metro article on helmets

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

lukesdad

Guest
Something tells me that, if you were genuinely interested, you'd have done some digging yourself. As you have not, I treat your suggestion that health professionals can not distinguish between a sports injury and a pedestrian injury with (imho - a fairly healthy degree of) ridicule.

But ... I'm open to persuasion. Show me evidence that health professionals treat and record injury on a rugby field as a "pedestrian" injury, and I will happily review my judgement of your contribution.
It was a straight question, thanks for the straight answer.

Perhaps someone else would care to answer maybe from not quite a deffensive position as our friend here.

I really should not need to dig. I thought you'd have this sort of info at your fingertips.
 

lukesdad

Guest
I don't think I am the authority on questions involving peds, and never claimed to be.

I don't know the answers to those questions off the top of my head (haha!), but I'll see if I can find out.

Fair enough, and thank you for taking the time to find out :thumbsup:
 

MontyVeda

a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
Yesterday i was round at a friends house, they have two young girls, aged 5ish and 3ish. When they asked if they could play on the street (quiet cul de sac in sleepy village), their dad said "Yes but don't go past my van and watch out for cars." So they got their bikes (one a balance bike) out of the garage and off they went to play on the street. What was refreshing to me in this day and age is that daddy didn't insist on strapping their heads into a helmet beforehand. Neither of them died. :thumbsup:
 

lukesdad

Guest

There are some interesting points in there. Exposure time being one that caught my eye. As far as I understand it the comparison between Peds and cyclists has been made in these threads in kilometres travelled. I have pointed out before the time factor , unfortunately other than gaz nobody could grasp the difference including the usual suspects on this thread. Now I wonder why that could be ? Could it be that it would actualy indicate that cycling would be potentialy more hazardous than travelling by foot ?

More questions I know, but hey, you guys like answers. So I'm expecting no shortage of them.
 
There are some interesting points in there. Exposure time being one that caught my eye. As far as I understand it the comparison between Peds and cyclists has been made in these threads in kilometres travelled. I have pointed out before the time factor , unfortunately other than gaz nobody could grasp the difference including the usual suspects on this thread. Now I wonder why that could be ? Could it be that it would actualy indicate that cycling would be potentialy more hazardous than travelling by foot ?

Or could it be that you haven't thought fully about the actual data in the report. Can you see the vital bit of information you missed?
 

lukesdad

Guest
1810169 said:
So, assuming that cycling is more hazardous than walking, how do you quantify the cut offs that say whether or not the activity warrants helmet wearing? Where do you fit car use in your scale?
There is only one discipline in either activity that I partake in where there is a cutoff that warrants the use of a helmet. Car use and accident rate are reffered to in the link ben provided above. You really need to get over this car thing Adrian not all head injurys are caused by cars certainly not in peds.

Now back to my questions.
 

lukesdad

Guest
Or could it be that you haven't thought fully about the actual data in the report. Can you see the vital bit of information you missed?

How unlike you to answer a question with another question :whistle: Go on I'm all ears. Meanwhile you of all people should have the answer to my original questions
 

lukesdad

Guest
1810204 said:
Head injuries suffered by car occupants. Are they sufficiently numerous and/or severe to justify helmet wearing?

A diversion when the going gets tough I like it :thumbsup: We're talking about peds and cyclists remember ? It seems to be a bone of contention throughout this thread now lets get to the bottom of these figures shall we.
 
How unlike you to answer a question with another question :whistle: Go on I'm all ears. Meanwhile you of all people should have the answer to my original questions

You've already got the two parts of the puzzle - all you need to do is join them together to get the answer that you are missing.

Yes, I could answer your questions within the confines of what data is available, but I'm waiting to see how much you actually know yourself first.
 

lukesdad

Guest
You've already got the two parts of the puzzle - all you need to do is join them together to get the answer that you are missing.

Yes, I could answer your questions within the confines of what data is available, but I'm waiting to see how much you actually know yourself first.

Oh its a game ! Silly me. If I knew I wouldn't be asking would I ?

The thing is for people to make an informed descision they need to be informed of the facts, thats all the facts, not just the ones you choose to reveal.
 
Oh its a game ! Silly me. If I knew I wouldn't be asking would I ?

The thing is for people to make an informed descision they need to be informed of the facts, thats all the facts, not just the ones you choose to reveal.

Well since if any of us produce any facts that are not in favour of helmets, you will accuse us of being selective, I am simply suggesting that you produce them yourself so all those people get the unredacted facts that they need to make their informed decisions.
 

lukesdad

Guest
FFS its got nothing to do with not being in favour of helmets. As you well know I only wear a helmet mtbing, that leaves between 6000 and 10 000 miles anually when I don't.

I asked some simple questions, the allotment man decided he try and get clever, then ( except for ben to his credit) you and Adrian decided you'd follow suit. This seems to be a reoccuring factor in most helmet debate threads, that is of course untill you start to ridicule some poor misfortunate who stumbles in, unaware of the ambush awaiting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom