycle ridership is full 
of BS. I can’t put it in a nicer way. Again, I am pro-helmet. I am an LCI 
(bicycle safety instructor). I teach bicycle safety in schools all the 
time. We give them helmets, we make them wear them during class and we 
encourage them to wear them when the class is over. But many kids (and 
adults) don’t like wearing helmets and making them wear a helmet reduces 
ridership. I wish that this was not true, but my wishing does not change 
the truth. Study after study has proven that mandatory helmet laws reduce 
ridership. My own personal experience is that mandatory helmet use reduces 
ridership. Just ask any potential bicycle rider. The truth that mandatory 
helmet use reduces ridership is intuitively obvious to the casual observer! 
Does anyone honestly dispute this truth? Why don’t mandatory helmet law 
supporters ever mention this simple truth?


Ron Mc wonders if the surgeons have helmets for sale. Probably not, in my 
view; I still put my money on AAA to be the financiers for this study. But 
then the study identifies lower facial injuries as a problem, so maybe they 
want to develop full face helmets for bicyclists and make them mandatory. 
That should get those pesky bicyclists off of the road! Interesting though 
is the fact that the study says nothing about neck injuries. Most other 
studies recognize the fact that helmets INCREASE neck injuries. This is 
because the helmet catches on the ground or other objects and twists the 
neck. I have seen figures that helmets reduce head injuries by 15% but 
increase neck injuries by 11%. I would be interested in reading another 
impartial study that would scientifically measure helmet 
effectiveness…clearly, this study we are discussing here does not qualify.


Steve, I don’t think that Garth and Benz are the least bit cynical. They 
are just realistic.

 

Doug

 

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 8:23:46 AM UTC-8, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> The IQ of the counter-helmet arguments continues to plummet.  
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

actually, I don't wonder that at all - I think they'e tired of looking at 
needlessly severe trauma, just like my MD friends who abhor motorcycles.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Bill]

Do the foil hats that some wear offer some degree of protection???

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

just like the projection on this thread.  It's simply about being sensible 
v. not.  It's totally stupid to say wearing a helmet makes you want to go 
faster or wantonly.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

conspiracy theories?  seriously?  this simply about smart choice v. dumb 
choice.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[John Phillips]

MD's are not just tired of *looking at trauma*, I know someone who treats 
ER MD's for vicarious psychological trauma suffered from treating mangled 
accident victims.

Can you imagine needing to see a shrink, because you are too 
psychologically traumatized from working in the ER to ride your own bike?

John 

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 9:13:43 AM UTC-8, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> actually, I don't wonder that at all - I think they'e tired of looking at 
> needlessly severe trauma, just like my MD friends who abhor motorcycles.  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Geoffrey]

I haven't looked at the article but I will.  I do want to say that I'm not 
entrenched in any position aside from freedom of choice and please, don't 
proselytize. 

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:02:05 PM UTC-6, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
>
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
> times on this forum.
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com 
> www.campyonly.com
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Okay, what do you suggest? Should we pass mandatory helmet laws that will 
reduce ridership so that doctors won't be traumatized by injured bicyclists? 
Even though:

1) The few remaining bicyclists will be at greater risk.

2) Many more people will die of obesity and other fitness related diseases. 
(And motor vehicle accidents).

3) More cars will clog our roads and pollute our air. (The list goes on).

I'm just saying that those advocating mandatory helmet laws need to address ALL 
of the facts and policy concerns that accompany those laws.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

conflict of interest - you believe these surgeons have helmets for sale.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

  Exactly   follow the money .  Every "study" has and angle to promote. 

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 12:31:21 AM UTC-5, Benz, Sunnyvale, CA 
wrote:
>
>
> I will like to see if there are any sponsors to this analysis. The 
> sentence "next step is to create injury prevention programs to increase 
> helmet use among bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop 
> and enforce stricter laws for helmet use." creates a little suspicion on 
> possible conflicts of interest.
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

That's a very cynical view.

On 11/24/2015 08:28 AM, Garth wrote:
  Exactly   follow the money .  Every "study" has and angle to 
promote.


On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 12:31:21 AM UTC-5, Benz, Sunnyvale, 
CA wrote:



I will like to see if there are any sponsors to this analysis. The
sentence "next step is to create injury prevention programs to
increase helmet use among bicyclists, to manufacture better
helmets, and to develop and enforce stricter laws for helmet use."
creates a little suspicion on possible conflicts of interest.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

 Not helmets, but a myriad of "other benefits" of endless variety of 
which would astound .  There is always a finacial angle for someone   . 


On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 6:12:26 AM UTC-5, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> conflict of interest - you believe these surgeons have helmets for sale.  
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

['Clayton' via RBW Owners Bunch]

>
> Helmets can give a false sense of security. There is risk compensation, 
> where you ride faster and a touch more reckless because you feel safer 
> wearing a helmet. A Neurologist stated that you can get a fatal head injury 
> from a three foot fall. I wear my helmet most of the time, and have been 
> grateful when my head has hit the ground. I strongly suggest that 
> *occasionally,* folks ride without your helmet, to give back a sense of 
> vulnerability, which will make you ride safer. I have to chip in with this, 
> every time a helmet argument pops up. I couldn't resist. 
>

Clayton Bailey
Retired Paramedic Firefighter. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Garth]

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

the law argument is that most states don't require motorcycle helmets.  I 
also don't know a surgeon who would ever own a motorcycle - they hate them 
because they have to stop and render aid at every one, but they all ride 
bikes. . It ends up being about common sense.  I would vote in favor of a 
helmet law.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Edwin W]

Tim,

You wrote about car safety: "because cars have four wheels and are good at 
staying on them." I agree, but still 30,000 people die in car wrecks every year 
and 280,000 get head injuries from cars. Each year. 

