Path: ...!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: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Helmet efficacy test
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:36:35 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <vs1dv4$26r83$5@dont-email.me>
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>
 <4s45uj1f7a09kdh5cuau8e2k37snjcm2g5@4ax.com> <vrudkh$3fet8$3@dont-email.me>
 <vruj8u$3i4m6$3@dont-email.me> <vrvmhi$j8eo$3@dont-email.me>
 <vs0m66$1h7oe$2@dont-email.me> <vs18m6$21gj2$2@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 18:36:37 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0d6d1025fd90446b0fecbec3723e149c";
	logging-data="2321667"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19lCiYLCFQ8VzVTNKqzfbbXjrpSy4RgiAs="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:n0FdlfdKy5GKAPzqDV8UP5AAMYw=
In-Reply-To: <vs18m6$21gj2$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2612

On 3/26/2025 12:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>  
> If activity A causes more TBI deaths than activity B - whether measured 
> in total (i.e. "cost to society") or, say, in lifetime odds of death (as 
> in "odds of dying by...") or in, say, number of deaths per mile (for 
> transportation modes) - then why should activity B get subjected to 
> helmet nagging when activity A does not?
> 
> On average, bicycling is safer than walking by all those metrics. You 
> obviously don't believe that, but that just means you have more reading 
> to do.

Regarding sources of head injury: See the big pie chart at this site:
https://how-sen.com/journal/2014/2/bike-helmets

I don't agree with absolutely everything in the article - specifically, 
Thompson & Rivara's claim of 85% or 88% benefit have _never_ been 
corroborated. Even their own subsequent work showed much lower 
protection, and AFAIK all other studies have shown lower protection yet.

But the author makes many good points, and I agree with almost all.

-- 
- Frank Krygowski