As above, you could have saved time and googled, but here we are at home
The thread here is a classic where a professional racing accident i s used to justify helmet use
Last edited:
Would any cycle helmet have helped here?
- Thread starter al78
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
As above, you could have saved time and googled, but here we are at home
The thread here is a classic where a professional racing accident i s used to justify helmet use
This was an error on my part, I had mixed tow posters and hence the post was incorrect
What I should have posted was:
Not at all.there is a difference between an attack and a challenge
It was the simple case of someone making the absurd claim (in spite of the evidence otherwise) that cycle helmets offer facial protection
Then we had an infantile tantrum and name calling, and further unfounded claims that cycle helmets reduce facial injuries
It is simply challenging dangerous and unevidenced claims that are misleading.. this is a necessary step and not an attack on the individual but a challenge to a misleading claim
If someone was to accept this claim and decide to wear a helmet expecting facial protection then they have been misled and lied to
Everyone entitled fully to a different view, but they are not entitled to make unfounded, unevidenced clams about the effectiveness of helmets that fly in the face of the evidence
What I do find ironic is that the only one who is calling people who don' t agree with them infantile names was the one making these claims
I would really be interested in evidence for the claims that helmets protect the face and let's put the discussion on an evidenced footing instead of tantrums
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
I said that I wear a helmet "for just these sort of incidents". I was speaking in generalities. I didn't say for these specific incidents. I said these sort of incidents. There's a big difference.
As you said above, I "may not have received an injury"... Which, of course, means that I might have received an injury. Your own statement proves my point. thanks very much.
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
A single thread doesn't exactly equate with "frequently".
How many would you like?
Or we could go for sharing?
One piece of evidence that professional use is used to justify helmet use for normal cyclists, and in turn gain a single piece of evidence that helmets prevent facial injury
Then we can take turns...
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
The statement about helmets and facial injuries wasn't made by me either mate. You're not having much luck on that one, are you?
As for your use of the word "frequently", I kinda thought you would be showing me one example after another as it happens so, you know, frequently.
Mugshot
Cracking a solo.
Yes Lemond you may have, you may not have, but that is not what you are saying, you are saying that the helmet prevented injuries, you have no way of knowing that, so you really need to stop saying it. You were not speaking in generalities, there is not a big difference, you were and are attempting to use entirely spurious examples to demonstrate something which you patently cannot without being totally disingenuous.
BTW, when you're riding down a path with low hanging branches why not try riding at a pace that allows you to both observe your surroundings for potential dangers and take avoiding action should you spot any, you'll probably find that you'll suffer no injuries if you don't keep riding into things, helmet or not.
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
Right back at you.
You have no way of knowing that my helmet didn't prevent me from injury. To claim you know otherwise is just plain stupid.
And thanks for the advice on how I ride my bike. But seeing how you yourself have banged your head on a branch too, it's probably wise that I don't listen to you too carefully.
Seeing how you clearly don't ride at an appropriate pace either, you might want to consider wearing a helmet
Care to point out where I said it was you??
Mugshot
Cracking a solo.
Did you forget that I didn't injure myself or are you choosing to ignore that? The stupid thing here is your insistence that it was the wearing of a helmet that prevented the injuries, you have no way of knowing that, can you honestly not see the point or are you just trolling now? I am quite prepared to say that in some circumstances a helmet may prevent injuries, although in your path example and plenty of others those potential injuries could be prevented simply by riding in a manner which is appropriate for the conditions, you however cannot bring yourself to admit that wearing a helmet is not actually essential for the prevention of injuries, either you are actually convinced or you are determined to try to convince yourself that helmets are an essential safety item when riding a bike. Your post with your nonsense examples is also an attempt to convince others that it is necessary to wear a helmet, you quite clearly wish to suggest in that post that you would have, not may have, suffered injuries without it, (despite the fact you didn't even bump your head in one of them) but if you would only be honest enough to admit it I have proven to you that in both of your examples you absolutely cannot show that your helmet prevented you from sustaining injuries.
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
if you didn't think it was me, why ask me to provide you with evidence about it?
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
It staggers me that you cannot see the double standards in your own words.
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
Just read them. It's pretty bloody obvious.
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
try harder.
Lemond
Senior Member
- Location
- Sunny Suffolk
Goodie gumdrops.
- Status