Still, some things are safer than others. Biking in the Netherlands is safer 
than most biking in the U.S. And some neighborhoods and streets on Nashville, 
where I live, are safer than others. 

Sometimes with a helmet,

Edwin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the 
article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the 
wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That 
itself has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile 
attempting to answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of 
mandatory helmet laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can 
be for the wearing of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am 
and I know many others who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know 
many, many helmet users I don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the 
not wearing of them.


On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:


Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention 
several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t 
be taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support 
your desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those 
advocating helmet laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that 
don’t support their conclusion. That’s not how science works, and 
anyone who ignores established and pertinent facts when making their 
conclusion shouldn’t be taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their 
single fact that helmets may reduce injuries in the event of a crash. 
This single fact has to be weighed against the other proven facts 
before we can arrive at a conclusion that mandatory helmet laws save 
lives.



Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven 
over and over again in study after study.



Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well 
documented.



Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of 
bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more 
people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and 
motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in 
accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who 
would have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for 
bicyclists. Why not save these people as well? I’ll take these people 
seriously when they propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone 
instead of just for bicyclists.



Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The 
reduced ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more 
deaths from reduced health status than would be saved by helmets.


All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above 
facts. Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet 
wars. In the meantime…yawn.



On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:

Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but
it is perhaps of interest to some:

https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider


And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have
firmly established their entrenched positions, which have been
expressed many times on this forum.

--Eric Norris
campyo...@me.com 
www.campyonly.com 
campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com 
.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

just the wrong impact at 12 mph is enough to kill you - helmet is a 
no-brainer


>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Will]

This is what was left of the helmet that saved my wife's life. Not my 
opinion... the direct observation of the trauma surgeon... We still had 
trouble, but... 






On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 7:15:30 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>
> just the wrong impact at 12 mph is enough to kill you - helmet is a 
> no-brainer
>
>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Philip Kim]

I think as more bicycles are on the road, helmets will become less 
necessary. I think a better way to promote bicycling is to have a traffic 
system where bicycles and cars don't share the same road, physically and 
psychologically. A lot of my friends won't ride bikes in the city for this 
reason. 

But in DC, as long as there's a law designating a "3 ft minimum to pass" 
for those driving 2 tons of metal and are usually texting or using facebook 
on their phone, I will keep wearing my helmet.

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 12:19:43 AM UTC-5, Doug Williams wrote:
>
> Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention 
> several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be 
> taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your 
> desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet 
> laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their 
> conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores 
> established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be 
> taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets may 
> reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed 
> against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that 
> mandatory helmet laws save lives.
>
>
> Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven over 
> and over again in study after study.
>
>
> Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
> Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
> drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
>
>
> Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of 
> bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more 
> people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and 
> motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in 
> accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would 
> have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why 
> not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they 
> propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
>
>
> Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
> 300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced 
> ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from 
> reduced health status than would be saved by helmets. 
>
> All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above facts. 
> Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars. In the 
> meantime…yawn.
>
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>>
>> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
>> perhaps of interest to some:
>>
>> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>>
>> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
>> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
>> times on this forum.
>>
>> --Eric Norris
>> campyo...@me.com
>> www.campyonly.com
>> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Eric Norris]

Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in the 
shower, or elsewhere. 

Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> 
> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the 
> article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the 
> wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself has 
> been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to 
> answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet 
> laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing of 
> helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others who 
> feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I don't 
> know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
> 
>> On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
>> Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention several 
>> OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be taken 
>> seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your desired 
>> conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet laws can't 
>> ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their conclusion. That’s 
>> not how science works, and anyone who ignores established and pertinent 
>> facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be taken seriously. Let’s start 
>> by granting their single fact that helmets may reduce injuries 
>> in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed against the 
>> other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that mandatory 
>> helmet laws save lives.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven over 
>> and over again in study after study.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
>> Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
>> drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of bicycle 
>> injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more people would 
>> be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and motorists. Around 
>> 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in accidents each year in 
>> the U.S. The percentage of these people who would have reduced injuries with 
>> a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why not save these people as 
>> well? I’ll take these people seriously when they propose a UNIVERSAL helmet 
>> law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
>> 300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced 
>> ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from 
>> reduced health status than would be saved by helmets. 
>> 
>> 
>> All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above facts. 
>> Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars. In the 
>> meantime…yawn.
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>>> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
>>> perhaps of interest to some:
>>> 
>>> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>>> 
>>> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
>>> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
>>> times on this forum.
>>> 
>>> --Eric Norris
>>> campyo...@me.com
>>> www.campyonly.com
>>> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com
>>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to 

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Eric Norris]

In that vein, here's a reply to the same post from a friend:

"Nicely said Eric.I too wear a helmet every time I'm on my bike! I definitely 
advocate wearing helmets for any type of riding. I worked in transplantation 
for 10 years and I assure you we had several donors because of the choice not 
to wear a helmet. I will never forget a donor we had who fell on a local bike 
path. I will never forget her because I saw her riding without her helmet while 
I was on the same bike path on my way home. I went home and was called back 
into work because we were transplanting her organs. :(.
Kelly"

Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:36 AM, Will  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what was left of the helmet that saved my wife's life. Not my 
> opinion... the direct observation of the trauma surgeon... We still had 
> trouble, but... 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 7:15:30 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>> just the wrong impact at 12 mph is enough to kill you - helmet is a 
>> no-brainer
>> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Lynne Cooney]

Who can resist the helme(n)t war?

