Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Helmets cramp my style

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Helmets cramp my style

Old 02-06-07, 11:24 AM
  #1176  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
"parent--child" communication, yeah, that's the problem. Sheesh.

Lets try to hit some common ground here.

Recently read, "It's No Accident" by Lisa Lewis where she mentions a fundamental viewpoint of crash prevention being a better strategy than crash mitigation (I think we both agree with that) but I also have a second viewpoint that also seems to be a fundamental switch from the conventional way of thinking. Maybe I can ask if you can agree with this different point of view.

Are collision or accident victims that need care from a health professional considered a health issue or a safety issue?

For example, if someone needs a splenectomy, does it matter that the patient needs one due to an aneurysm or a MVA?
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 12:16 PM
  #1177  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Finding common ground

Originally Posted by closetbiker
...Lets try to hit some common ground here.

Recently read, "It's No Accident" by Lisa Lewis where she mentions a fundamental viewpoint of crash prevention being a better strategy than crash mitigation (I think we both agree with that) but I also have a second viewpoint that also seems to be a fundamental switch from the conventional way of thinking. Maybe I can ask if you can agree with this different point of view.

Are collision or accident victims that need care from a health professional considered a health issue or a safety issue?

For example, if someone needs a splenectomy, does it matter that the patient needs one due to an aneurysm or a MVA?
Good, let's do go for common ground. Yes, I agree that crash prevention is better than crash mitigation, but both are in order. You put, quite appropriately, the emphasis on crash prevention through basically administrative controls (how you ride, rider behavior in traffic, etc.). This is but one approach. Some cyclists who are engineers like including engineering controls in the picture, as they help define the roadway, help keep incompatible means of transportation away from each other (a 2000 pound auto traveling 45-65 mph from a 35 pound bicycle traveling at 12-30 mph), and, as with my look at basic bicycle design itself (upright verses recumbant cycling), can influence the type of accident/injury. Then there is personal protective equipment for those times when all the safeguards, both engineering and administrative, fail.

The safety and industrial hygiene (IH) fields embrace engineering controls, as they do not require special training, or depend upon the person to "do it right" as some in the scuba diving fields profess (the DIR movement in scuba diving, which I also find some fault with--google "DIR and scuba" to see what is said about it). Well, some people will not "do it right," and may as a result get into an accident. Engineering controls usually (but not alway) either negate the potential for an accident (a "mishap" in Coast Guard lingo, as there are few true "accidents"), or minimize it. So that is the preferred approach is safety and IH work.

Administrative controls will work, but again depend totally on the individual to make it work. In bicycling, riding out in the traffic as what you are advocating as a means of controlling the auto, truck, and other drivers by their need to move to avoid contact. That will work in the vast majority of circumstances. But I have investigated a traffic accident where this led to a collision, as the driver was trying to pass the cyclists at the time, did not expect the move by the cyclist into the middle of the lane, and hit him. The unfortunate part of this was that they were about 200 yards from a stop sign, and on a two-lane roadway without shoulders, and the driver passing went across a double yellow line to do so. In spite of all this, the Washington County Sherriff's department stated the cause of the accident was the bicyclist moving in front of the pickup. (I documented this on the Advocacy site here about two years ago, with photos, etc.). So there are exceptions to the means you advocate which, if something were to happen, could cause a fatal accident. I use the techniques you advocate all the time, but they are only one of the "tools" that I use for maintaining my safety. And, still I will continue to wear a helmet, ride on bike paths, use bicycle lanes (except when it's not appropriate to do so, with snow, debries, and/or traffic considerations--the infamous "right hook").

Now, let's examine the example that you speak of above.
Are collision or accident victims that need care from a health professional considered a health issue or a safety issue? For example, if someone needs a splenectomy, does it matter that the patient needs one due to an aneurysm or a MVA?
Sometimes, these are both safety and health issues. The person who may need a splenectomy from an aneurysm is definately a health issue. Aneurysms are many times an inherited disorder. But the person needing the same operation from a MVA will potentially be both a health issue and a safety issue. The health issue is to complete the operation successfully, and hopefully ensure a complete recovery.

