Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
15-06.-2008, 01:06 AM
|
#61 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On 13/06/2008 07:51, Peter Clinch wrote:
>> For me, that one fall demonstrated the helmet's worth. Not because it >> prevented a serious injury - I'm sure it didn't - but because it helped >> Charlie to retain his love of cycling. > > That's supposition, I'm afraid. It's supposition based on a knowledge of my son's personality. As Mark pointed out, whether a child will be put off by a bash to the bonce depends very much on the child. It also depends on the child's mood at the time, but I would say that my son is more likely to be put off than not. > It's also never going to be clear > whether or not the helmet contributed in any way to the accident > happening in the first place. I see a lot of children with loose helmets flopping from side to side and slipping over the child's eyes, but my children's helmets are always properly fitted. I think not quite having got the hang of steering yet was probably the main contributory factor... > I think this is another line which actually gives far more credence to > elbow pads and gloves for young kids than helmets. Both of my children wear track mitts when cycling. > Note I'm not saying they shouldn't wear them, just that it it isn't > actually particularly tight reasoning as why to one should. It wasn't given as a reason why one /should/ wear a helmet. It was given as a psychological (not a physical) reason why a helmet may be more beneficial for a child riding a bike than for a child running around. FWIW Charlie fell backwards off of a bench onto the patio this morning and hit his head. That was more worrying than any fall he's likely to have cycling round the park, but after sitting on my lap and having a cuddle for half an hour he was fine. I don't think he's been back on that bench since, though. -- Danny Colyer <http://www.redpedals.co.uk> Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often "The plural of anecdote is not data" - Frank Kotsonis |
|
|
15-06.-2008, 05:07 AM
|
#62 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 16:06:35 +0100, Danny Colyer
<danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: >FWIW Charlie fell backwards off of a bench onto the patio this morning >and hit his head. That was more worrying than any fall he's likely to >have cycling round the park, but after sitting on my lap and having a >cuddle for half an hour he was fine. I don't think he's been back on >that bench since, though. I was told a story today by someone who came off his bike at the same time as a friend of his on an oily bend in a road. My friend's friend was helmeted and my friend was not. My friend suffered a cut to his head and was concussed for four days. His friend only had a few grazes to his legs and upper body. In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. |
|
|
|
15-06.-2008, 06:44 AM
|
#63 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On 14/06/2008 20:07, Tom Crispin wrote:
> I was told a story today by someone who came off his bike at the same > time as a friend of his on an oily bend in a road. > > My friend's friend was helmeted and my friend was not. My friend > suffered a cut to his head and was concussed for four days. His > friend only had a few grazes to his legs and upper body. > > In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from > a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. Do you know whether the helmet hit the ground? It could as easily be that your friend's friend knew how to fall, and your friend didn't. -- Danny Colyer <http://www.redpedals.co.uk> Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often "The plural of anecdote is not data" - Frank Kotsonis |
|
|
|
15-06.-2008, 04:09 PM
|
#64 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 06:56:08 +0100, Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com>
wrote: >On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:07:39 +0100 >Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote: > >> In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from >> a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. > >Which one was in front? Helmeted. |
|
|
|
15-06.-2008, 04:11 PM
|
#65 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:44:27 +0100, Danny Colyer
<danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: >On 14/06/2008 20:07, Tom Crispin wrote: >> I was told a story today by someone who came off his bike at the same >> time as a friend of his on an oily bend in a road. >> >> My friend's friend was helmeted and my friend was not. My friend >> suffered a cut to his head and was concussed for four days. His >> friend only had a few grazes to his legs and upper body. >> >> In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from >> a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. > >Do you know whether the helmet hit the ground? It could as easily be >that your friend's friend knew how to fall, and your friend didn't. My friend says it was so quick there was no time to react - or even put an arm out. |
|
|
|
15-06.-2008, 08:49 PM
|