I was hit by a car. My helmet was cracked in two. I had no head injury. I'm 
damn glad I was wearing it. But this was a road ride, where I was actually 
trying to keep my average speed at around 17mph for 62 miles. I'm going to 
wear a helmet in that case.

We have a mandatory helmet law in Seattle. 

I have been a member of Pronto! (bike sharing) since day one (I even have 
the super-sexy blue fob).

I have never used Pronto! Not once. Why? That damn helmet law. If I want to 
grab a bike share bike to ride eight blocks to REI, at only slightly faster 
than walking speed, I don't feel like dealing with the rental helmet. And 
I'm not going to carry my own helmet everywhere I go. Every single time I 
have thought about it, I just walked instead. Many people just don't wear 
the mandatory helmet.

If I'm not using the bike share program because of the helmet BS, I'm 
probably not the only one.

When I'm riding my own bikes to work or wherever, I have found that my 
helmet is a very convenient place to keep my backup battery lights. Easy to 
move them from bike to bike, no need to remove them when I park the bike. 
It's also just handy to have lights on your helmet. 

Most of us know all the arguments. Many car occupants have head injuries 
from car crashes. Anyone who races cars wears a helmet. But we are not 
screaming for helmets in cars. I know of one person who would probably be 
alive today if she had been wearing a helmet in the car.

Helmet laws are not helping.

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
>
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
> times on this forum.
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com 
> www.campyonly.com
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Lynne Cooney]

This is just a question, not trying to stir up trouble. How many donors did 
you have from car occupants who also would have been saved by a helmet?

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:21:55 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> In that vein, here's a reply to the same post from a friend:
>
> "Nicely said Eric.I too wear a helmet every time I'm on my bike! I 
> definitely advocate wearing helmets for any type of riding. I worked in 
> transplantation for 10 years and I assure you we had several donors because 
> of the choice not to wear a helmet. I will never forget a donor we had who 
> fell on a local bike path. I will never forget her because I saw her riding 
> without her helmet while I was on the same bike path on my way home. I went 
> home and was called back into work because we were transplanting her 
> organs. :(.
> Kelly"
>
> Eric N
> www.CampyOnly.com 
> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com 
> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>
> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:36 AM, Will  
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>
> This is what was left of the helmet that saved my wife's life. Not my 
> opinion... the direct observation of the trauma surgeon... We still had 
> trouble, but... 
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 7:15:30 AM UTC-6, Ron Mc wrote:
>>
>> just the wrong impact at 12 mph is enough to kill you - helmet is a 
>> no-brainer
>>
>>
>>> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com .
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

I disagree.  I've had several crashes over the years, all due to road 
hazards: sand, eroded roots, potholes, cracks, black ice  -- not one of 
which involved cars and none of which would have been mitigated in any 
way by having more cyclists on the road.  And several people I know were 
involved in crashes because of other cyclists: riders who stopped dead 
with no warning while riding in the midst of a large group, riders who 
rode into other riders, people who for no known reason just crashed 
right in front of others causing a multi-bike pileup.


If you're going down, head protection is far more likely to help than to 
hurt.  The next time you're hitting the asphalt at 10 or 15 mph and you 
hear your helmet hitting the pavement and then sliding along the 
asphalt, ask yourself "Would I rather be sliding on my skin than on the 
helmet right now?"


On 11/23/2015 08:34 AM, Philip Kim wrote:
I think as more bicycles are on the road, helmets will become less 
necessary. I think a better way to promote bicycling is to have a 
traffic system where bicycles and cars don't share the same road, 
physically and psychologically. A lot of my friends won't ride bikes 
in the city for this reason.


But in DC, as long as there's a law designating a "3 ft minimum to 
pass" for those driving 2 tons of metal and are usually texting or 
using facebook on their phone, I will keep wearing my helmet.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

Irrelevant question.  We aren't discussing whether or not one should 
wear a helmet while driving in a car.


On 11/23/2015 09:30 AM, Lynne Cooney wrote:
This is just a question, not trying to stir up trouble. How many 
donors did you have from car occupants who also would have been saved 
by a helmet?


On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:21:55 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:

In that vein, here's a reply to the same post from a friend:

"Nicely said Eric.I too wear a helmet every time I'm on my bike! I
definitely advocate wearing helmets for any type of riding. I
worked in transplantation for 10 years and I assure you we had
several donors because of the choice not to wear a helmet. I will
never forget a donor we had who fell on a local bike path. I will
never forget her because I saw her riding without her helmet while
I was on the same bike path on my way home. I went home and was
called back into work because we were transplanting her organs. :(.
Kelly"



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Scott G.]

