Originally posted by cbhungry
In addition, from purist medical view, the mortality statisitics have all been comparing bikers vs. drivers vs. heart attacks etc. and there has never been a subgroup analysis amongst bikers ie: of the 170 bicycle deaths, how many were not wearing helmets 160 out of 170 or only 5 out of 170?

And even that won't tell you anything really. For example, one might conclude that 10% of all cyclist deaths were not wearing a helmet at the time. That, on it's own could literally mean anything. One could conclude from that that helmets are not particularly beneficial, but what if, at any given time, only 5% of all cyclists don't wear helmets?

My point is that people can make incomplete statistics prove whatever they feel like making them prove at any given time. Very rarely does anybody ever issue a set of complete statistics in any facet of research anymore, and very few people can be bothered reading through all of them when they do.

It's far easier and more effective to just use your common sense, and I again reiterate that there is no reason that the benefits of cycling sensibly (indeed cycling point blank) and wearing a helmet have to be considered mutually exclusive.

Froze i don't know where you get your stats.. but there is over 5 million ppl in the toronto and gta alone and i can bet there is about that many cars... as i live in the city and try dodging them all the time:) that is one city in canada..?
you have a point tho.. california does have a lot of cars... when i visit san diego ... everyone uses their car... even to go to the corner store :( however if you go out of the city.. along the beach, there are a medium amount of cyclists..even out by the marine base... of course that is just my experience... you live there and know better.. right?
oh yes... 90% of the cyclists i met there wore helmets... only the surfer dudes seemed to be comfortable without them :D
p.s. never heard of the ball pen stats before wonder how many die chewing gum in the states?

Well first of all, Froze, with a response like that - you're off the deep end. 500 people riding bikes? Cars per sq. mile?

Next, a2psyklnut and Harry, 80% of people don't get the minimum exercise required to stay healthy and end up being a drain on the tax payer by needing help for something they could have prevented. Get them on a bike, helmet or not, and the health of the counrty (both medically and financially) improves. This has been studied by both the British and American medical associations and shown that helmetless riders have greater health benefits than the general population.

cbhungry and Chris L, we've been down this path and made the same arguments before.

I thought I was doing quite well in this thread until I reacted to some salt being poured into an old wound by froze and ngateguy so I take some of the blame for inciting others. I have made some progress and I think I have a little more understanding of why targeting of cyclists in selected parts of the world to wear helmets over others, who would also benefit from wearing a helmet, after reading "Culture of Fear"

And juciluci, I think the reasons stated in that book explain why the deaths of the 70 cyclists are well known but the deaths of the 100 who choke on pens are not.

As long as I ride, I'll be doing this,

Originally posted by closetbiker
And, how ironic that the first post I make in response to an attack to a different point of view, I get accused of making stuff up when it's common sense heart disease is the biggest killer and cycling is known to combat heart disease, after I post apologizing that most on this forum make reasonable arguments and don't vilify because I might present an argument that some might not have considered.

O.K., maybe I'll just give in and believe the helmet will save more lives than persuing proper road use and improving cardiac health ever will.

:rolleyes:

I'm sorry Closet all I saw was a pic of someone on a table with an oxygen mask on it could of been somebody getting a vasectomy for all I knew. You still haven't come up with any valid study on why not to were a helmet and since you seem to love to us studies from the medical standpoint find me one, from a medical study, that shows me that wearing a helmet won't increase my chances of survival when and if I land on my head while ridding bikes. (not guarantee mind you just give me better odds that I will survive)There is a lot more to this issue than just teaching safe riding techniques anybody can hit an oil slick or black ice or anything and it does not mater how well trained you are your still going down!

Originally posted by gattm99
WARNING TO CHILDREN OR THOSE WITH WEAK MINDS READING THIS POST COULD CAUSE SERIOUS INJURY, AVOID AT ALL COSTS

Media Creations got me just perfect but I don't understand why everybody thinks my arguments are LAME.


GHOLSON

Dude! Why worry? Smoking is a lot worse to smokers health and to those who get a second lung smoke...

Enjoy riding with your bare head... Better ventilation :)
By the way, are you sure you wore the right size helmet, because I hardly feel mine while some that I tried in the store, definitely bothered me...

