Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Roger Merriman Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech Subject: Re: Helmet efficacy test Date: 6 Apr 2025 14:26:37 GMT Lines: 112 Message-ID: References: <5rteuj1mr9a65enuv3jqj7sfmpgurreaqs@4ax.com> <87iknpxigi.fsf@mothra.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> <87tt79kodg.fsf@mothra.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> <62cmuj1f1dvq0kig96gflu90uat89d6ssj@4ax.com> <87a58um184.fsf@mothra.hsd1.ma.comcast.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net mlObZWOEEVrc5XNGfuO/TgLDwhnYsjAa7z2o0nmlKGFNJ88rt/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:7ulP6jN4E1NswtSQet/F/+3PV6w= sha1:wfKDWyPoFmwqG639WTctqiZ1DJA= sha256:mP897gr5EBxeAYHiCO5NSvbEmF7hI3YL6llDchQs9HU= User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad) Bytes: 6040 AMuzi wrote: > On 4/6/2025 4:55 AM, Roger Merriman wrote: >> Radey Shouman wrote: >>> Frank Krygowski writes: >>> >>>> On 3/31/2025 9:36 PM, John B. wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 19:54:58 -0500, AMuzi wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 3/31/2025 7:43 PM, John B. wrote: >>>>>>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 18:42:12 -0400, Frank Krygowski >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 3/31/2025 3:10 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: >>>>>>>>> Frank Krygowski writes: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 3/31/2025 12:39 PM, Radey Shouman wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Actually I was talking to Mr. Krygowski. It seems to me that his >>>>>>>>>>> standards for studies on flu shots are different to those for bike >>>>>>>>>>> helmets, and I was curious as to what had convinced him of the efficacy >>>>>>>>>>> and safety of flu shots. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As I said, there is nationwide, ~ whole population data indicating flu >>>>>>>>>> vaccines have high effectiveness in preventing infection and/or >>>>>>>>>> hospitalization. There is no such nationwide data for bike helmets, >>>>>>>>>> and indeed nationwide data shows no apparent benefit. And there are >>>>>>>>>> serious weaknesses in many or most helmet promoting studies. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Could you provide a link to that data, and its analysis? >>>>>>>> Look up cyclist fatality counts since, oh, 1980, the time during which >>>>>>>> helmets became normalized and popular. There is no significant reduction >>>>>>>> in fatalities. And I've given links to several articles describing >>>>>>>> increases in cyclist concussions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The following data is freely available on the Web. It seems strange >>>>>>> that you are unaware of it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Year U.S. bicycle fatality/ 100,000 population >>>>>>> 1980 -- 0.422 >>>>>>> 1990 - 0.345 >>>>>>> 2000 - 0.246 >>>>>>> 2010 - 0.202 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> More Data >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Year Bicycle Deaths No helmet % Deaths Helmet % >>>>>>> 2013 464 62 127 17 >>>>>>> 2014 429 59 118 16 >>>>>>> 2015 439 53 139 17 >>>>>>> 2016 425 50 138 16 >>>>>>> 2017 420 52 126 16 >>>>>>> 2018 525 60 121 14 >>>>>>> 2019 520 61 127 15 >>>>>>> 2020 535 57 168 18 >>>>>>> 2021 599 62 143 15 >>>>>>> 2022 674 62 159 15 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Data source on that? >>>>>> >>>>>> I personally know of two helmeted riders who were killed in >>>>>> traffic between 2013 and 2022 so it is certainly not zero >>>>>> although "what counts?' and 'who's counting?' may be >>>>>> appropriate questions here. >>>>> I deliberately left the source out as Frank so often does. See above >>>>> "Look up cyclist fatality counts since, oh, 1980, the time during >>>>> which helmets became normalized and popular. " >>>> >>>> John, I also very often _do_ list the sources or give direct links to >>>> them. I rarely get comments on them, which leads me to believe that >>>> neither you nor many others ever bother to read the sources. Again, >>>> I'm pretty sure I hold the record for data posted in these >>>> discussions. >>>> >>>> Regarding Radey's request, it seemed obvious that he wanted to >>>> challenge me. In such a case, the onus is on him to do the digging. >>> >>> As I have said before, I mostly agree with you regarding bike helmets. >>> I just think your standards for proof are different for bike helmets >>> than they are for your chosen example, flu shots. >>> >> >> To the best of my knowledge they work in that they reduce the strain on the >> NHS during the winter, which is a busy time anyway. Are their vaccines with >> much better rates? Absolutely but even with its 50/60% ish rate it’s worth >> it. >> >> NHS doesn’t vaccinate anyone but is more targeted, but even so it works at >> a population level. In that to use a COVID term it flatteners the curve and >> stops hospitals being overwhelmed. >> >> Roger Merriman >> > > > heh heh heh > > "Get this jab, not for yourself but rather to protect NHS!" > Ultimately the same thing really, if the hospital and specifically intensive care is overwhelmed ie out of beds, this will have consequences, equally if the vaccine can reduce the chance of needing hospital admissions this also is win win. Uk it’s folks who potentially are at risk group or could jeopardise others ie care workers and so on, though it’s neither mandatory or expected, I do but I tend to respond poorly to viral infections so seems for myself to be the best option. Roger Merriman