14% Higher Chance Of Injury When Wearing Helmets

[Dan B]

Is your world flat?

My personal experience is that the world is flat.

 

[Dan B]

On average, the world is flat

 

[Dan B]

(That's statistics)

 

[StuartG]

That would be somewhere over my head

I never thought you were below average Adrian ...

 

[screenman]

Is your world flat?

I do live in Lincolnshire.

Not sure what that has got to do with my opinion.

 

[screenman]

You're misusing the availability heuristic. Which is a depressingly common trait. It's better to understand the statistics.

Please explain, I have got rid of all the members of staff I had that could read long words.

 

[screenman]

Odd county Lincoln, all the hill is in the one place.

Covering an area of 216 sq miles, with a maximum height of 551 feet.

 

[StuartG]

Not sure what that has got to do with my opinion.

Opinion based on personal experience can be dangerously misleading.

It is natural, from casual observation, to believe the world is flat. Indeed to believe otherwise is counter-intuitive. However, the evidence by more detailed observation and experimentation is that the earth is nearly spherical is very strong. Or overwhelming. That it goes around the sun and not vice versa.

You say your opinion was fixed twenty years ago based on personal experience and ignores the evidence gathered about helmets which did not even exist in their present form at that time. In other words don't bother yourself with facts. Intuitive is what you believe, counter intuitive stuff or evolving evidence is off your agenda. Hence the question of whether you believe Lincolnshire is flat.

Whoooooops

 

[screenman]

Opinion based on personal experience can be dangerously misleading.

It is natural, from casual observation, to believe the world is flat. Indeed to believe otherwise is counter-intuitive. However, the evidence by more detailed observation and experimentation is that the earth is nearly spherical is very strong. Or overwhelming. That it goes around the sun and not vice versa.

You say your opinion was fixed twenty years ago based on personal experience and ignores the evidence gathered about helmets which did not even exist in their present form at that time. In other words don't bother yourself with facts. Intuitive is what you believe, counter intuitive stuff or evolving evidence is off your agenda. Hence the question of whether you believe Lincolnshire is flat.

Whoooooops

Phew! got it.

Well maybe I did not point out that I have had experiences in more recent years that have helped me form my opinion. How's that?

 

[StuartG]

Well maybe I did not point out that I have had experiences in more recent years that have helped me form my opinion. How's that?

Human intuition and learning from experience are wonderful and successful processes. However, they are not foolproof.

When one scrutinises the overall statistics on helmets there is a consensus amongst professional statisticians that the evidence does not show a significant benefit and several disbenefits. It is not possible to definitively balance these up and it depends how you feel about personal and national benefit and wish to encourage a mass take up of cycling to the best continental levels. The statistics do point to processes (training!) which will significantly reduce your risk of collisions and injury. If all the money that had been spent on helmets had been spent on training then many lives would not have been wasted or damaged.

The bottom line is helmets are not important in cycling safety. The belief they are is the real danger.

 

[screenman]

Is the fact I spend a lot of time cycling in single track area's amongst tree's etc, of any use.

 

[screenman]

Any use for what?

Making a mess of the stats.

 

[StuartG]

Is the fact I spend a lot of time cycling in single track area's amongst tree's etc, of any use.

If so and low lying branches are a hazard then a helmet may be more use than TMN's insecure wooly hat that would be left hanging behind. The more important issue is that if you are using a helmet to knowingly justify riding in a hazardous area and belief it will more than compensate for the extra risk - then how confident are you about that?

Wearing a helmet does affect risk compensation. People are very bad at judging risk (without supporting statistics). Personally I prefer to ride safely without rather than dangerously with. I think the stats are with me on average outcomes. But see you in heaven or the other place (CS2?).

 

[ufkacbln]

That would be somewhere over my head

 

[learning2cycle]

Sorry, where is the link to the study?

The question asked on the OP.

Hilly problem solved --> http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/problems-with-hills-rain.147609/#post-2910028

also forced to cancel all and any cycling trips as there are no good gps solution presently --> http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/gps-navigation-advice-please.147607

I don't think this forum has helped solved any of the problems I've asked so far................. ='(