Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!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: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 06:44:05 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 97
Message-ID: <jjqkuj5s6mb7mm4qmi6fae6m84bpf7kgcj@4ax.com>
References: <vs3uvg$la27$1@dont-email.me> <87iknsq422.fsf@mothra.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> <vs751k$3k5eb$1@dont-email.me> <87o6xkmwqn.fsf@mothra.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> <5rteuj1mr9a65enuv3jqj7sfmpgurreaqs@4ax.com> <vs92mm$1j1nq$2@dont-email.me> <m4qvduFb17oU1@mid.individual.net> <p83hujhub0kjjqbldnkenuod55mq8uu4nt@4ax.com> <vsa9hq$2ret2$1@dont-email.me> <fackujprf51nqihig9d1020qjr4gabi77s@4ax.com> <hulkujd5jj5uidnhdeochn6646br6hbbo6@4ax.com> <rrnkujdkdea3l0jen35hflt9vn5b9jtb9e@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 12:44:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b74c51c5256c4a8dcfe21ff45b6c5448";
	logging-data="86819"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/pPMQclv4qEdUXfBWlo5ddIGKQTobJ8aw="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:n8bfu78mFNoy9fiQXJnnTnC6N3g=
Bytes: 5947

On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 16:42:05 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 04:57:32 -0400, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 08:42:05 +0200, Wolfgang Strobl
>><news51@mystrobl.de> wrote:
>>
>>>Am Sat, 29 Mar 2025 22:16:26 -0400 schrieb Frank Krygowski
>>><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>:
>>>
>>>>On 3/29/2025 8:17 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On 29 Mar 2025 19:19:26 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/29/2025 12:35 AM, John B. wrote:
>>>...
>>>
>>>>> O.K. Try https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-35728-x
>>>>
>>>>What was your point, John? I ask because it seems you just grabbed 
>>>>another study at random. Roger's and my discussion was about cheap 
>>>>helmets vs. expensive ones. I didn't see that addressed. Perhaps when 
>>>>you post a link, you could tell us what part of the study was 
>>>>significant to our discussions?
>>>>
>>>>I did see this: "Although rotational acceleration has been known to be 
>>>>relevant in cyclist injuries, it is still missing in standardized 
>>>>testing today. Using full body simulation, Wang et al.24 confirmed that 
>>>>rotational acceleration is indeed increased when wearing a helmet." That 
>>>>would seem to go back to the issue of a larger moment arm for glancing 
>>>>blows.
>>>
>>>IMO, it's not just the larger moment arm, it's the enlarged probability.
>>>This is mostly caused by the bigger cross-section of a helmet, in
>>>comparison to a bare  head.  Neck muscles are generally strong enough to
>>>hold the head away from the ground or turn it away in the event of a
>>>fall. However, this distance is often smaller than that wat a helmet
>>>adds to size of the head.  
>>>
>>>My head was uninjured in a serious bike crash years ago in which I broke
>>>my collarbone and half a dozen ribs. A helmet wouldn't have fitted
>>>between the asphalt and my head, though.  
>>>
>>>Does this prove anything? I don't think so. It's just an anecdote,
>>>similar to those anecdotes told by bicycle helmet enthusiasts flooding
>>>the media with "how my helmet saved my life".  
>>>
>>>But ... my experience illustrates one mechanism that might partially
>>>explain why bicycles helmets didn't deliver any of the advertised
>>>benefits, despite of all those great expectations.  Safety research
>>>perhaps should start analyzing risks caused or enlarged by bicycle
>>>helmets ernestly, such like as enlarged cross section, rotational
>>>traumata and risk compensation.
>>>
>>>We should also not overlook the indirect damage caused by complicating
>>>and inconveniencing a means of transportation that is beneficial to
>>>health.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>And that paper, like almost all, does almost nothing to address the lack 
>>>>of reduction in TBI counts in the entire population. They do mention one 
>>>>paper by Olivier claiming large reductions in cyclist TBI in Australia 
>>>>after their mandatory helmet laws (MHLs). But Olivier is famous in other 
>>>>forums for his insistence that there was no reduction in cycling as a 
>>>>result of the MHLs. Copious survey and count data indicating large 
>>>>reductions in cycling, which would of course lead to large reductions in 
>>>>cyclist TBI.
>>>>
>>>>In Olivier's world, prohibiting all cycling would be a great way of 
>>>>wiping out almost all cyclist TBI.
>>
>>In my opinion, the biggest problem bike helmets cause is "do gooders"
>>on either side of the issue telling "others" what they should or
>>shouldn't do and the "others" not ignoring the "do gooders."
>
>That was the what I was trying to highlight with my report of the
>Drilling Crew  not saying a word then the Boss told then that they had
>to wear a "Hard Hat" while the bicyclists weep and crying about
>something that is their own decision whether to do or not do.

I tried a bike helmet on once several years ago when I was buying it
for my friend who had Parkinson's, but the thought of me wearing one
never crossed my mind. I make my decisions about helmets and many
other issues, ignoring, as best I can, "studies," anecdotes, and
advice from one side or the other about them. 
 
Everywhere I look beyond my close friends and family, I see people
trying to influence me for their own personal gain. Most of their
claims about caring for others is hogwash. 

Everyone has an agenda.

--
C'est bon
Soloman