What's the problem, you are not trying to convience someone to do what they don't want to do :) I don't see a problem here
http://www.angelfire.com/al2/misha18male6/mvc/na_velosipede2.jpg

Originally posted by ngateguy
You still haven't come up with any valid study , that shows me that wearing a helmet won't increase my chances of survival when and if I land on my head while ridding bikes.

You still miss the point. I've been quite clear. This is not what I'm arguing.

Originally posted by gattm99
Hello,

Nonetheless I choose not to. Why?



I honestly don't care whether or do or not.

Your head - your decision.
Personally, I think you're just a troll looking to stir up some heated debate.

Don't you have anything better to do with your time ?

Justen

Originally posted by gattm99
Hey well I've read all the replies and you guys did a great job answering my post, especially the troll guy. I have to admit your arguments are pretty good but in my defense let me say this.

1. I knew this was stupid post to begin with.

2. I only made it to see what you guys would say.



Oh big surprise !
First...you didn't need to tell us it was a stupid post - it was pretty obvious from the start.

2nd - One of the purposes of this forum is to educate all cyclists about various aspects of cycling. You have given a fine demonstration to all visitors to this forum regarding the importance of wearing a helmet - nobody wants to end up with the kind of brain injury you have.

Hope you have a few brain cells left pal ! Although, I have to say that I see no evidence of that here.

Justen

Originally posted by Chris L
Did someone say "troll"?

I'm sorry but anyone who shows up on a bike forum, posts some of the oldest and lamest anti-helmet arguments around, then purports to post their name and address (I don't know if it's his real address, nor do I particularly care), can only have one intention as far as I can see.

I agree and I don't understand why people are encouraging people like this by suggesting that they not be put off by strong responses and that "most people here are friendly".

This person is a troll and openly admitted he was just playing games with us.

I consider myself a pretty friendly person but when somebody posts bait messages like this, I don't understand why we need to be welcoming and friendly towards them ???

Justen

Time out.......what exactly is "a troll"????

On the internet, a troll is basically somebody who deliberately tries to stir up controversy.
A few are very skilled at it and end up pitting an already established group of people against each other.

That was not the case here. This person was clearly not that clever or intelligent and went about it in an exceptionally clumsy manner.

Too bad that he can find nothing better to do with his time. I initially thought he was a child or teen given his poor english and presentation. I believe he is actually a teacher though.
Scary !

Justen

[QUOTE]Originally posted by juciluci
[B]Froze i don't know where you get your stats.. but there is over 5 million ppl in the toronto and gta alone and i can bet there is about that many cars... as i live in the city and try dodging them all the time:) that is one city in canada..?

Health Canada is the source of statistics I got my population figures from same source that ClosetBiker used for his statistics. Maybe that shows us his statistics he's using is in error? I don't know, I just quoted statistics I found at that site, I have no personal counting experience nor live in Canada. I do live in California but again I do not count people just got the statistics off the internet.

Justen...

You are incredibly rude. I think you just proved gattm99's point. Please keep a level of civility in this forum or leave.

Brian

[QUOTE]Originally posted by closetbiker

"[B]Well first of all, Froze, with a response like that - you're off the deep end. 500 people riding bikes? Cars per sq. mile?"

You crazy loon, I was trying to be funny about the 500 bike thing; sorry if that didn't register with you. Obviously Canada has more than 500 bikes! The cars per square miles represents how many licensed autos there are in Canada and how many square miles there are in Canada gives you the ratio, I did the same with how many registered cars in California and how many sq miles here. This stuff is all on the internet, all you have to do is ask the question the right way and the answers pop up; and I am not a computer genius by any scope of the imagination!!!!!!


"thought I was doing quite well in this thread until I reacted to some salt being poured into an old wound by froze and ngateguy so I take some of the blame for inciting others."

Please accept my apology; I am not in any way trying to pour salt on an old wound nor did I think I was and I am sorry if it came across like that. I was just stating statistics about cyclist death and injuries in California and Canada. I am not telling you you must wear a helmet; I said this before and I will say it again...we, us, you, should have the freedom to choose whether or not to wear helmets; BUT I believe wearing helmets is a prudent thing but you should not be forced to. I hope this clears up some of the mud.


"Next, a2psyklnut and Harry, 80% of people don't get the minimum exercise required to stay healthy and end up being a drain on the tax payer by needing help for something they could have prevented. Get them on a bike, helmet or not, and the health of the counrty (both medically and financially) improves. This has been studied by both the British and American medical associations and shown that helmetless riders have greater health benefits than the general population."

