View Poll Results: What Are Your Helmet Wearing Habits?
I've never worn a bike helmet
52
10.40%
I used to wear a helmet, but have stopped
24
4.80%
I've always worn a helmet
208
41.60%
I didn't wear a helmet, but now do
126
25.20%
I sometimes wear a helmet depending on the conditions
90
18.00%
Voters: 500. You may not vote on this poll
The Helmet Thread 2
#1326
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,530
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2112 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times
in
443 Posts
I insisted on nothing. Just pointed out the platitude you've used before to dodge the question.
And yet less than a year ago, it was a "fair question."
You project such unrealistic qualities onto a few ounces of fabric. Surely you can find a slow, one-way, near zero traffic road to enjoy a few moments unbuckled, you know, just to flush.
-mr. bill
Originally Posted by wphamilton
An illogical analogy in context....
You project such unrealistic qualities onto a few ounces of fabric. Surely you can find a slow, one-way, near zero traffic road to enjoy a few moments unbuckled, you know, just to flush.
-mr. bill
#1327
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
I seriously doubt that. Or this:
I had thought that you might be interested in the differing risk ratios and catastrophic consequences which show that your analogy is improper, but since you prefer this vaguely insulting mis-recollection instead, I'll go back to non-conversational mode with you now.
#1328
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,530
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2112 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times
in
443 Posts
Another person is an eye-witness to a crash and posted their opinion that the rider would have gone to the hospital had they not been wearing a helmet, and you challenge the "fact" - and you know this opinion is false because, why? Because you have a keyboard?
Another person posts about their helmet and their head, and their opinion that without the helmet they would have hurt their head. And yet you challenge again, and you know that opinion is false because, why? Because their helmet and their head are actually yours?
-mr. bill
#1329
Senior Member
1)Someone posts a picture of his *NOT* *DEAD* father and they are part of the "helmet saved my life!" crowd?
2) Another person is an eye-witness to a crash and posted their opinion that the rider would have gone to the hospital had they not been wearing a helmet, and you challenge the "fact" - and you know this opinion is false because, why? Because you have a keyboard?
3) Another person posts about their helmet and their head, and their opinion that without the helmet they would have hurt their head. And yet you challenge again, and you know that opinion is false because, why? Because their helmet and their head are actually yours?
2) Another person is an eye-witness to a crash and posted their opinion that the rider would have gone to the hospital had they not been wearing a helmet, and you challenge the "fact" - and you know this opinion is false because, why? Because you have a keyboard?
3) Another person posts about their helmet and their head, and their opinion that without the helmet they would have hurt their head. And yet you challenge again, and you know that opinion is false because, why? Because their helmet and their head are actually yours?
2) I did not claim it was presented as a fact, nor did I claim their opinion was false. I can haz logic.
3) Again, I did not claim -- nor do I know that -- their opinion is false, I merely asked why they thought their opinion was correct. And they provided more follow up information. Which you may have noted I did not challenge. I know what the bare-head brigade challenges would be to his reply, but it satisfied my previously stated curiosity -- I think probably their helmet could very well have provided some injury mitigation, but would still stop short of a definitive statement without qualifiers.
#1330
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,530
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2112 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times
in
443 Posts
My father wrecked his bike today, while not wearing his helmet. Wear your helmet!
You? Well....
Originally Posted by ;17900990
Last month's crash resulted in a cracked helmet. I'm pretty sure that would've been my noggin.
-mr. bill
#1331
Senior Member
How can you claim a question is false? Or a non-truth?
That sounds familiar, hmm...:
#1332
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 197
Bikes: Paramount Series 3, Shimano RX-100; Cannondale CAADX, Shimano 105; Cinelli SuperCorsa, SRAM Red; Pinarello Dogma F8, Shimano Dura-Ace Di 2; Firefly Custom Titanium Sram 1x
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The existence of helmet threads speaks for human sanity as much as the existence of a Flat Earth Society.
#1333
Senior Member
#1334
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 2,698
Bikes: Giant Propel, Cannondale SuperX, Univega Alpina Ultima
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 677 Post(s)
Liked 425 Times
in
256 Posts
Uh, you better be careful with the whole flat earth analogy. Scientists are currently testing a theory that the universe is 2d (flat, which would include the Earth) and we are merely experiencing a holographic projection...
__________________
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton
#1336
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
Havent posted here in a while. Checked in and see the usual suspects that are against helmets are amazingly still alive and kicking. They remind me of one of my sons that told me that teens are good drivers since they have lightning quick reflexes. But-------------------------that was before he had an accident.