#66 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:11:34 +0100, Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:44:27 +0100, Danny Colyer > <danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>On 14/06/2008 20:07, Tom Crispin wrote: >>> I was told a story today by someone who came off his bike at the same >>> time as a friend of his on an oily bend in a road. >>> >>> My friend's friend was helmeted and my friend was not. My friend >>> suffered a cut to his head and was concussed for four days. His >>> friend only had a few grazes to his legs and upper body. >>> >>> In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from >>> a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. >> >>Do you know whether the helmet hit the ground? It could as easily be >>that your friend's friend knew how to fall, and your friend didn't. > > My friend says it was so quick there was no time to react - or even > put an arm out. This is pointless. Of course there is a chance that someone wearing an MFH could experience a situation which is a) within the narrow band of impact speed and angle for which an MFH may be protective; and b)which lacks any of the usual factors that accompany such situation, for which an MFH is either useless or a detriment - but one cannot choose the kind of "situations" one will experience. To trot out an individual event and then to suggest that an MFH is of any true value because of that event is specious; worse, it reinforces the erroneous view that cycling is dangerous and that it should be controlled and regulated to reduce this false danger. |
|
|
|
15-06.-2008, 11:01 PM
|
#67 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message news:6bcv3qF3c5fgtU1@mid.individual.net... > Neil Williams wrote: > > > I would very much /like/ to be neutral on them, but ISTM that the "do > nothing" approach actually leads to more pressure for everyone to wear > them. > I was in a club ride on Winterfold Hill in the North Downs and as we passed some walkers, some cocky little kid shouted at me "where's yer helmet" which caused some amusement amongst the other club riders (the cycle club has a "we strongly recommend wearing a helmet on club rides" statement in their club rules). |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 12:22 AM
|
#68 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:49:43 GMT, _
<jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote: >On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:11:34 +0100, Tom Crispin wrote: > >> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:44:27 +0100, Danny Colyer >> <danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>On 14/06/2008 20:07, Tom Crispin wrote: >>>> I was told a story today by someone who came off his bike at the same >>>> time as a friend of his on an oily bend in a road. >>>> >>>> My friend's friend was helmeted and my friend was not. My friend >>>> suffered a cut to his head and was concussed for four days. His >>>> friend only had a few grazes to his legs and upper body. >>>> >>>> In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from >>>> a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. >>> >>>Do you know whether the helmet hit the ground? It could as easily be >>>that your friend's friend knew how to fall, and your friend didn't. >> >> My friend says it was so quick there was no time to react - or even >> put an arm out. > >This is pointless. Of course there is a chance that someone wearing an MFH >could experience a situation which is > >a) within the narrow band of impact speed and angle for which an MFH may be >protective; and > >b)which lacks any of the usual factors that accompany such situation, for >which an MFH is either useless or a detriment > >- but one cannot choose the kind of "situations" one will experience. To >trot out an individual event and then to suggest that an MFH is of any true >value because of that event is specious; worse, it reinforces the erroneous >view that cycling is dangerous and that it should be controlled and >regulated to reduce this false danger. All I have done is recount an event as told to me by a friend. I choose not to wear a helmet. I allow schools to decide if they want their pupils to wear helmets for cyclist training. I take a neutral position when I carry out private cyclist instruction. I don't criticise those who choose to wear a helmet or enforce it on their children. Neither do I criticise those who choose not to wear a helmet. I have heard enough stories from those who claim a helmet has been of benefit to be convinced that helmets can protect against certain types of injury. I have never heard a first hand account of a time when a helmet has increased the severity of an injury. I am therefore convinced that helmets do more to protect against injury than cause further harm. I am equally convinced that mandotary helmet use, in the population as a whole, would lead to a reduction in cycle use and an increase in the health of the nation. I am therefore opposed to mandatory helmet use. |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 01:08 AM
|
#69 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 15:22:17 +0100, Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:49:43 GMT, _ > <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote: > >>On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 07:11:34 +0100, Tom Crispin wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:44:27 +0100, Danny Colyer >>> <danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On 14/06/2008 20:07, Tom Crispin wrote: >>>>> I was told a story today by someone who came off his bike at the same >>>>> time as a friend of his on an oily bend in a road. >>>>> >>>>> My friend's friend was helmeted and my friend was not. My friend >>>>> suffered a cut to his head and was concussed for four days. His >>>>> friend only had a few grazes to his legs and upper body. >>>>> >>>>> In this case, it may have been luck which saved my friends friend