And true, excercise of any kind, on this forum it's bicyicle related, is obvious more beneficial to do so without a helmet than it is not to excercise. The main point is not that though! The main point is that if your going to ride a bike is it better to wear a helmet VS one who rides a bike and does not wear a helmet. You strayed off the subject when you stated that.

I hope we are still friends? At least you don't know who I am so you can't look me up and hit me on the head with a helmet killing me then say, "see, helmets are lethal!" :fight:

Originally posted by Brian Ratliff
Justen...

You are incredibly rude. I think you just proved gattm99's point. Please keep a level of civility in this forum or leave.

Brian

Whatever. I'm sick of people like that coming in and playing head games with everybody. What do you want me to do - sit back like some spineless twit ?

Forget it. If gatt99 wants to play games, he's going to have to deal with the consequences.

Justen

What games? What gatt99 brings up is a valid point, which is that people who do not wear helmets tend to be called bad names by some certain people on this forum. Yea, he was a little clumsy, but why the bad names and characterizations? Why is it that whenever a helmet post comes up, the helmet people come up and destroy the point of the post and make it into the steriotypical helmet thread. The point of this thread, as I understand it, is the villification of non-helment wearers. The point of some of closetbiker's threads is that the relative risks of riding bare headed are small. These points get drowned out by the helmet people who recycle the same antidotes and the same arguments and the same villifications and turn the thread into a helmet thread.

If you want to stop flames, then respond to the post intelligently and make it into a genuine thread, or don't answer at all. And as for the consequences that you bring up, what would those be? You are on the web for Pete's sake. Nobody's hurt by what you post. Rude posts just perpetuate the flames.

BR

Originally posted by Justen
Whatever. I'm sick of people like that coming in and playing head games with everybody. What do you want me to do - sit back like some spineless twit ?

How about just ignoring them and letting the thread die? As I recall, Gatt99 hasn't posted in this thread for about two days, yet it's still going! If it upsets you that much why not just let the thread drop to the bottom of the page and die?

Originally posted by Brian Ratliff
What games? BR

What games ?
Gatt99 that admitted to starting this thread just to see what kind of reaction he would get. And now he is seeing exactly what he wanted to see - people on the forum turning against each other.

That is what a troll does ! And you turn around and support him. Good plan.

As for my position on helmets - I lost a good friend to a fatal head injury a few months ago because she was not wearing a helmet. I was cycling with her when she was hit by a car and killed.
So yes, my views are VERY strong on this subject and what makes me even more angry is when people like Gatt99 decide to play a game and see how people will react.

Gatt99, I hope you're proud of yourself.
You have stirred up some very painful memories for me. Pat yourself on the back ! You got what you were looking for - a reaction.

Justen

Originally posted by Chris L
How about just ignoring them and letting the thread die? As I recall, Gatt99 hasn't posted in this thread for about two days, yet it's still going! If it upsets you that much why not just let the thread drop to the bottom of the page and die?

You know what.. I am sick of people who play cruel head games like this.

As I said in my other note...my friend was killed recently. She was not wearing her helmet. That was not Gatt's fault but what makes me angry is that he started this thread for the sole purpose of stirring up debate and seeing how people react.

Well, obviously I did not deal with my friend's death well but it is hard to see a friend that you have known since you were in kindergarten hit by a car, thrown over the hood and into the windshield and then off the other side to the road, dead. I will never forget this accident.

So..like I said in my other note..I hope Gatt is proud of himself and I hope all of you who supported him in his idiotic head games are proud too.

Justen

I did not plan to reply in this thread again but Justen's posts have encouraged me.

First off I am sorry about your friend that is truely horrible. I have never lost anyone really close to me and hope I never have to.

Nonetheless I did say that I mainly wrote this thread to see what people would say, but isn't that the reason you would write just about any thread.

I wanted to know if the way I percieved cyclists treating me was "all in my head" or truth. It's obviously truth, some of the time. I feel like cyclists as a group have fallen into a sort of mob mentality about helmets and I think this is something that every cyclists should examine within theirselves. Perhaps your friend would still be alive if they were wearing a helmet, perhaps not. Perhaps cycling on public roads is such a dangerous activity it should be banned? Nonetheless I will not be wearing a helmet and I will be riding on public roads, and I encourage anyone who wants to do the same to do so.

It's a serious subject, I know, but the current tension here calls for a little levity...