The safety issue depends upon the cause of the ruptured spleen. If it is a non-collapsible steering wheel, and it is shown (as it was) that these injuries are common, then a preventive engineering contol needs to be implemented. In this case it was a collapsible steering column which would not cause the type of blunt force trauma that a non-collapsing one would cause. If the ruptured spleen was caused by a seat belt (which also happens), then we need to look at the entire system and mishap. Was the injury sustained by improper placement of the lap portion of the belt? This happens, when people get it up over the soft parts of the abdomen, and not down on the hip bones. Or was the injury because this was a roll-over accident, and the person, while being restrained, was forcably thrown around inside the harness system by the forces of the roll-over? If this was the case, then the price of the ruptured spleen may have been unavoidable, but prevented greater damage by keeping the occupant within the "cage" of the vehicle as it rolled.

So there are a number of tools available, from engineering to administrative to PPE. We need to keep all them available to bicyclists. Helmets have been shown, especially in studies involving children, to provide significant protection, and have helped me personnally, to survive a bicycle crash. But helmets can led to a feeling that something bad cannot happen because the person is wearing one, and as you ahave pointed out many times, some bicycle/car accidents are not survivable. They are more survivable with than without a helmet from a brain injury standpoint (which we have debated often). But, and here is where we completely agree, it is best to avoid the mishap entirely, either by the riding skills and adaptive behaviors (administrative controls) or by engineering controls. You really should try, for an extended time, a recumbant bicycle, just to see the difference--it takes a bit of getting used to, but it is different, and safer, to ride feet-first. Other engineering controls include the bike paths, bicycle lanes, dedicated bicycle avenues, etc. These measures should be kept in the toolbox of accident/injury prevention.

John
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 12:39 PM
  #1178  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I just looked over the Amazon discussion of the book you have read (Its No Accident by Lisa Lewis, Closetbiker, and agree that this type of "outside the box" thinking is necessary. I think that, a while back, I advocated for giving drivers the same types of training as pilots receive, as they are the cause of huge damages in the USA, and it is not being adressed at all.

On seat belts, look at what Ford is doing:

https://www.edmunds.com/ownership/saf...4/article.html

Now, applying this to bicycles, we need to advocate for our place on the road, and for the types of controls necessary to keep bicycles safe on the road. Portland is doing a lot for this, as are the surrounding communities (such as Beaverton and Hillsboro, where I spend a lot of time). Training, riding techniques, and engineering controls are all as important for both autos and bicyclists as is the helmet issue for bicyclists, but let's not take helmets out of the equation.

John
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 01:31 PM
  #1179  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
Sometimes, these are both safety and health issues.
so, from your point of view it matters in managing a patients care and resource usage, just how the patient ended up in the hospital?
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 02:22 PM
  #1180  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
so, from your point of view it matters in managing a patients care and resource usage, just how the patient ended up in the hospital?
No, it doesn't matter for the management of the patient at the care facility. But yes, it does matter for future injury prevention measures, which is where safety and industrial hygiene professionals look. The docs need to do their thing, and the safety professionals do their thing; the two are somewhat exclusive professions, one working to keep the "victim" or "patient" alive, whereas the other looks at the situation, and tries to prevent future occurrances.

In my emergency services work (and I spent a number of years there), we needed to handle the accident scene, ensure no one else was hurt, treat the injured on-scene, and evacuate the survivors to a facility where they would receive definative treatment. We did not care much about the actual cause of the accident, but how to treat the injured.

But in my safety and IH work, we need to analyze what actually happened, determine root causes, derive preventative measures for those root causes, and then implement the so that all the causes that have been identified have a safety measure (or measures) in place to prevent future reoccurrance. We also look at the proactively workplace (or other environments), determine safety and health hazards, and implement measures to ensure the continued safety and health of the individuals involved.

This is why I feel that we need to keep all the options open for bicyclists. We need to have engineering safety measure in place (bicycle facilities, good and safe bicycles, roadway changes, lighting for the cyclist and the roadway, etc.), administrative measures (training for cyclists and drivers, bicycle route choices, cyclist and driver behavior, etc.), and personal protective measures (gloves, helmets, sunglasses, etc. for the cyclists).

