helmets increase danger
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Proposed Motion of No Confidence in URCM Moderation
Next: Ok cyclists - is this reasonable behaviour?
From: JMS jmsmith2010 on 17 Apr 2010 08:39 On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:59:35 +0100, Albert T Cone <a.k.kirby(a)durham.ac.uk> wrote: >JMS wrote: >> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 17:13:39 +0100, Albert T Cone >> <a.k.kirby(a)durham.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> JMS wrote: >>>> Are you against them by any chance? >>> No. I don't wear one myself, if you are interested, because I prefer >>> the risk of abrasions and blunt trauma injury to those of torsional >>> injury to the neck and spine. Other people may weigh those risks >>> differently, but I think that it *should* be a personal choice, and I am >>> not in favour of making helmet wearing mandatory. >> >> >> I was not aware that there was any discussion about making helmets >> mandatory in the thread. > > >> I do however love the way that those who are actually anti-helmet like >> to introduce the "compulsory argument" when all else fails. >> >> Well done. > >I'm afraid that's a straw man. I am not anti-helmet, I simply think, >based on the evidence as I understand it, that *for me* the balance of >risk/severity of injury is better if *I* don't wear a helmet. > >I do think that the general perception of the efficacy of helmets is not >supported by the evidence. I would prefer that people were better informed. > >It is a single logical step from me making an informed personal choice >to others doing the same, and then one more to the issue of compulsion, >so it is unfair to suggest that this was a last-ditch attempt to divert >attention from a supposedly failing argument. > > >> And the chance of "torsional injury to the neck and spine." through >> wearing a helmet is what exactly? >If you mean to query the mechanism, then it is is described well in: >J.H. Adams, D.I. Graham, L.S. Murray and G. Scott , Diffuse axonal >injury due to non-missile head injury in humans. Ann. Neurol. 12 (1982), >pp. 557�563 > >Evidence that cycling helmets do in-fact contribute to axial torque is >given in: >Andersson, T., Larsson, P., Sandberg, U., 1993. Chin strap forces in >bicycle helmets, Swedish National Testing and Research Institute, >Materials and Mechanics, SP report 42 > >If you mean for me to quantify the risk, then I can't - the statistics >are unclear, for all aspects of helmet safety. The potential severity >of the injury, *in my opinion*, is such that I give it higher weighting >than the potential for abrasion and concussion. Others' opinion may vary. I have looked at the papers - thanks for the links I understand that you are unwilling/unable to answer the question : "And the chance of "torsional injury to the neck and spine." through wearing a helmet is what exactly?" In which case - perhaps you could point out a paragraph which actually says that wearing a cycle helmet will (or perhaps even "may") increase the torsional injury to the neck and spine by any measure at all as I cannot see such. -- "wearing helmets can sometimes increase the chance of a cyclist being involved in an accident." That august body The CTC (They've already had a slap for lying by the ASA)
From: Roland Perry on 17 Apr 2010 10:26 In message <1jh3chg.1yi4zw11h06zm2N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>, at 11:42:16 on Sat, 17 Apr 2010, Steve Firth <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> remarked: >> >> >> Which doesn't answer the question about a possible sliding scale, and >> >> >> the "more" in my question. >> >> > >> >> >Which part of the answer do you not understand? >> >> >> >> Whether or not the degree of "caution and respect" varies, specifically >> >> do you give more of it to a vulnerable-looking motorist. >> > >> >Why would one give more than that is adequate? >> >> Because "adequate" might vary depending upon the perceived vulnerability >> of the cyclist. Giving more room to a wobbly five year old than a >> professional looking adult, for example. > >Keep digging. Keep failing to answer the question. >> >Your claims about the degree of caution shown by a driver are classic >> >examples of dogma. >> >> I would regard it as one kind of common sense for me as a driver to give >> a wobbly child more room, and another kind of common sense for me to >> realise that drivers in general might do that. > >What you keep claiming as "common sense" is dogma. Both sorts of common sense, or just one of them? -- Roland Perry
From: Roland Perry on 17 Apr 2010 10:39 In message <1m8fs5tn3ait05tnppkpv4i61mftuqhd9r(a)4ax.com>, at 00:38:03 on Fri, 16 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: >>>Perhaps I am not so naive as you; just because something appears in a >>>book does not make it true, >> >>And nor does appearing in a peer reviewed paper. > >It gives something just a little more credibility than something >having been read and supported "by very many people". Not if none of the peers have (for example) an actuarial background, but those agreeing with the book, do. -- Roland Perry
From: Roland Perry on 17 Apr 2010 10:42 In message <rhnes5lmhvf0mij21a4oddmkustmudjt72(a)4ax.com>, at 19:44:47 on Thu, 15 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: >>>It is a simple question - not circumstance specific at all - "on >>>average" >>> >>>The fact that you refuse to answer is sufficient. >> >>It's a stupid question, you are asking to average completely different >>things. > >J: Does the average motorist ever break the speed limit? > >Roland Perry: Don't be stupid it depends if you mean on a motorway or >not. Totally different things. Average motorists often break the speed limit. I'm sure they are frequently found doing 31mph on deserted urban dual carriageways, for example. If they weren't, such roads would not be breeding grounds for speed cameras. >For those who missed it - here is the really difficult question for >Roland: > >Do you think that the wearing of a cycle helmet - by the average >cyclist - will most likely reduce or increase the level of injury if >they are involved in an accident? Asking the question again doesn't change the answer. hint: you might want to look more closely at different kinds of accident than average kinds of cyclist. -- Roland Perry
From: Roland Perry on 17 Apr 2010 10:50
In message <82p6vnFrqkU1(a)mid.individual.net>, at 20:16:07 on Thu, 15 Apr 2010, john wright <john(a)pegasus.f2s.com> remarked: >Of course to take part in any debate you need to know what you're >talking about. That might work for scientists, but I doubt politicians see it as a requirement. -- Roland Perry |