...> The second one was probably my own fault. It was in Iowa....

I've found them quite useful . . . having broken two of them.>

The first was in Las Vegas in 1994. A driver didn't want to wait for a> light in a constructions zone. I felt the impact, had trouble remaining> upright (later I would realize that this is quite natural when neither> wheel is in conact with the ground), and landed 20-30 feet away. I only> got half the plate before I couldn't keep my head up.>

The foam was still in a single piece, but it was now cracked and loose> inside the outer lining. Best $50 I ever spen.>

The second one was probably my own fault. It was in Iowa, at night afet> I helped administer a test. I *should* have bummed a ride home from the> prof I was working for.>

Iowa has a "freezing rain" which comes down supercooled, creating sheet> ice on impact. I lost control the first time in the rain-shadow of an> underpath--as it freezes instantly, the lee of the train track was dry,> and my back wheel on ice caught up with the front wheel on pavement.> That merely hurt. >

I went down aa half a mile later and broke the helmet, one of the> now-recalled duck-tail helmets. I landed just right, with the> duck-tail absorbing most of the impact and completely splitting.>

They work. I'd probably have ended up a vegetable both times without> one.>

hawk

One can never say, as it is usually impossible to re-run the scenario, not> wearing a helmet.> However, I am impressed by the large numbers of people whose lives or> brains were saved because they were wearing a helmet.> There are many times more of these than there ever were people who> died or became vegetables before helmet-wearing became commonplace!>

Peter>

-- > If you are careful enough in life, nothing bad -- or> good -- will ever happen to you.>

No more needs to be said. ;)

One can never say, as it is usually impossible to re-run the scenario, not>wearing a helmet.

However, I am impressed by the large numbers of people whose lives or>brains were saved because they were wearing a helmet.>There are many times more of these than there ever were people who>died or became vegetables before helmet-wearing became commonplace!

b) more people are riding than in the past.

True, you can't be *certain*. But it is, at best, highly improbable>that my skull alone would have held up to an impact that visibly broke>the helmet and still had enough left to leave me stunne . . .

a) Much more is reported now than in the past. (E.g., child>kindnappings are *not* more common today than in the past; it's just>that the whole country gets heavy coverage of every single one).

b) more people are riding than in the past.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <uce@ftc.gov> wrote:>

Just a single anecdotal bit of evidence, but tell me you'd like to>have tried out your semi-bare skull's ability to withstand the hit my>helmet took...>

As it was I had lingering memory effects from the concussion for>months (yes, that means I was even flakier than I am now). >

Maybe it was the exception, but I honestly don't think my skull (as>hard and thick as it is in legend) would have been able to withstand>the focused impact. How much the "cushioning" did for my neck and>soft tissue I'll never know, but it sure couldn't have hurt... I still>have effects from that in my back almost two years later, so anything>it did helped prevent further injury.>

YMMV...>

Mark "not so much into helmets as statistics" Hickey

Habanero Cycles>http://www.h­abcycles.com>Home of the $695 ti frame

Just a single anecdotal bit of evidence, but tell me you'd like to>have tried out your semi-bare skull's ability to withstand the hit my>helmet took...

...> The thing is, if you look at charts of head injury rates against> helmet wearing rates for various countries around the world, and> compare cyclists with pedestrians, and look at years in which laws> have been introduced which cause massive increases in wearing rates,> what you find is that the effect is unmeasurably small....

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:48:58 -0700, Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com­>>wrote in message <8di1411u7c5od6ddsl­bf9kvo05dcjt9hb5@4ax­.com>:>

As I have said before, I don't know where the idea came from that all>bike crashes were inevitably fatal before helmets came along, or that>helmeted cyclists who survive do so only because of their helmets.

I don't either (since I've yet to see anyone actually take that>position, which coincidentally has nothing to do with my crash).

Kinda hard to accuse others of hyperbole when you're tossing it around>that thick yourownself.

I can>assure you if anyone would offer me $1,000,000 to turn back time and>have the same impact without it I'd laugh at them.

...> But all those helmets "saved their lives[tm]". Or rather, they saved> maybe a slightly worse headache. Or not, because the head would have> missed the ground entirely without the helmet, or the rider would have> taken fewer risks....

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:55:09 -0700, Mark Hickey <mark@habcycles.com­>>wrote in message <4g27415ddi08hrn2tr­3fip8bbbu5ppvjoo@4ax­.com>:>

But all those helmets "saved their lives[tm]". Or rather, they saved>maybe a slightly worse headache. Or not, because the head would have>missed the ground entirely without the helmet, or the rider would have>taken fewer risks.

Not really. There are two types of anecdote that get my goat here:>one is the "helmet saved my life[tm]" story, which is hard to swallow>when the population level statistics obstinately refuse to show any>effect on serious or fatal injuries. The other is the shroud-wavers'>favo­urite "if only he'd been wearing a helmet he'd still be here>today" - which generally turns out to be founded on the idea that>helmets work against two tons of metal moving at 30mph or more.

Precisely: no controlled experiments, hence no certainties.

Guy Chapman wrote:>> ...>> But all those helmets "saved their lives[tm]". Or rather, they saved>> maybe a slightly worse headache. Or not, because the head would have>> missed the ground entirely without the helmet, or the rider would have>> taken fewer risks....>

Or the h*lm*t saved the rider from a nasty scalp injury.

I put my h*lm*t in the same category as the full finger MTB gloves [1] I >wear while riding. They will not provide any significant protection >against broken bones or torn tendon/ligaments, but they do provide >significant protection against skin abrasion.>

[1] They also make it much easier to operate twist shifters, due to >improved grip.

Guy Chapman wrote:>

Or the h*lm*t saved the rider from a nasty scalp injury.>

I put my h*lm*t in the same category as the full finger MTB gloves [1] I > wear while riding. They will not provide any significant protection > against broken bones or torn tendon/ligaments, but they do provide > significant protection against skin abrasion.>

[1] They also make it much easier to operate twist shifters, due to > improved grip.

Again, it's hard to throw stones when living in a glass house (with or>without a helmet). ­ Yeah, no doubt some people DO overestimate>the effectiveness of their styrofoam hat - but going to the other>extreme with statements accusing "anyone" of thinking "all bike>crashes were inevitably fatal before helmets came along" isn't any>less inaccurate. The truth is in the middle, and that's where the>discussion should be. This shouldn't be a polarizing, "religious">issue.

sometimes they are right (perhaps my own accident was one case>where an unprotected head, even an infamously hard one, wouldn't be>able to withstand a 20+mph direct impact into the edge of a thin metal>mirror mount anchored to a 2+ ton truck).

if we can>agree that someone who comes out of an accident in which their helmet>was trashed WITH a serious concussion would have been injured somewhat>worse without the helmet, we've made progress.

Probably doesn't matter much since I doubt I'll ever get the chance to>turn down the million bucks... ­

Now, while it seems that helmet use is not correlated with cyclist> safety in any country in the world, it does appear to be the case that> more people cycling /does/ increase safety. And so do things like> laws reversing the burden of proof where a driver hits a cyclist or> pedestrian in a residential neighbourhood.

Care to elucidate?>More people bicycling means more people in favor of>bike-centric, or at least bike-friendly infrastructure?>Mor­e motorists at ease with bicyclists using the roadways?

To me, any comparison between seat belts and bike helmets is specious.>On the one hand, we have a safety measure which lasts as long as the>vehicle, has approximately zero cost in terms of vehicle price or>convenience, and is designed and certified using very realistic tests