And that, folks, is why the helmet zealots should be spending some tiny fraction of their money on promoting better de-icing or studded tyres or some other actual crash prevention measures instead of head-only mitigation devices.Wish I'd worn my helmet on my elbow when I came down on black ice this morning OWEEEE
She had already suffered major facial injuries, lost a bunch of teeth and been rendered unconscious when her head hit the road, so you could argue that a helmet might have lessened the effect of those injuries, given that that's what helmets are supposed to do.So what's the relevance of a helmet? Did the car trap her head? And does no-one mention that helmet manufacturers warn they don't protect against cars?
Helmets are supposed to prevent unconsciousness now, are they? I thought some manufacturers explicitly warned they aren't sufficient to prevent that or concussion.She had already suffered major facial injuries, lost a bunch of teeth and been rendered unconscious when her head hit the road, so you could argue that a helmet might have lessened the effect of those injuries, given that that's what helmets are supposed to do.
The irony of that was particularly striking when I read the road.cc article on. It seems to have more detail than the BBC and from the description of the accident & injuries I really doesn't look to me like the helmet would have made any difference. It seems like one of those "common sense" statements that her doctors made but I'm not convinced.Had the school not had a helmet policy she would have not been late (not being able to find her helmet) most likely not rushed to school, avoided the accident altogether, and been much better off.
“As I braked, my bike stopped, but I didn’t. I flew over the handlebars of my bike and landed in front of the car. The driver didn’t see me and, spotting a gap in the traffic, moved forward over me. Her son was sitting in the passenger seat and saw me fall so it didn’t take long for her to realise that something had happened.”
Maisie sustained three breaks in her pelvis, a broken collarbone, major facial injuries and the loss of seven teeth.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but helmets are intended to lessen the impact forces sustained in a low-energy contact between the head and a solid object, such as might occur when falling off a bike.Helmets are supposed to prevent unconsciousness now, are they?
Changes to car design in the 1950's wouldn't account for much difference. No such thing as crumple zones back then.Flying Dodo said:Presumably the steady decline in deaths from 1950 is simply due to cars themselves being better built, with the steady increase in crumple zones and other features? As it can't be that the standard of driving has got better!
There's no reason to be nasty to children.Emotive rubbish? Not from the point of a young girls who's life was saved by wearing one.
Are you going to write to her to let her know how she was spouting rubbish ?
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|Compulsory Insurance and VED||Advocacy & Cycling Safety||77|
|Plumbing help, listen to my toilet flush. Or Just watch the soft close lid.||CC Cafe - General Chat||17|
|Ireland’s transport minister backs compulsory hi-visibility gear for cyclists||Advocacy & Cycling Safety||5|
|G||"compulsory age-appropriate retesting every 3 years once a driver turns 70" - Petition||Advocacy & Cycling Safety||34|