Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Helmet efficacy test
Date: 29 Mar 2025 19:19:26 GMT
Lines: 57
Message-ID: <m4qvduFb17oU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <vruk1u$3k0mh$2@dont-email.me>
 <dtl5ujhl59hpq12lnbovebk80os181ulgo@4ax.com>
 <3SEEP.1067220$eNx6.591931@fx14.iad>
 <vrvog0$j8eo$6@dont-email.me>
 <vs1280$1ri3r$2@dont-email.me>
 <vs17id$21gj2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs1m78$26rhi$2@dont-email.me>
 <vs2glq$35mlr$2@dont-email.me>
 <b5t9ujtrk4ph0rcl8stghedkbcmv2ho64q@4ax.com>
 <vs3uvg$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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 2Mr2rc/udQnOGUpEHrmmSQQWiCtknNNzoTooTmCZ8CfpJSVDe7
Cancel-Lock: sha1:y+w9En7+Atowufj7b9D22hyFtFI= sha1:FYuXTtebk/Gqpb8UawDV3LyIGmo= sha256:JyiugqMkh2pV5LEmR1Q2voxUo6upXrlYgf5d7e4DHPA=
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Bytes: 3815

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 3/29/2025 12:35 AM, John B. wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 21:49:52 -0400, Radey Shouman
>> <shouman@comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Could you point out a few flu vaccine studies, of the design and quality
>>> that would convince you if they were instead about bike helmets?  All of
>>> us have to die of something, congestive heart failure, pneumonia, flu,
>>> whatever.  I guess you would want some evidence that with flu shots
>>> (bike helmets) people actually live longer and better lives.
>> 
>> Perhaps -
>> https://www.cdc.gov/flu-vaccines-work/php/effectiveness-studies/index.html
>> and
>> https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/safest-bike-helmet
> 
> And note the differences, please.
> 
> The data on flu vaccine effectiveness comes from counting actual flu 
> cases in the general population, in some cases among people 
> hospitalized, in other cases outpatients.
> https://www.cdc.gov/flu-vaccines-work/php/vaccine-effectiveness/index.html
> So that's counting what actually happened, as in "How many Americans 
> were infected with flu?" They find that vaccinated folks are much less 
> likely to catch the flu.
> 
> The helmet article's 3rd photo shows their method of measuring 
> "effectiveness." It has nothing to do with counting cases in the general 
> population, as in "How many Americans got TBI while riding?" Instead it 
> measures deceleration of a model of a human head (no body attached) 
> that's dropped onto an anvil.
> 
> If they evaluated helmets as they do flu vaccines, they'd have to say 
> "Hmm. Looks like no evidence for saving lives, but concussions have gone 
> up."
> 
> Also notice the article gives no specific data on the test. The impact 
> speed is 14 mph (from a 2 meter drop) and the deceleration is required 
> to be less than 300 gees to pass government certification.
> 
> And if you have an expensive, very lightweight helmet you can be sure 
> that the designers whittled away styrofoam as much as possible, leaving 
> enough to just barely pass that impact test.
> 
> 
There are other folks doing testing, and cheap helmets still don’t do well,
more expensive helmets have MIPs and other similar tech ie stuff that is
intended to protect from rotating injuries. Or in the MTB world heavier
burlier full face ones.

I can’t imagine is any population data either way but I’d absolutely not
assume cheap would be stronger, is an unwise assumption.

Roger Merriman