I don't wear a helmet, I wear a AEPMSD.
AeroDynamic Expanded Polystyrene Mirror Support Device.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Benz, Sunnyvale, CA]

I do actually work in the healthcare industry (helping run clinical trials 
no less!). My impression of this short article and an even shorter abstract 
(lol) is that I cannot say the conclusion is supported one way or the 
other, because there simply isn't enough information and details to chew 
on. Statistical analysis is a very tough subject and if there's something I 
learned from my profession, it's that having an MD is no qualification to 
working the numbers (an inside joke is that it's an anti-qualification), 
which is why we always have a clinical science person (often MD or MD-PhD), 
and a statistician with a PhD in that field (because yes, Shirley, it's 
*that* specialized). Until we see more, we should really take the 
conclusions drawn with cup of salt.

I will like to see if there are any sponsors to this analysis. The sentence 
"next step is to create injury prevention programs to increase helmet use 
among bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop and enforce 
stricter laws for helmet use." creates a little suspicion on possible 
conflicts of interest.



On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 5:11:02 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the 
> article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the 
> wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself 
> has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to 
> answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet 
> laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing 
> of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others 
> who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I 
> don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
>
> On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
>
> Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention 
> several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be 
> taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your 
> desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet 
> laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their 
> conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores 
> established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be 
> taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets may 
> reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed 
> against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that 
> mandatory helmet laws save lives.
>
>
> Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven over 
> and over again in study after study.
>
>
> Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
> Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
> drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
>
>
> Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of 
> bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more 
> people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and 
> motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in 
> accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would 
> have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why 
> not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they 
> propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
>
>
> Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
> 300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced 
> ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from 
> reduced health status than would be saved by helmets. 
>
> All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above facts. 
> Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars. In the 
> meantime…yawn.
>
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote: 
>>
>> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
>> perhaps of interest to some: 
>>
>> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>>
>> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
>> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
>> times on this forum.
>>
>> --Eric Norris
>> campyo...@me.com
>> www.campyonly.com
>> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>>
>> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com .
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at 

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Montclair BobbyB]

Whew, I was so afraid I would miss the annual helmet discussion... This year is 
no different and I am still at the same conclusion.  I will continue to choose 
to wear my helmet (most of the time), and be grateful I have a choice to ride 
through town wearing only a baseball cap (and equally grateful when I arrive 
home safely). 

Thankful to live and ride. 

Happy Thanksgiving to all, we have much to be grateful for. ☀️

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

next up, the usefulness of blinkies in giving drivers an extra 30 seconds 
alert to your presence on the road

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 9:51:55 AM UTC-6, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>
> Whew, I was so afraid I would miss the annual helmet discussion... This 
> year is no different and I am still at the same conclusion.  I will 
> continue to choose to wear my helmet (most of the time), and be grateful I 
> have a choice to ride through town wearing only a baseball cap (and equally 
> grateful when I arrive home safely). 
>
> Thankful to live and ride. 
>
> Happy Thanksgiving to all, we have much to be grateful for. ☀️

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Eric Norris]

... Or while taking a shower.

Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> 
> Irrelevant question.  We aren't discussing whether or not one should wear a 
> helmet while driving in a car.
> 
>> On 11/23/2015 09:30 AM, Lynne Cooney wrote:
>> This is just a question, not trying to stir up trouble. How many donors did 
>> you have from car occupants who also would have been saved by a helmet?
>> 
>>> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:21:55 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>>> In that vein, here's a reply to the same post from a friend:
>>> 
>>> "Nicely said Eric.I too wear a helmet every time I'm on my bike! I 
>>> definitely advocate wearing helmets for any type of riding. I worked in 
>>> transplantation for 10 years and I assure you we had several donors because 
>>> of the choice not to wear a helmet. I will never forget a donor we had who 
>>> fell on a local bike path. I will never forget her because I saw her riding 
>>> without her helmet while I was on the same bike path on my way home. I went 
>>> home and was called back into work because we were transplanting
>>>  her organs. :(.
>>> Kelly"
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Quoting from the article: "As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider and 
Joseph said that the next step is to create injury prevention programs to 
increase helmet use among bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to 
develop and enforce stricter laws for helmet use."

Doug

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:55:31 AM UTC-8, Doug Williams wrote:
>
> Umm...Eric...read the article again. The authors of the study recommended 
> mandatory helmet laws.
>
> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:16:27 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>>
>> Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in 
>> the shower, or elsewhere. 
>>
>> Eric N
>> www.CampyOnly.com 
>> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com 
>> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>>
>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
>>
>> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the 
>> article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the 
>> wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself 
>> has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to 
>> answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet 
>> laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing 
>> of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others 
>> who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I 
>> don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

Fine.  I did say I didn't read the article all that closely. Anyway, 
that's just their opinion.  Their work doesn't necessarily lead to that 
conclusion.


What's more, none of us would object to efforts to get manufacturers to 
make better helmets, and few would object to efforts to increase helmet 
use -- indeed, many of us participate in such efforts now, ranging from 
club-sponsored free helmet give-aways to lead-by-example.


On 11/23/2015 10:00 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
Quoting from the article: "As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider 
and Joseph said that the next step is to create injury prevention 
programs to increase helmet use among bicyclists, to manufacture 
better helmets, and to develop and enforce stricter laws for helmet use."