#1338
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 197
Bikes: Paramount Series 3, Shimano RX-100; Cannondale CAADX, Shimano 105; Cinelli SuperCorsa, SRAM Red; Pinarello Dogma F8, Shimano Dura-Ace Di 2; Firefly Custom Titanium Sram 1x
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#1339
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 197
Bikes: Paramount Series 3, Shimano RX-100; Cannondale CAADX, Shimano 105; Cinelli SuperCorsa, SRAM Red; Pinarello Dogma F8, Shimano Dura-Ace Di 2; Firefly Custom Titanium Sram 1x
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
These threads often make use of statistics in all sort of right and wrong ways. One needs statistics only when no direct experience exists for an event. Probability is not fact, it is merely the projection of the past into the future making lots of assumptions like that trends will continue and models are correct, which often don't and aren't. Hence people with an intact helmet enjoy 0% of the effects the probability predicts, and people with a cracked helmet suffer 100%.
When you have direct experience of what a helmet can do for you when you fall on your head, you need not freaking statistics, or other people's say in the matter.
A wonderful human ability is that of learning from other people's experiences. That's why many smart people wear helmets, and when their day of misfortune comes, god forbid, they go through the mishap dressed for it.
As you were.
When you have direct experience of what a helmet can do for you when you fall on your head, you need not freaking statistics, or other people's say in the matter.
A wonderful human ability is that of learning from other people's experiences. That's why many smart people wear helmets, and when their day of misfortune comes, god forbid, they go through the mishap dressed for it.
As you were.
#1340
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 197
Bikes: Paramount Series 3, Shimano RX-100; Cannondale CAADX, Shimano 105; Cinelli SuperCorsa, SRAM Red; Pinarello Dogma F8, Shimano Dura-Ace Di 2; Firefly Custom Titanium Sram 1x
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Uh, you better be careful with the whole flat earth analogy. Scientists are currently testing a theory that the universe is 2d (flat, which would include the Earth) and we are merely experiencing a holographic projection...
#1341
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
These threads often make use of statistics in all sort of right and wrong ways. One needs statistics only when no direct experience exists for an event. Probability is not fact, it is merely the projection of the past into the future making lots of assumptions like that trends will continue and models are correct, which often don't and aren't. Hence people with an intact helmet enjoy 0% of the effects the probability predicts, and people with a cracked helmet suffer 100%.
When you have direct experience of what a helmet can do for you when you fall on your head, you need not freaking statistics, or other people's say in the matter.
A wonderful human ability is that of learning from other people's experiences. That's why many smart people wear helmets, and when their day of misfortune comes, god forbid, they go through the mishap dressed for it.
As you were.
When you have direct experience of what a helmet can do for you when you fall on your head, you need not freaking statistics, or other people's say in the matter.
A wonderful human ability is that of learning from other people's experiences. That's why many smart people wear helmets, and when their day of misfortune comes, god forbid, they go through the mishap dressed for it.
As you were.
But it sounds like you want to disregard the probability and statistics because of a specific outcome, which would be completely wrong. Everything we experience is governed by some probability, which we may control to varying extent which makes it fundamental to rational, thoughtful behavior. Otherwise we're reduced to rote rule-following.
When no incident occurs, we do experience a non-zero positive benefit - the risk reduction we obtained when we made the decision. After the ride is over, and we didn't bump our head, it is hard to say there was any benefit to the helmet - and yet, if the decision was optimal for risk reduction prior to the ride, it is still optimal even in hind-sight knowing nothing happened. Because of the element of chance.
#1342
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 2,698
Bikes: Giant Propel, Cannondale SuperX, Univega Alpina Ultima
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 677 Post(s)
Liked 425 Times
in
256 Posts
If we're waxing philosophical, this perspective must be feasible since people survive it but I have to disagree both in theory and in practice. Reason helps us before an event, and in reacting to an event, but after the fact our reasons are less relevant than the repercussions. We probably agree on that - maybe that's all you're trying to say in which case I take it back and say "spot on."
But it sounds like you want to disregard the probability and statistics because of a specific outcome, which would be completely wrong. Everything we experience is governed by some probability, which we may control to varying extent which makes it fundamental to rational, thoughtful behavior. Otherwise we're reduced to rote rule-following.
When no incident occurs, we do experience a non-zero positive benefit - the risk reduction we obtained when we made the decision. After the ride is over, and we didn't bump our head, it is hard to say there was any benefit to the helmet - and yet, if the decision was optimal for risk reduction prior to the ride, it is still optimal even in hind-sight knowing nothing happened. Because of the element of chance.
But it sounds like you want to disregard the probability and statistics because of a specific outcome, which would be completely wrong. Everything we experience is governed by some probability, which we may control to varying extent which makes it fundamental to rational, thoughtful behavior. Otherwise we're reduced to rote rule-following.