from >>>>> a bump to the head - but it seems more likely that it was his helmet. >>>> >>>>Do you know whether the helmet hit the ground? It could as easily be >>>>that your friend's friend knew how to fall, and your friend didn't. >>> >>> My friend says it was so quick there was no time to react - or even >>> put an arm out. >> >>This is pointless. Of course there is a chance that someone wearing an MFH >>could experience a situation which is >> >>a) within the narrow band of impact speed and angle for which an MFH may be >>protective; and >> >>b)which lacks any of the usual factors that accompany such situation, for >>which an MFH is either useless or a detriment >> >>- but one cannot choose the kind of "situations" one will experience. To >>trot out an individual event and then to suggest that an MFH is of any true >>value because of that event is specious; worse, it reinforces the erroneous >>view that cycling is dangerous and that it should be controlled and >>regulated to reduce this false danger. > > All I have done is recount an event as told to me by a friend. > > I choose not to wear a helmet. I allow schools to decide if they want > their pupils to wear helmets for cyclist training. I take a neutral > position when I carry out private cyclist instruction. I don't > criticise those who choose to wear a helmet or enforce it on their > children. Neither do I criticise those who choose not to wear a > helmet. > > I have heard enough stories from those who claim a helmet has been of > benefit to be convinced that helmets can protect against certain types > of injury. I have never heard a first hand account of a time when a > helmet has increased the severity of an injury. I am therefore > convinced that helmets do more to protect against injury than cause > further harm. > "First-hand accounts" and "stories" are not data - they are anecdote. Data is what we find in statistical studies; they show the opposite of what your religion says. > I am equally convinced that mandotary helmet use, in the population as > a whole, would lead to a reduction in cycle use and an increase in the > health of the nation. I am therefore opposed to mandatory helmet use. You should then, even given your error in re. the efficacy of helemts, stop recounting such events as doing so leads to that which you claim to oppose. |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 01:44 AM
|
#70 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 15:08:04 GMT, _
<jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote: >"First-hand accounts" and "stories" are not data - they are anecdote. Data >is what we find in statistical studies; they show the opposite of what your >religion says. When I cited (sort of) Brian Walker's study for the CTC I was told "theory <> reality". When I give a real life example I am told "first-hand accounts" are not data. |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 05:57 PM
|
#71 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 15:08:04 GMT, _ > <jtayNOSPAMlor@hfDONTSENDMESPAMx.andara.com> wrote: > >> "First-hand accounts" and "stories" are not data - they are anecdote. Data >> is what we find in statistical studies; they show the opposite of what your >> religion says. > > When I cited (sort of) Brian Walker's study for the CTC I was told > "theory <> reality". They're indeed not the same. Reality is what you see across the whole population. What you see is the number of serious injuries are not reduced by wearing helmets. If the theory was reality, you would see a different effect. > When I give a real life example I am told > "first-hand accounts" are not data. They are a /very/ small part of the data. The whole population statistics are the sum total of *all* of the anecdotes, all ways. Rather than listen to one, you need to listen to them *all*, and the whole population data allows you to do something like that. And it tells you that there is no benefit against serious head injuries from wearing a cycle helmet. I wish it were otherwise, then I could easily make myself genuinely safer wearing something I proved able to wear every trip for over a decade. But that's not what relaity turns out to be like. 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@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 06:06 PM
|
#72 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
Tom Crispin wrote:
> I take a neutral > position when I carry out private cyclist instruction. Almost, but not quite. I'm quite sure you intend to. But the reasons you've cited as good reasons for kids to wear helmets in convoy aren't, IMHO, quite as good as you think. There is nothing in the reasoning that should change by crossing the North Sea, but if you do that then the EU nation with the best record of cycling rates and of cyclist head injury rates doesn't bother with it, which suggests it's not quite as straightforward as you made out. > I have heard enough stories from those who claim a helmet has been of > benefit to be convinced that helmets can protect against certain types > of injury. I have never heard a first hand account of a time when a > helmet has increased the severity of an injury. I am therefore > convinced that helmets do more to protect against injury than cause > further harm. Again, the logic is just a bit too good to be true. People who have bought and trusted a safety device are very unlikely to believe it made anything worse: the automatic assumption is it must have made things better, because that's what they bought it for. Stock reaction after a helmeted accident, even if you don't hit your head, "lucky you were wearing a helmet!" In practice you don't know whether it was better or worse, because there's no access to a control. However, the assumption is it makes things better. As Guy points out, theory <> reality, especially theory with /incredibly/ loosely constrained statistics like the above. 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@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 08:08 PM
