Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Catrike Ryder <Soloman@old.bikers.org>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Helmet efficacy test
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 03:09:41 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 153
Message-ID: <5s97uj5dahrmveummf60sh8crl60f1d2gv@4ax.com>
References: <vrru3v$152e3$3@dont-email.me> <B0kEP.112929$Xq5f.111799@fx38.iad> <f9k3ujl9ev5nopn2f329cuesca36o9c7j0@4ax.com> <vrskop$1qlue$1@dont-email.me> <vrt0d6$24h8c$2@dont-email.me> <m4f68uFpiqsU1@mid.individual.net> <ogu4ujpkvk3ck8tojoh6fkq5tbmkmh1oor@4ax.com> <vru3fn$31kv7$1@dont-email.me> <vruc9d$3efo8$4@dont-email.me> <r3k6ujdb4jpap6vnhpgsmjiniohs8i6b7i@4ax.com> <vrvka1$id1c$1@dont-email.me> <b4o6ujtsckjf9l605tn4rui4bva7e21lpf@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 08:09:44 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f7bb353b07ff21f805dd490ec63c4e59";
	logging-data="1295909"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/G1Sf7BO94yjROzdk+FX+qkocRp9GctEk="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tc2KpGgksGCGjyxOVCVmevEXu3M=
Bytes: 6834

On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 09:11:09 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:12:33 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>>On 3/25/2025 7:58 PM, John B. wrote:
>>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 08:49:32 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 3/25/2025 6:19 AM, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>>>>> Am 25.03.2025 um 11:11 schrieb John B.:
>>>>>> On 25 Mar 2025 08:02:38 GMT, Roger Merriman
>>>>>> <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/24/2025 6:02 PM, Mark J cleary wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I like to wear helmet for extra protection against a
>>>>>>>>> fall. I do agree
>>>>>>>>> that for me even running with a helmet would be good
>>>>>>>>> since I have no
>>>>>>>>> balance to run anymore. However, Frank is I think in
>>>>>>>>> the minority about
>>>>>>>>> helmets...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nope, that's not true. In the current echo chamber of
>>>>>>>> avid sport
>>>>>>>> cyclists I am a minority. But very I'm comfortable with
>>>>>>>> not following
>>>>>>>> most of the group's trends. I don't use clipless pedals,
>>>>>>>> I don't use
>>>>>>>> brifters or disk brakes, I don't ride in jerseys that
>>>>>>>> advertise my
>>>>>>>> favorite products or my favorite racing team, I don't
>>>>>>>> use aerodynamic
>>>>>>>> sunglasses, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But in the total population of world cyclists, it's the
>>>>>>>> helmet wearers
>>>>>>>> who are a definite minority.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ... and while he may have data to support it sometimes
>>>>>>>>> we humans
>>>>>>>>> overlook data. I rely sometimes only on intuition and
>>>>>>>>> what I think might
>>>>>>>>> be good.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's a common human trait. It leads to lots of bad
>>>>>>>> decisions, but it's
>>>>>>>> common. It's usually wiser to pay attention to good
>>>>>>>> data, when it's
>>>>>>>> available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I really don't understand the length's Frank goes to dis
>>>>>>>>> helmets but maybe I am simply taking it more than it is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you check, you'll see I never initiate helmet
>>>>>>>> debates. But when
>>>>>>>> someone else - um, like you, Mark! - starts stating or
>>>>>>>> implying that
>>>>>>>> helmets have great benefit, and/or states or implies
>>>>>>>> that bicycling is a
>>>>>>>> serious risk for brain injury, I do point out that those
>>>>>>>> notions are false.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bicycling has never been a major source of serious
>>>>>>>> traumatic brain
>>>>>>>> injury (TBI). On a nationwide basis, bicycling's
>>>>>>>> contribution to TBI
>>>>>>>> counts is low enough to be off most "causes" charts.
>>>>>>>> Bicycling causes
>>>>>>>> fewer then 1% of U.S. TBI deaths, far fewer than
>>>>>>>> pedestrian travel, and
>>>>>>>> far fewer on a "per mile" basis. And historic data over
>>>>>>>> the years shows
>>>>>>>> quite clearly that bicycle helmets are not preventing
>>>>>>>> either fatalities
>>>>>>>> or concussions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Data on request - but it's been posted or linked
>>>>>>>> countless times.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Helmets for cycle safety are distraction to use one of UK
>>>>>>> bike
>>>>>>> personalities/transport experts aka Chris Boardman.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With cycling the danger and risk is almost entirely
>>>>>>> introduced by
>>>>>>> motorists, which should be the focus.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Helmet “debates” as ever seem to go nowhere as folks have
>>>>>>> such intrenched
>>>>>>> positions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've told this story before but once again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I was working around oil well drilling rigs the word
>>>>>> came down
>>>>>> from the Drilling Company -  "When you come back from
>>>>>> break be sure
>>>>>> you are wearing a "Hard Hat"(i.e. helmet) or don't bother
>>>>>> to come
>>>>>> back". And you know? Everybody came back with a hard hat
>>>>>> and there was
>>>>>> never a mention,  good, bad or indifferent, whether people
>>>>>> wanted to
>>>>>> were a helmet, or not, or any of the other  arguments I
>>>>>> hear in
>>>>>> bicycle circles.
>>>>>
>>>>> How many people get paid to go bicycling? Most people cycle
>>>>> voluntarily, or stop cycling voluntarily.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the cost to society if people "don't bother to come
>>>>> back" (as hapened in Australia)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why did the "don't bother to come back unless you wear a
>>>>> seat belt" not work in the USA?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a perfect world, I would probably wear a seat belt when
>>>> driving. But since the State made it mandatory, which
>>>> naturally engenders defiance,  I just restrict myself to
>>>> exempt autos and drive without.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> (:-) do we assume that you also ignore state laws against, oh say,
>>> theft and taxes?
>>>   
>>
>>I'm morally aligned with the statues on theft and resigned 
>>to taxes.
>>
>>But the seatbelt laws are well outside the proper realm of 
>>the government.
>>
>>As mentioned here recently, we either have a government of 
>>limited enumerated powers or we do not.
>
>Well... as I posted previously, your state receives a rather
>astonishingly large amount of money from the Federal Government and if
>you take their money you have to play to their tune :-)

The question is, "why do the Feds tax people and then use it to bribe
them?

Why not simply stop taxing them?

--
C'est bon
Soloman