John

Last edited by John C. Ratliff; 02-06-07 at 02:29 PM.
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 02:46 PM
  #1181  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
No, it doesn't matter for the management of the patient at the care facility. But yes, it does matter for future injury prevention measures,
So a patient, to be responsible, should take all reasonable precautions to try to avoid being a patient?

Last edited by closetbiker; 02-06-07 at 04:33 PM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 05:30 PM
  #1182  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
So a patient, to be responsible, should take all reasonable precautions to try to avoid being a patient?
There is a shared responsibility. Some patients cannot be "responsible," as they are children. Here, an adult has to be responsible for that child.

But there is more than that; there are the questions of the "exercise of due care," in providing a product (say, a bicycle or a car or a roadway), the idea of "express warranty" about a product, and "implied warranty (the implication by a manufacturer or dealer that a product is suitable for a specific purpose or use, or is in good condition, or is safe, by placing it on sale), and a lot of other product safety issues over which the person, or patient, may not be able to control.

Preventive medicine is an important part of the process, but not the only part. One of the precautions would be to wear a bicycle helmet. Even Lance Armstrong had to tell his wife that he forgot to put on his helmet once when he crashed just before his first Tour de France win.

Somehow, I don't see where you are going with this...

John
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 06:03 PM
  #1183  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
There is a shared responsibility. Some patients cannot be "responsible," as they are children. Here, an adult has to be responsible for that child.
So, if there is a simple item whos use could make a significant impact in preventing up to an 80% reduction in brain injury, it would be worth using (over experimental devices that could only make a possible reduction in less than 2% of brain injury)?

Last edited by closetbiker; 02-06-07 at 06:12 PM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 06:28 PM
  #1184  
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360

Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
No offense to either Closetbiker or John Ratliff, because I like and respect you both, but when you guys get together, this thread has no potential for comic relief.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 06:31 PM
  #1185  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
No offense to either Closetbiker or John Ratliff, because I like and respect you both, but when you guys get together, this thread has no potential for comic relief.
I know what you mean

I just wish John would answer my last question though.

I'm trying to ease some bad blood between us and agree on some common ground through simple, easy questions.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 06:57 PM
  #1186  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
So, if there is a simple item whos use could make a significant impact in preventing up to an 80% reduction in brain injury, it would be worth using (over experimental devices that could only make a possible reduction in less than 2% of brain injury)?
'Sounds interesting, if the numbers are correct, and the device or item shown to be effective, and the numbers on the other device are also correct. (By the way, I do work at other things during, and am not always looking at this.)

John
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 07:06 PM
  #1187  
chipcom 
Infamous Member
 
chipcom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 24,360

Bikes: Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
I know what you mean

I just wish John would answer my last question though.

I'm trying to ease some bad blood between us and agree on some common ground through simple, easy questions.
No, I'm just being the comic relief - the exchange between you two is always educational and informative.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey
chipcom is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 07:12 PM
  #1188  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
'Sounds interesting, if the numbers are correct, and the device or item shown to be effective, and the numbers on the other device are also correct. (By the way, I do work at other things during, and am not always looking at this.)

John
Well then maybe, everyone should just get on a bicycle and ride it to avoid brain injury.

From - https://www.elbowvalleycc.org/evccbhl.html

In a 1998 radio phone-in program an Alberta doctor reported that there are on the order of 10.000 brain injuries suffered annually in this province. Some 80% of these are due to strokes and heart attacks, with the remaining 20% being traumatic brain injuries. Of these remaining 2,000 about one half were as a result of motor vehicle collisions, and following the reasoning presented above, only about 50 or so will be a result of bicycle falls or collisions. As cycling can result in many physiological changes that lead to a reduction in the risk of suffering a stroke or heart attack, it may be counterproductive to emphasise the numbers of cycling related brain injuries, and the health risks associated with cycling.

(I'm busy too. I try to make it on the computer between flights and I don't have my files with me to pull up fast...I have to rely on memory here - Yikes!)
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 07:21 PM
  #1189  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by chipcom
No, I'm just being the comic relief - the exchange between you two is always educational and informative.

Well thanks Chip.