Doug

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:55:31 AM UTC-8, Doug Williams wrote:

Umm...Eric...read the article again. The authors of the study
recommended mandatory helmet laws.

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:16:27 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:

Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on
bikes, in the shower, or elsewhere.

Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com 
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com 
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar 
wrote:


When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I
didn't read the article all that closely, but the gist of it
as I recall it is that the wearing of helmets was in fact
effective in the cases cited.  That itself has been called in
question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to
answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of
mandatory helmet laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant
distraction.  One can be for the wearing of helmets but
against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others
who feel the same way. In fact, although I know many, many
helmet users I don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the
not wearing of them.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com 
.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Steve Palincsar]

On 11/23/2015 10:19 AM, Eric Norris wrote:
Ok. I guess I mentally separated the results--a helmet protects your 
head when it hits the ground--from their suggestion that it would be a 
good idea to require the use of helmets. The former seems to be to be 
a fact-based conclusion, the latter an opinion.


Exactly.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Eric Norris]

Ok. I guess I mentally separated the results--a helmet protects your head when 
it hits the ground--from their suggestion that it would be a good idea to 
require the use of helmets. The former seems to be to be a fact-based 
conclusion, the latter an opinion.

Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

> On Nov 23, 2015, at 6:55 AM, Doug Williams  wrote:
> 
> Umm...Eric...read the article again. The authors of the study recommended 
> mandatory helmet laws.
> 
>> On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:16:27 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>> Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in the 
>> shower, or elsewhere. 
>> 
>> Eric N
>> www.CampyOnly.com
>> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
>> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>> 
>>> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
>>> 
>>> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the 
>>> article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the 
>>> wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself 
>>> has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to 
>>> answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet 
>>> laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing 
>>> of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others 
>>> who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I 
>>> don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
>>> 
 On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
 Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention 
 several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be 
 taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your 
 desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet 
 laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their 
 conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores 
 established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be 
 taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets 
 may reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be 
 weighed against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a 
 conclusion that mandatory helmet laws save lives.
 
 
 
 Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven over 
 and over again in study after study.
 
 
 
 Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
 Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
 drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
 
 
 
 Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of 
 bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more 
 people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and 
 motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in 
 accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would 
 have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why 
 not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they 
 propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
 
 
 
 Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
 300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced 
 ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from 
 reduced health status than would be saved by helmets. 
 
 
 All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above facts. 
 Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars. In 
 the meantime…yawn.
 
 
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
> 
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
> 
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
> times on this forum.
> 
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com
> www.campyonly.com
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com
 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
 To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
 email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
 To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
 Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
 For more options, visit 

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Joe Broach]

On Nov 23, 2015 6:16 AM, "Eric Norris"  wrote:
>
> Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in
the shower, or elsewhere.

Yes they are--in the article you linked to, the paper authors are quoted
"As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider and Joseph said that the next
step is to create injury prevention programs to increase helmet use among
bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop and enforce
stricter laws for helmet use."

Interesting study design and findings, but their recommendations are
unfortunate.

Best,
joe in pdx or

> Eric N
> www.CampyOnly.com
> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>
> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
>
>> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the
article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the
wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself
has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to
answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet
laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing
of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others
who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I
don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
>>
>> On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention
several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be
taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your
desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet
laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their
conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores
established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be
taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets may
reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed
against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that
mandatory helmet laws save lives.
>>>
>>>
>>> Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven
over and over again in study after study.
>>>
>>>
>>> Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road.
Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The
drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
>>>
>>>
>>> Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of
bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more
people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and
motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in
accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would
have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why
not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they
propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
>>>
>>>
>>> Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over
300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced
ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from
reduced health status than would be saved by helmets.
>>>
>>> All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above
facts. Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars.
In the meantime…yawn.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:

 Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it
is perhaps of interest to some:

 https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider

 And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly
established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many
times on this forum.

 --Eric Norris
 campyo...@me.com
 www.campyonly.com
 campyonlyguy.blogspot.com

>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at 

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Edwin W]

The way I think about it is this (supported by the article): if you get in 
a wreck, a helmet will probably help.
Then I think of these questions:
Do you think wearing a helmet when walking would make you more safe, less 
safe, or about the same?
Do you think wearing a helmet when driving (as the pro racers do) make you 
more safe, less safe, or about the same?

Honestly, I think wearing a helmet in all three forms of transportation 
would make you (some bit) safer. But would you EVER, REALLY wear a helmet 
when driving? Even in the MOST dangerous types of driving (at dusk, in the 
rain, on a mountain road/crowded expressway, etc..). No, of course not! 
Helmets are not for transportation driving, they are for racing or driving 
like a racer. and that is how I think about helmets with biking. If you are 
racing or biking like a racer, think about a helmet, like they do.

The vague suggestions:
If you are biking faster than 30mph, consider a helmet.
If you are biking with drop bars, consider a helmet.
If the cars around you are all close and going faster than 30mph, consider 
a helmet.

Otherwise, it is just like walking and driving - sure it will make you a 
bit safer, but you wouldn't ACTUALLY wear a helmet when doing those things!

