How can wearing a helmet offer no protection from injury?

[lukesdad]

People have quoted all sorts of reports, if you give me a link I'll do what I can to find out what information is available.

To expect me to search out the links to reports most commonly quoted on here and to look up who has funded them, seems a bit - well, lazy?

Ill save you the effort it comes from one of 3 sources Public Private or Charity.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

O

Well Ive covered this before, The australian for example. The fall in cycle use after they became mandatory was farcical. In particular the drop in teenage use.

The numbers pure and simlpe could not be construed as being representative.

I think you will need to be bit clearer than the " AUSTRALIAN" one .If you have it to hand, who were the authors?

 

[benb]

Who do you think pays the researchers Mad@urage.

Sorry I forgot they do it for the good of humanity.

Translation: The evidence contradicts my deeply held beliefs, so I must discredit the evidence in any way I can.

 

[lukesdad]

Translation: The evidence contradicts my deeply held beliefs, so I must discredit the evidence in any way I can.

....and what deeply held beliefs would they be ?

 

[lukesdad]

O
I think you will need to be bit clearer than the " AUSTRALIAN" one .If you have it to hand, who were the authors?

The link is in one of the threads I dont have it to hand, if you are that interested I suggest you go look for it yourself.

 

[benb]

....and what deeply held beliefs would they be ?

That cycle helmets are effective.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

The link is in one of the threads I dont have it to hand, if you are that interested I suggest you go look for it yourself.

Of course I'm interested, I need to make sure I'm refering to the same paper that you have read!

 

[lukesdad]

That cycle helmets are effective.

I have never nor will I ever say that. Untill that is I believe it is so.

 

[lukesdad]

Of course I'm interested, I need to make sure I'm refering to the same paper that you have read!

Go find it then

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Of course I'm interested, I need to make sure I'm refering to the same paper that you have read!

I am guessing it is this one. http://www.cycle-helmets.com/

 

[benb]

I have never nor will I ever say that. Untill that is I believe it is so.

Then I apologise. Why then are you dismissing the evidence?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Go find it then

Is it this one http://www.cycle-helmets.com/?

 

[lukesdad]

That cycle helmets are effective.

Helmets offer limited protection only.

 

[lukesdad]

Then I apologise. Why then are you dismissing the evidence?

Im not dismissing it I am questioning it there is a subtle diiference. Remember it is a lot easier to disprove something than it is to prove something.

I can disprove for instance tyre innertubes are safe or your PC I cannot however prove they are safe.

 

[Mad at urage]

Ill save you the effort it comes from one of 3 sources Public Private or Charity.

Which of those sources introduces a bias towards proving that helmets are of limited value and which can introduce a bias towards proving helmets protect the wearer?