It's always my hope to be informative, but to make someone laugh, that's the stuff of life!

Last edited by closetbiker; 02-06-07 at 07:48 PM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 08:43 PM
  #1190  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
Well then maybe, everyone should just get on a bicycle and ride it to avoid brain injury.

From - https://www.elbowvalleycc.org/evccbhl.html

In a 1998 radio phone-in program an Alberta doctor reported that there are on the order of 10.000 brain injuries suffered annually in this province. Some 80% of these are due to strokes and heart attacks, with the remaining 20% being traumatic brain injuries. Of these remaining 2,000 about one half were as a result of motor vehicle collisions, and following the reasoning presented above, only about 50 or so will be a result of bicycle falls or collisions. As cycling can result in many physiological changes that lead to a reduction in the risk of suffering a stroke or heart attack, it may be counterproductive to emphasise the numbers of cycling related brain injuries, and the health risks associated with cycling.

(I'm busy too. I try to make it on the computer between flights and I don't have my files with me to pull up fast...I have to rely on memory here - Yikes!)
Actually, I cannot at all disagree with this statement. I'm 61 years old, and bicycle a minimum of 4 days a week, substituting snorkle & scuba diving, walking, running, etc. on the other days. My diastolic BP ranges between 105-118, and when I was in my 30's it was in the 140 range at times.

I can also agree that all the discussion of brain injuries can be detrimental (the study you quoted). We need to run the full gammit of protection factors, and really encourage cycling in our communities. It makes so much sense, giving us the necessary, and vital, exercise that we need. Well, I've been called to "come down and grate cheese," so I'll have to go for now.

John

Last edited by John C. Ratliff; 02-06-07 at 09:15 PM.
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 02-06-07, 09:03 PM
  #1191  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
Actually, I cannod at all disagree with this statement...I can also agree that all the discussion of brain injuries can be detrimental (the study you quoted). We need to run the full gammit of protection factors, and really encourage cycling in our communities. It makes so much sense, giving us the necessary, and vital, exercise that we need.
I knew we could agree on some basic ideas.

Some further ideas we could possibly agree on are on this page because it closely relates to the concept of the previous posting

https://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...fety/mayer.htm

where there is an interview with Mayer Hillman

Mayer Hillman is well known for his controversial views on road
safety and his challenges to "official" thinking on everything from
cycle helmets to how we should measure danger. This interview
first appeared in Inroads, Journal of the Institute of Road Safety
Officers, in 1995...

A central feature of his approach is that the Department of
Transport's thinking on road safety is flawed. It relies almost
exclusively on reducing accidents rather than danger. He says
that they are wrong to claim that our roads are safer because
accidents are going down...

He admitted to having had an "enlightenment" about cycling a
couple of days before. Up till then he had thought the order of
priority should be walking, cycling, public transport and then
personal transport (cars). He now puts cycling before walking
because it offers better scope for becoming independent of
motorised transport as it is faster and more convenient, and also
because of its great benefits to health...

He explained the concept of "life years" which he had used. This
allowed him to make a comparison of the life years lost in road
accidents against the life years gained through improved fitness.
He took each cycle death in 1989 and looked at the acturial
evidence as to how long a person of a certain age could expect
to live and multiplied that by the number of deaths in each age
group in order to arrive at a figure of approximately 11,000 life years
lost in cycle fatalities. To calculate life years gained he looked
at some American evidence of the increased longevity of those
who cycled regularly and this showed that people could expect
to live two years longer. When this is multiplied by the numbers
of those who cycle regularly, as revealed by the National Travel
Survey, you arrive at the extraordinary ratio of 20:1. In other
words, he says, for every life year lost through accidents, 20
years are gained through improved health and fitness...

So maybe we should put things in perspective, wake up and realize not only is cycling not dangerous, it extends life in spite of its inherent difficulties.