All things in moderation,

Edwin

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

why listen to published medical facts researched and peer reviewed by the 
American College of Surgeons when you can make pointless analogies 
(rhetorical question)

I would say the fact that 75% of traumatic brain injuries occurred in 
riders not wear helmets is alone significant even without the other 
supporting statistics.  
One thing for sure, wearing a helmet makes you 150% smarter.  

btw, not once have I been on a bike and had an accident with a vehicle, but 
lost count of the number of times I've been intentionally harassed by a 
vehicle.  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Tim Gavin]

Edwin -- I agree with your suggestions, but not with the "racer"
qualification.

Instead of "driving/riding like a racer", I'd say "driving/riding
aggressively", or more specifically "driving/riding with a reasonable
suspicion of landing on one's head".

Racing driving, stunt driving, etc, are reasonable situations to wear a
helmet in a car.  But there aren't too many more situations because cars
have four wheels and are good at staying on them.  A notable exception
would be winter storms; snow and ice cause plenty of cars on their sides or
tops.
Most of us simply won't drive in those dangerous situations, and if you've
ignored common sense enough to drive in a winter storm, I doubt you'd have
the common sense or forethought to wear a helmet.

Bicycle riding, however, leaves one much more likely to land on one's
head.  Bicycles fall over by nature.  Even when riding around town, a
surprise low-speed accident with a careless auto, bicycle, pedestrian,
pothole, or animal could cause you to fall over and bonk your head.  Of
course, aggressive riding raises the risk, but it doesn't need to be
"racing" to be aggressive/high risk behavior.
The likelihood of a fall may be very low due to your riding style, safety
(lighting/mirrors/reflective), behavior, time of day, and other factors.
But it's still a lot more likely than if you were riding a four wheel
bicycle that doesn't tip over on its own, and more likely than if you were
just walking, showering, shaving, fly fishing, or whatever.

At least, that's the reasoning I use to always wear a helmet.  High risk =
cover your dome.
When I flew aircraft in the military I wore a helmet.  When I operate my
motorcycle, I wear a helmet.  When I ride my bike, I wear a helmet.  Also,
I ride aggressively (aka, "like an enthusiastic clutz").


I don't believe that helmet should be required by law when cycling, because
it discourages riding.
But, I believe that all riders should be smart enough to wear a helmet.
I also believe that organizers of cycling events are correct to require
helmet use in order to participate.

Tim


On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Edwin W  wrote:

> The way I think about it is this (supported by the article): if you get in
> a wreck, a helmet will probably help.
> Then I think of these questions:
> Do you think wearing a helmet when walking would make you more safe, less
> safe, or about the same?
> Do you think wearing a helmet when driving (as the pro racers do) make you
> more safe, less safe, or about the same?
>
> Honestly, I think wearing a helmet in all three forms of transportation
> would make you (some bit) safer. But would you EVER, REALLY wear a helmet
> when driving? Even in the MOST dangerous types of driving (at dusk, in the
> rain, on a mountain road/crowded expressway, etc..). No, of course not!
> Helmets are not for transportation driving, they are for racing or driving
> like a racer. and that is how I think about helmets with biking. If you are
> racing or biking like a racer, think about a helmet, like they do.
>
> The vague suggestions:
> If you are biking faster than 30mph, consider a helmet.
> If you are biking with drop bars, consider a helmet.
> If the cars around you are all close and going faster than 30mph, consider
> a helmet.
>
> Otherwise, it is just like walking and driving - sure it will make you a
> bit safer, but you wouldn't ACTUALLY wear a helmet when doing those things!
>
> All things in moderation,
>
> Edwin
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

RE: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Allingham II, Thomas J]

Now, now, boys and girls….

From: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Eric Norris
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 10:17 AM
To: rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

... Or while taking a shower.

Eric N
www.CampyOnly.com<http://www.campyonly.com>
CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com<http://campyonlyguy.blogspot.com>
Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

On Nov 23, 2015, at 6:39 AM, Steve Palincsar 
<palin...@his.com<mailto:palin...@his.com>> wrote:
Irrelevant question.  We aren't discussing whether or not one should wear a 
helmet while driving in a car.
On 11/23/2015 09:30 AM, Lynne Cooney wrote:
This is just a question, not trying to stir up trouble. How many donors did you 
have from car occupants who also would have been saved by a helmet?

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:21:55 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
In that vein, here's a reply to the same post from a friend:

"Nicely said Eric.I too wear a helmet every time I'm on my bike! I definitely 
advocate wearing helmets for any type of riding. I worked in transplantation 
for 10 years and I assure you we had several donors because of the choice not 
to wear a helmet. I will never forget a donor we had who fell on a local bike 
path. I will never forget her because I saw her riding without her helmet while 
I was on the same bike path on my way home. I went home and was called back 
into work because we were transplanting her organs. :(.
Kelly"

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to 
rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to 
rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com<mailto:rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

This email (and any attachments thereto) is intended only for use by the 
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or 
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, 
you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
email (and any attachments thereto) is strictly prohibited. If you receive this 
email in error please immediately notify me at (212) 735-3000 and permanently 
delete the original email (and any copy of any email) and any printout thereof.

Further information about the firm, a list of the Partners and their 
professional qualifications will be provided upon request.

==

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

it's hard to do 12 mph in the shower, but falling off one's bike is 
frequent enough to be a likelihood.  

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 8:16:27 AM UTC-6, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in the 
> shower, or elsewhere. 
>
> Eric N
> www.CampyOnly.com 
> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com 
> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Ron Mc]

Been on my helmet 3 times.  One flip at 18mph.  All three times, my helmet 
protected my face and scalp from serious road rash.  

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 8:37:54 AM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> I disagree.  I've had several crashes over the years, all due to road 
> hazards: sand, eroded roots, potholes, cracks, black ice  -- not one of 
> which involved cars and none of which would have been mitigated in any 
> way by having more cyclists on the road.  And several people I know were 
> involved in crashes because of other cyclists: riders who stopped dead 
> with no warning while riding in the midst of a large group, riders who 
> rode into other riders, people who for no known reason just crashed 
> right in front of others causing a multi-bike pileup. 
>
> If you're going down, head protection is far more likely to help than to 
> hurt.  The next time you're hitting the asphalt at 10 or 15 mph and you 
> hear your helmet hitting the pavement and then sliding along the 
> asphalt, ask yourself "Would I rather be sliding on my skin than on the 
> helmet right now?" 
>
> On 11/23/2015 08:34 AM, Philip Kim wrote: 
> > I think as more bicycles are on the road, helmets will become less 
> > necessary. I think a better way to promote bicycling is to have a 
> > traffic system where bicycles and cars don't share the same road, 
> > physically and psychologically. A lot of my friends won't ride bikes 
> > in the city for this reason. 
> > 
> > But in DC, as long as there's a law designating a "3 ft minimum to 
> > pass" for those driving 2 tons of metal and are usually texting or 
> > using facebook on their phone, I will keep wearing my helmet. 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Joe Broach]

And, mea culpa, I just broke my own rule of reading the whole thread before
commenting. I see others pointed this out already and didn't mean to pile
on Eric. I appreciated the link.  -joe in pdx

Caveat lector. Sent from a phone.
On Nov 23, 2015 9:00 AM, "Joe Broach"  wrote:

> On Nov 23, 2015 6:16 AM, "Eric Norris"  wrote:
> >
> > Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in
> the shower, or elsewhere.
>
> Yes they are--in the article you linked to, the paper authors are quoted
> "As a result of their findings, Drs. Haider and Joseph said that the next
> step is to create injury prevention programs to increase helmet use among
> bicyclists, to manufacture better helmets, and to develop and enforce
> stricter laws for helmet use."
>
> Interesting study design and findings, but their recommendations are
> unfortunate.
>
> Best,
> joe in pdx or
>
> > Eric N
> > www.CampyOnly.com
> > CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com
> > Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
> >
> > On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar  wrote:
> >
> >> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read
> the article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the
> wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself
> has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to
> answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet
> laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing
> of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others
> who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I
> don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
> >>
> >> On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention
> several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be
> taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your
> desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet
> laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their
> conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores
> established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be
> taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets may
> reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed
> against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that
> mandatory helmet laws save lives.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven
> over and over again in study after study.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road.
> Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The
> drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of
> bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more
> people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and
> motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in
> accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would
> have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why
> not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they
> propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over
> 300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced
> ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from
> reduced health status than would be saved by helmets.
> >>>
> >>> All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above
> facts. Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars.
> In the meantime…yawn.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
> 
>  Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it
> is perhaps of interest to some:
> 
>  https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider
> 
>  And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many
> times on this forum.
> 
>  --Eric Norris
>  campyo...@me.com
>  www.campyonly.com
>  campyonlyguy.blogspot.com
> 
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com
> .
> >>> Visit this 

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Umm...Eric...read the article again. The authors of the study recommended 
mandatory helmet laws.

On Monday, November 23, 2015 at 6:16:27 AM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Well said, Steve. Nobody is suggesting mandatory helmets--on bikes, in the 
> shower, or elsewhere. 
>
> Eric N
> www.CampyOnly.com 
> CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com 
> Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy
>
> On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:10 AM, Steve Palincsar  > wrote:
>
> When did mandatory helmet laws enter this discussion?  I didn't read the 
> article all that closely, but the gist of it as I recall it is that the 
> wearing of helmets was in fact effective in the cases cited.  That itself 
> has been called in question in the past, and it is worthwhile attempting to 
> answer it.  And within that context, the introduction of mandatory helmet 
> laws/helmet wars is an irrelevant distraction.  One can be for the wearing 
> of helmets but against mandatory helmet laws; I am and I know many others 
> who feel the same way.  In fact, although I know many, many helmet users I 
> don't know anyone who favors criminalizing the not wearing of them.
>
> On 11/23/2015 12:19 AM, Doug Williams wrote:
>
> Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention 
> several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be 
> taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your 
> desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet 
> laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their 
> conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores 
> established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be 
> taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets may 
> reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed 
> against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that 
> mandatory helmet laws save lives.
>
>
> Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven over 
> and over again in study after study.
>
>
> Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
> Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
> drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.
>
>
> Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of 
> bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more 
> people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and 
> motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in 
> accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would 
> have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why 
> not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they 
> propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.
>
>
> Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
> 300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced 
> ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from 
> reduced health status than would be saved by helmets. 
>
> All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above facts. 
> Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars. In the 
> meantime…yawn.
>
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote: 
>>
>> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
>> perhaps of interest to some: 
>>
>> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>>
>> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
>> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
>> times on this forum.
>>
>> --Eric Norris
>> campyo...@me.com
>> www.campyonly.com
>> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>>
>> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com .
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com .
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from 

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Kelly]

I'm not anti helmet and if I know I'm going down I would choose to have a 
helmet on.   The article as many suggests that cycling is dangerous and 59% 
better chance of surviving a terrible crash. 
Well .. trouble is the chance of me having that terrible crash is pretty 
insignificant.   Regardless of that I was enjoying the article right up 
until it states we needed laws to force helmet use.   
That is the point I will stand up yet again and state that giving 
bureaucrats power over me in even more aspects of my life is unacceptable. 
  They fail to break down the instances of sport riders to casual riders, 
computers etc.  

