Okay. I'll take the group of experienced and cautious bare-headers who go out of their way to avoid situations where they might land on their heads. You take the group of Lance-boomers who say things like "Bro, if you don't crash sometimes then you're not going hard enough. Courage for your head, dude!"

We'll meet back here in five years to compare results.

I was wondering how the testing would go... maybe a merry-go-round for the non-helmet?

No fair. Those are already brain-damaged.

Yeah, and if only everyone would not try to convince everyone else that they aren't making a wise decision by not wearing a seat belt or not smoking or not downhill skiing w/o a helmet or not driving a motor vehicle with functional safety equipment or not bothering to have safety laws regarding building codes/practices or not having environmental laws, life would be so simple...

Totally irrelevant to bicycle helmets. Bicycle helmets are not intended to save someone's life or prevent serious injury.

Some people enjoy wearing helmets...
http://tulsa20something.files.wordpr...7/bikerfox.jpg

Hey, who took that picture of me? :twitchy: Wheres the pic with me in the shower? :innocent: Do NOT post it... :twitchy:

EDIT; My crocks are gray...JFYI :p Thus there is something fishy with this picture switch...

Not trying to mean, but you could stand to lose a few pounds from the thighs.

The heels do make your calves look pretty nice, though. :)

No, No, No, I'm pretty sure I am that guy wearing the bike helmet... :eek:

Ha, those are ear muffs...

Just a little reminder that this is a family-friendly forum, at least for the images. Helmet discussion is another thing altogether.

CbadRider
Forum Admin

Phew, no pics of me in the shower with my helmet on... Yay... :thumb:

OK, I'd hate to tell a kid not to wear a helmet.

Wait a minute what happened?... Now that's NOT me, that guy "may" have been me with that dancer... but this guy NO, NO NO... :eek:

I retract the positive comment about your calves.

The one regarding your thighs still stands, however.

Hey, there's some shenanigans going on here with that pic, it was a lot more flattering pic of me with other "people" doing some relaxing after work er hobby "things"...

Moderator, I commend you for a most delightful shenanigan.

It looks convincing but the major issue I have with this is that it does not speak to the actual level of risk. Another way to put it, if 37 is the most common winning lottery number and 54 is the least common, how does choosing one or the other affect my chances to win? What are my chances if I choose 37, good enough to warrant a dollar? Good enough to warrant the time spent checking the ticket, even if it's free? Without knowing the odds of winning in the first place, the statistic is almost meaningless.

Or put it another way. I've seen fatality statistics with respect to lighting strikes, and enough people who are struck die that I believe it would be a good thing to avoid. I could carry a lightning rod wherever I go, and when I see clouds gather a few miles away I'll ground it and stand some ways away. This would reduce the chances of being struck by lightning. Would it be worthwhile? Not if my chances of being struck at any given day are one in 10 billion. One in a hundred, probably so. It depends on the actual risk.

Im still waiting for the anti helmet crowd to post verified incidents where a bike helmet killed someone!!!!

Something to consider, examining Australia's helmet legislation:

"WA's helmet legislation has diverted resources from preventing bicycle crashes into increasing helmet wearing rates. For instance, about 50% of the WA Police Bicycle Safety Section's time is devoted to enforcing the helmet law. At the same time, about 80% of cyclists on the road at night are riding without lights," http://www.helmets.org/veloaust.htm

Since the resources are diverted away from serious safety issues there are likely more injuries and fatalities due to their mandatory helmet laws.

Additionally, discouraging bicycle use by mandating helmets leads to increased incidence of obesity and heart disease.

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/helmet_statistics.html

Yes, We are all invincible... Until we are not, then we become statistics... That others won't even consider because they are better, and it won't happen to them... Good... Nay, not even conceivable that a helmet could help out in a crash even to excellent riders... :rolleyes:

It's not inconceivable that a helmet could help a cyclist.

It's also not inconceivable that a helmet could help a pedestrian, or a car driver, or a ladder climber. And yet folks aren't lined up to be A-holes about unhelmeted pedestrians, drivers, and ladder climbers.

Does it really show that more injuries occur without a helmet, or does it only show that out of the head injuries that appear in the ER, more of the cyclists were apparently not wearing helmets? Is it possible that many injuries occur with and without helmets, which did not result in a trip to the ER? What is the statistical risk of injury of not wearing a helmet while cycling, compared to other active pursuits?

"Apparently" because I wonder if the anecdotal categorization arises from observation of scalp wounds, which most people will agree are effectively reduced by helmets. If so, that observation alone does not inform much about the risk of serious trauma.

But...

http://thestar.blogs.com/.a/6a00d834...2608970c-800wi

http://thestar.blogs.com/.a/6a00d834...27f2970c-800wi

http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/...injuries-3.jpg

rtuuji

Your real world experience is REAL. All the "studies" are meaningless when place up against what happens in the real world.


The vast majority of "research" projects and papers are entered into by people that are trying to prove they are right in their preconceived ideas. And guess what-----------their research just happens to prove them "right"!!!!!