Originally Posted by
closetbiker
well considering that the rate of head has risen with the use of helmets, it seems the neurologists are getting the same or more work than they ever have. And besides their speciality isn't really the mechanism of bicycle helmets now is it? A more credible source of information would lie in the experts that design and maintain the standards of the protection helmets provide. like
Brain Walker the director of Head Protection Evaluations, the principal UK test laboratory for helmets. (there are views of leading neurologists in this paper, if you're interested enough to read them)
Every link you use always winds up going back to cyclehelmets.org, doesn't it?
Even the Wikipedia page on cycling helmets has them linked in.
Remember, folks, those guys are the ones that think the percentage of head injuries to the subset of cyclists who were admitted to hospitals in ONE study being the same between helmeted and non-helmeted cyclists is some sort of evidence against the efficacy of bike helmets. They gloss completely over the odds of getting admitted in the first place, which was much higher for non-helmeted cyclists.
And that laughable "logic" is the basis of their refutation of the 1989 Thompson study that showed that bike helmets prevent 85% of head injuries.