Any my opinion only the article doesn't really tell me anything to make me 
thing the helmet is anymore useful on a bicycle that it is in the shower or 
walking down steps. 

Kelly


On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:02:05 PM UTC-6, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
>
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
> times on this forum.
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com 
> www.campyonly.com
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Doug Williams]

Hey, I wear my helmet all the time, but…The article fails to mention 
several OTHER important facts. Because of this, the study simply can’t be 
taken seriously. You simply can’t pick only the facts that support your 
desired conclusion; you must weigh all the facts. Those advocating helmet 
laws can't ignore other inconvenient facts that don’t support their 
conclusion. That’s not how science works, and anyone who ignores 
established and pertinent facts when making their conclusion shouldn’t be 
taken seriously. Let’s start by granting their single fact that helmets may 
reduce injuries in the event of a crash. This single fact has to be weighed 
against the other proven facts before we can arrive at a conclusion that 
mandatory helmet laws save lives.


Fact 1: Mandatory Helmet Laws reduced ridership. This has been proven over 
and over again in study after study.


Fact 2: Bicycling in general is safer with more bicycles on the road. 
Drivers get used to seeing bicycles and become accustomed to them. The 
drivers then act more safely around bicycles. This is also well documented.


Fact 3: Bicycling is much safer than they represent when the risk of 
bicycle injury is weighed against other known risks. Many, many, more 
people would be saved by mandatory helmet laws for pedestrians and 
motorists. Around 4,500 pedestrians and 45,000 motorists are killed in 
accidents each year in the U.S. The percentage of these people who would 
have reduced injuries with a helmet is similar to that for bicyclists. Why 
not save these people as well? I’ll take these people seriously when they 
propose a UNIVERSAL helmet law for everyone instead of just for bicyclists.


Fact 4: Around 600 bicyclists die each year in the U.S. but well over 
300,000 die of obesity and lack of exercise related diseases. The reduced 
ridership caused by mandatory helmet laws would cause more deaths from 
reduced health status than would be saved by helmets. 

All “studies” that argue for mandatory helmet laws ignore the above facts. 
Find me a study that doesn’t and then we can reopen the helmet wars. In the 
meantime…yawn.

On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 7:02:05 PM UTC-8, Eric Norris wrote:
>
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
>
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many 
> times on this forum.
>
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com 
> www.campyonly.com
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Smart Guys: Bicycle Helmets Reduce Injuries

[Eric Norris]

There is risk in pretty much everything we do in life. As you point out, unless 
compelled to do otherwise by laws, we all assess and respond to those risks in 
different ways. I didn’t see the article as saying that bicycling is risky (a 
high rate of accidents), just that wearing a helmet can reduce the incidence of 
injuries if your head hits the ground.

And yes, people injure their heads by slipping in the shower. And yes, if we 
all wore a helmet in the shower we could probably avoid some injuries. That 
ignores that fact that wearing a helmet would interfere with a common part of 
showering: the washing of one’s hair. Wearing a bicycle helmet doesn’t 
interfere with anything I’m doing on a bike.

P.S. Sorry for dipping my toe into this debate. Flame on!

--Eric Norris
campyonly...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
campyonlyguy.blogspot.com

> On Nov 22, 2015, at 7:13 PM, Kelly  wrote:
> 
> I'm not anti helmet and if I know I'm going down I would choose to have a 
> helmet on.   The article as many suggests that cycling is dangerous and 59% 
> better chance of surviving a terrible crash. 
> Well .. trouble is the chance of me having that terrible crash is pretty 
> insignificant.   Regardless of that I was enjoying the article right up until 
> it states we needed laws to force helmet use.   
> That is the point I will stand up yet again and state that giving bureaucrats 
> power over me in even more aspects of my life is unacceptable.   They fail to 
> break down the instances of sport riders to casual riders, computers etc. 
>  
> 
> Any my opinion only the article doesn't really tell me anything to make me 
> thing the helmet is anymore useful on a bicycle that it is in the shower or 
> walking down steps. 
> 
> Kelly
> 
> 
> On Sunday, November 22, 2015 at 9:02:05 PM UTC-6, Eric Norris wrote:
> Not that this is going to change a single mind on the subject, but it is 
> perhaps of interest to some:
> 
> https://www.facs.org/media/press-releases/2015/haider 
>  
> 
> And yes, I realize that the helmet and non-helmet camps have firmly 
> established their entrenched positions, which have been expressed many times 
> on this forum.
> 
> --Eric Norris
> campyo...@me.com 
> www.campyonly.com 
> campyonlyguy.blogspot.com 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.