Maybe if we want to make things "safer" we should be looking at other things, rather than the conventinal wisdom (i.e. helmets), to be "safer"

Last edited by closetbiker; 02-07-07 at 12:25 AM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 02-23-07, 07:43 PM
  #1192  
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696

Bikes: who cares?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Maybe this has already been posted here, maybe not:

https://www.momentumplanet.ca/?q=node/172
randya is offline  
Old 02-25-07, 03:10 PM
  #1193  
Dewaine
Desertbiker
 
Dewaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Two other reasons to wear a helmet in Arizona:
1. It is much cooler in 100+ degree weather to ride with a styrofoam helmet,
2. There are lots of desert trees (mesquite, palo verde) hanging around, many of which have long thorns. Helmets keep thorns and branches from coming in contact with the scalp.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
arguingoninternet.jpg (20.6 KB, 46 views)
Dewaine is offline  
Old 02-28-07, 11:40 AM
  #1194  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Fell upon this video that was pretty good from a CBC TV show.

A rant by an older person about over protective parents.


https://www.cbc.ca/22minutes/video.html

Open the link for February 27, 2007, "Fitness Break"

Some selected dialog:

"These days, parents are so over protective, kids need a helmet to eat breakfast"

"Kids need to get the occasional cut and scrape, otherwise they grow up to be the kind of adult who trips and skins their knee and tries to sue the sidewalk not to mention the occasional death to misadventure weeds out the dopey ones"

"Go ahead and wrap the kids in bubble wrap, just don't be suprised when they grow up to be adults who need warning labels on coffee to tell them hot beverages are hot!"
closetbiker is offline  
Old 03-02-07, 11:26 AM
  #1195  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by randya
Maybe this has already been posted here, maybe not:

https://www.momentumplanet.ca/?q=node/172
Actually, what I found more interesting is this website, which was found under Randya's link:

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-wah091106.php

This line of research led to the following conclusion (amoung many other):

The study also found that large vehicles, such as buses and trucks, passed considerably closer when overtaking cyclists than cars.

The average car passed 1.33 metres (4.4 feet) away from the bicycle, whereas the average truck got 19 centimetres (7.5 inches) closer and the average bus 23 centimetres (9 inches) closer.

However, there was no evidence of 4x4s (SUVs) getting any closer than ordinary cars.

Previously reported research from the project showed that drivers of white vans overtake cyclists an average 10 centimetres (4 inches) closer than car drivers.
I'm interested in following up on this study, as this one has objective data.

John
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 03-02-07, 05:30 PM
  #1196  
Dewaine
Desertbiker
 
Dewaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
This might be interesting to some of you:

https://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Bicycle-helmet
Dewaine is offline  
Old 03-02-07, 05:38 PM
  #1197  
Dewaine
Desertbiker
 
Dewaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
This is an interesting site with crash statistics, too:

https://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bc/
Dewaine is offline  
Old 03-02-07, 11:09 PM
  #1198  
STewmeister
a van down by the river
 
STewmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur GA
Posts: 52

Bikes: Lemond Reno, Trek 6500

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
if this isn't enought to make one wear a helmet, nothing is... not for the sqeamish

https://poetry.rotten.com/all-kings-horses/0002/
STewmeister is offline  
Old 03-02-07, 11:44 PM
  #1199  
Dewaine
Desertbiker
 
Dewaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Some numbers on bicycle deaths:

https://www.iihs.org/research/fatalit.../bicycles.html

Wear a helmet.
Dewaine is offline  
Old 03-04-07, 07:13 PM
  #1200  
Aphidman
Better dead than trendy.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7

Bikes: Giant

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
My family has run (and still runs) a chain of funeral homes in western Canada for 60 years now, serving 25 communities. We've done thousands of funerals in that time, and in 60 years, the number of funerals done for people killed in cycling accidents totals: 1. A 92 year old cyclist (father of one of my high school teachers) was struck by a car, lingered on for 6 months, then died. Would a helmet have saved him? Who knows -- but I can think of a lot of other activities and types of transportation that resulted in a lot more funerals than that. Walking comes to mind. So does using stairs. So does falling out of bed. (In Canada, there were about 64 deaths per year from cycling accidents in 2000--2003. The figure for falls involving beds was 78 per year. I found the figures in Statistics Canada's reports on external causes of morbidity and mortality for those four years.)

Be sure to wear your helmet when you get out of bed! It kills more people than cycling!
Aphidman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.