When no incident occurs, we do experience a non-zero positive benefit - the risk reduction we obtained when we made the decision. After the ride is over, and we didn't bump our head, it is hard to say there was any benefit to the helmet - and yet, if the decision was optimal for risk reduction prior to the ride, it is still optimal even in hind-sight knowing nothing happened. Because of the element of chance.
__________________
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton
#1343
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
I see those as being almost the same question! Or more precisely, two sides to the same question, which mathematically is the "expected value" of a decision. You need at minimum both the likelihood of the event, and the severity of the consequence. More realistically, the likelihood of a spectrum of events and the consequence of each of them.
#1345
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Neither question is sufficient by itself to evaluate risk. But they are both necessary.
I probably wouldn't have remarked on it, but I thought your two questions were well put for explaining the actual risk calculation - not with the distinction, but with the questions together. e.g,
To evaluate risk, the two questions are "how likely am I to need a helmet?", and "what are the implications of not having a helmet and needing one?".
#1346
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 223
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1662 Post(s)
Liked 226 Times
in
131 Posts
Ergo, you wear a helmet while driving/walking/watching TV, because according to your own admission it's not important what the chance is that driving/walking/watching TV will result in head injury, it's all about the implications of not having a helmet while driving/walking/watching TV and needing one.
Last edited by CarinusMalmari; 06-23-15 at 04:08 PM.
#1347
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 239
Bikes: Yuba Mundo 4.3, 2007 Jake the Snake
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I agree with you, though; you need both the probability of an event happening and the magnitude of the consequences of the event's occurrence to make any meaningful statement about what measures should be taken.
Last edited by bovine; 06-23-15 at 04:31 PM.
#1348
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
I think it's the fact that you made a misstatement initially by saying they were almost the same question -- which, to your credit, you immediately corrected -- when they're really the two variables you need to get an expected value for a particular random variable.
I agree with you, though; you need both the probability of an event happening and the magnitude of the consequences of the event's occurrence to make any meaningful statement about what measures should be taken.
I agree with you, though; you need both the probability of an event happening and the magnitude of the consequences of the event's occurrence to make any meaningful statement about what measures should be taken.
#1349
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 197
Bikes: Paramount Series 3, Shimano RX-100; Cannondale CAADX, Shimano 105; Cinelli SuperCorsa, SRAM Red; Pinarello Dogma F8, Shimano Dura-Ace Di 2; Firefly Custom Titanium Sram 1x
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If we're waxing philosophical, this perspective must be feasible since people survive it but I have to disagree both in theory and in practice. Reason helps us before an event, and in reacting to an event, but after the fact our reasons are less relevant than the repercussions. We probably agree on that - maybe that's all you're trying to say in which case I take it back and say "spot on."
But it sounds like you want to disregard the probability and statistics because of a specific outcome, which would be completely wrong. Everything we experience is governed by some probability, which we may control to varying extent which makes it fundamental to rational, thoughtful behavior. Otherwise we're reduced to rote rule-following.
When no incident occurs, we do experience a non-zero positive benefit - the risk reduction we obtained when we made the decision. After the ride is over, and we didn't bump our head, it is hard to say there was any benefit to the helmet - and yet, if the decision was optimal for risk reduction prior to the ride, it is still optimal even in hind-sight knowing nothing happened. Because of the element of chance.
But it sounds like you want to disregard the probability and statistics because of a specific outcome, which would be completely wrong. Everything we experience is governed by some probability, which we may control to varying extent which makes it fundamental to rational, thoughtful behavior. Otherwise we're reduced to rote rule-following.
When no incident occurs, we do experience a non-zero positive benefit - the risk reduction we obtained when we made the decision. After the ride is over, and we didn't bump our head, it is hard to say there was any benefit to the helmet - and yet, if the decision was optimal for risk reduction prior to the ride, it is still optimal even in hind-sight knowing nothing happened. Because of the element of chance.
Statistics is mostly mind games. A succedaneum of real knowledge. Useful for dealing with large populations, almost useless for individual events. It's ALWAYS an estimate, because the future is not knowable. Therefore, the confidence factor pales next to what is knowable: (1) two-wheel vehicles keep an easy to lose, precarious balance at all times; (2) impacts to the head at cycling speeds can cause serious injury and death. That suffices for me.
Here is a statistic: One in seven Americans dies of heart problems. That is useful to direct funds for medical research at the national level, but it says squat about the condition of your heart, or mine. Similarly for helmet stats.
#1350
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 197
Bikes: Paramount Series 3, Shimano RX-100; Cannondale CAADX, Shimano 105; Cinelli SuperCorsa, SRAM Red; Pinarello Dogma F8, Shimano Dura-Ace Di 2; Firefly Custom Titanium Sram 1x
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts