From: JMS jmsmith2010 on
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:54:09 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk>
wrote:

<snip>


>>Here it is again:
>>
>>==================================================================
>>Feel free to list those cases where it was found that a helmet made
>>things worse in a real accident - rather than in an insurance man's
>>imagination.
>>
>>A list of one will be a good start.
>>================================================================
>>
>>Your response of "Bigger head, more twisting leverage" was not really
>>sufficient.
>>
>>Perhaps you could not find just the one?
>
>There's some references to the issues we are discussing in here:
>
>http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/332/7543/722-a/DC1

Thank you - there was some stuff of interest there.

However, I couldn't see the bit which discussed the increase in head
injury due to wearing a cycle helmet.

Which particular section were you thinking of in relation to this
point?




--

"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: Peter Clinch on
Derek C wrote:

> So how do you explain the reduction in cyclist KSI figures, during a
> period when cylehelmet wearing has become much more commonplace
> without any compulsion? Seems like a far better correlation than
> anything in cyclehelmets.org!

I'll re-refer you to Hewson's 2005 piece in Tarfiic Injury
Prevention: he covers the link (or lack thereof) rather more
comprehensively (and is honest enough to draw attention to the
weaknesses in the data).

As Mike pointed out, correlation ain't necessarily causation, and
with paragraphs like the one above you pretty much abdicate any
benefit you may have had from a science education, at least as far
as statistics are concerned.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch(a)dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
From: JMS jmsmith2010 on
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:46:37 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk>
wrote:

<snip>


>OK, done what you asked.



Fine - as I thought.

You cannot provide any evidence whatsoever of any research which has
specifically concluded that wearing a cycle helmet increases the risk
to the wearer as a result of risk compensation.

If you find anything of a serious research nature which does back up
your argument in the future - then please feel free to come back and
present it.


You may go now.


--

"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: Nick Finnigan on
Roland Perry wrote:
>
> I did the Cambridge University Maths Faculty statistics course for a
> year (only the fresher year I'm afraid), but some of that has probably
> stuck.

There is no such course.
From: Roland Perry on
In message <nc74t5d3e3aaae7dv72nlsh8mqhrjtl841(a)4ax.com>, at 23:26:30 on
Fri, 23 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked:
>On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:46:37 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>OK, done what you asked.
>
>Fine - as I thought.
>
>You cannot provide any evidence whatsoever of any research which has
>specifically concluded that wearing a cycle helmet increases the risk
>to the wearer as a result of risk compensation.

You are such a pathetic, poor loser. Why does anyone even bother
discussing things with you? You ask for evidence, get it, then deny
you've been given it. That's it, I'm out.
--
Roland Perry