|
#73 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
Adam Lea wrote:
> I was in a club ride on Winterfold Hill in the North Downs and as we passed > some walkers, some cocky little kid shouted at me "where's yer helmet" Best response probably, "where's yours?" Cue anecdote of friend walking in hills, tripped or slipped, head on rock, airlifted out, permanent damage. Very sad, but not an activity for which helmets should be recommended, in most people's opinion. > (the cycle club has a "we strongly recommend wearing a helmet on > club rides" statement in their club rules). Foot, meet bullet. Colin McKenzie -- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org. |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 08:24 PM
|
#74 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
Colin McKenzie wrote:
> Adam Lea wrote: >> I was in a club ride on Winterfold Hill in the North Downs and as we >> passed some walkers, some cocky little kid shouted at me "where's yer >> helmet" > > Best response probably, "where's yours?" > Cue anecdote of friend walking in hills, tripped or slipped, head on > rock, airlifted out, permanent damage. A pal of mine was doing some winter skills instruction up in the 'Gorms. He'd told everyone what a jolly good idea it was to wear a climbing helmet when practising ice axe braking, and set an example wearing his. At the end of a successful training session he packed his lid away for the trivial walk back to the ski centre... slipped at some point and banged his head, no chopper but still off to Raigmore for a few days after he got shock-induced hypothermia. Oops. > Very sad, but not an activity for which helmets should be recommended, > in most people's opinion. Indeed. >> (the cycle club has a "we strongly recommend wearing a helmet on >> club rides" statement in their club rules). Pretty standard case of "we think this is probably what people should do because we get all this media pressure telling everyone it's good". Repeat something often enough and it starts to look like it's true, in this case with unfortunate consequences. Which is why I'm keen on making sure even minor exaggerations of worth are put firmly in place. 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@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
|
|
|
16-06.-2008, 08:25 PM
|
#75 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"
Danny Colyer wrote:
> It's supposition based on a knowledge of my son's personality. But not based on a known outcome because there's no way of knowing what the accident would have been like without the helmet. > I see a lot of children with loose helmets flopping from side to side > and slipping over the child's eyes, but my children's helmets are always > properly fitted. There's more to it than fitting. With a hlemet you have a bigger, heavier head which is more likely to hit something, because it is bigger and harder to hold away from things that might impact the head. It is also the case that helmets may modify behaviour that leads to accidents in the first place. Like I said, there is no way of knowing what would have happened if the helmet hadn't been there: the accident would have been different in at least some respects, you can't just substitute "bashed head not wearing helmet" for "bashed head wearing helmet" with all other factors being equal. >> I think this is another line which actually gives far more credence to >> elbow pads and gloves for young kids than helmets. > > Both of my children wear track mitts when cycling. Not really the point I'm making: I'm not trying to suggest your parenting skills are amiss, I'm pointing out that across the world kids go cycling without things that make more safety sense than helmets and keep on riding bikes after things go wrong. > It wasn't given as a reason why one /should/ wear a helmet. It was > given as a psychological (not a physical) reason why a helmet may be > more beneficial for a child riding a bike than for a child running around. Looked a bit stronger than that to me! "For me, that one fall demonstrated the helmet's worth. Not because it prevented a serious injury - I'm sure it didn't - but because it helped Charlie to retain his love of cycling" is more than "may be a reason helmets are of psychological worth". "Demonstrated the worth" suggests you have a very clear idea of what /would/ (as opposed to might) have happened without the helmet. I think it's understandable that you do that, but in reality I strongly suspect you're reaching quite a way beyond the sure facts. > FWIW Charlie fell backwards off of a bench onto the patio this morning > and hit his head. That was more worrying than any fall he's likely to > have cycling round the park, but after sitting on my lap and having a > cuddle for half an hour he was fine. I don't think he's been back on > that bench since, though. See if he's put off it in the long term and you might have something, over the course of a day doesn't really prove much. 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@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/ |
|
|
Linear Mode
