Originally Posted by
Six-Shooter
I neither think nor implied that
My point was this: given what I've read of bicycle helmet testing standards, it's hard to either over- or- underestimate the protection a helmet is "designed" to provide. I keep seeing statements in this thread implying that a helmet is only "designed" to do X, and anyone suggesting it can do Y must be mistaken. Yet I'm not seeing evidence to support those claims or insinuations.
...which is why when the bare head brigade chide someone for conferring protective abilities to a helmet that it might not have, they need to be reminded that in any given situation they can't claim a helmet did not help or wouldn't have helped.
I'm still waiting for an explanation of why the death rate of cyclists is so skewed toward the helmetless in the NYCDoT and IIoHS figures posted earlier...