Pros and Helmets

[ufkacbln]

The question was the one I asked, so a helmet could protect your head in a 25mph crash if you slowed a bit before your head made contact with the hard stuff, do you think I am right or wrong.

If you feel that you have to restrict the question to avoid a fuller debate, then fine.....

Helmets are still poorly designed to perform in the matter you describe, and a contrived and theoretical "if you slowed down a bit" doesn't help that



The point is that if this happens then the chances are you will in fact be accelerating, and not slowing!

So, simply, you are wrong!

 

[swansonj]

PS: @swansonj, allow me to be the first to claim a TMN.

Be my guest. I don't think either of us are having much influence.

 

[screenman]

Accelerating, not sure I get that one.

 

[Jameshopper]

Surely, there are millions of different permutations involved in a cycle accident. One general sweeping statement cannot possibly answer all of them. No-one has ever completed scientific testing across all of those permutations that provides a conclusion one way or the other. If they have, please correct me.
Its entirely possible that in some circumstances, your life may be saved. In other circumstances, it may cause more harm than good.
Studies across populations are all well and good until you're the unfortunate 1 in a million.
Wear it or don't wear it, until it becomes law (if it does) its your life

 

[ufkacbln]

I doubt you would let me get away with an unsupported assertion like this. Any chance of backing this up with some credible evidence?

Read "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre
Read "Death on the Streets" by Robert Davis

 

[ufkacbln]

Accelerating, not sure I get that one.

A new use in the helmet debate for melons!!!

Take a Melon and hold it at a height of six feet, then drop it.

Is is slowing, or accelerating?

 

[MikeG]

You're very good at complaining about how people "don't read your posts". Perhaps, then, you could do me the honour of reading mine. Most particularly my comments on how forensic scientists work. Then apply that comment onto clinicians who lack any detailed knowledge far less accurate measurements on how a particular accident happened and how it could have been mitigated by a helmet.

PS: @swansonj, allow me to be the first to claim a TMN.

None of that makes the slightest reference to the post of mine you quote. Did you quote the wrong post?

 

[MikeG]

Read "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre
Read "Death on the Streets" by Robert Davis

So these two, Goldacre and Davis, provide evidence that Accident and Emergency personnel, including, for instance, Consultants, are:

The problem is that these "medics" are not the best people in ANY particular accident

They are untrained, ignorant and failing to observe their own professional requirement for "evidence based practice"

NEVER the best people to have at an accident? Are untrained? Are ignorant? REALLY?

Nope, I'm calling you on that. You can't back up what you have just claimed on their behalf. Have fun backing up your "untrained" claim for an A&E consultant.

 

[screenman]

A new use in the helmet debate for melons!!!

Take a Melon and hold it at a height of six feet, then drop it.

Is is slowing, or accelerating?

Take a melon, roll it across the floor, which is it doing then.

I can see your point, but I feel you are being extremely selective.

 

[ufkacbln]

So these two, Goldacre and Davis, provide evidence that Accident and Emergency personnel, including, for instance, Consultants, are:


NEVER the best people to have at an accident? Are untrained? Are ignorant? REALLY?

Nope, I'm calling you on that. You can't back up what you have just claimed on their behalf. Have fun backing up your "untrained" claim for an A&E consultant.

Let me remind you of your original statement

I suggest that medics are in a better position than anyone else to comment as to whether or not a helmet may or may not have helped someone in a single particular accident.

I replied and then backed this up at your request backed this up with books for you to read.

Unable to actually dispute this you have completely changed this to an A/E consultant being the best to have at the scene of an accident!

Bizzare and desperate., and no point in trying to back up claims that are merely a fantasy

 

[ufkacbln]

... and even sadder is that you are still wrong!

The best person at accident is a qualified first aider and even better a paramedic.


When I worked Search and Rescue, we very rarely sent out a Doctor, the Midwife and myself got more flying time than the Doctors did!

 

[Dan B]

None of that makes the slightest reference to the post of mine you quote. Did you quote the wrong post?

Someone else did that recently

 

[ufkacbln]

I always understood your distinction. But I didn't bother intervening because I consider that you are wrong in your first premise, that medics are best placed to comment in a specific accident. How on earth is someone supposed to look at a patient with a cracked skull and, drawing on their no doubt extensive knowledge of physiology, biochemistry, pharmacology etc, pronounce in whether a given amount of a given grade of expanded polystyrene would or would not have made a significant difference to the extent of damage to the skull?

That is one point, the blatant hypocrisy another illustration is the selective way these "skills" are applied

If they were applied evenly then it would be more acceptable, but this analysis never seems to occur in the majority of head injuries, simply the minority that occur to cyclists

 

[screenman]

That is one point, the blatant hypocrisy another illustration is the selective way these "skills" are applied

If they were applied evenly then it would be more acceptable, but this analysis never seems to occur in the majority of head injuries, simply the minority that occur to cyclists

I think crash helmets have been introduced in other parts of day to day life, we just do not talk about them much.

 

[screenman]

Simple physics and mechanics isn't your strong point then...

Not too bad at it, just that when falling off of a bike another body part is likely to hit the floor before the head does, this will cause deceleration. So although coming off at say 25mph your head is likely to be going a lot slower by the time it comes in contact with the ground. Very few people fell of just before the finish line in a bunch sprint and won, if they did then Cav would have a far greater collection of wins as he does now.