Ontario case-control study

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

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
I appreciate that English may not be their first language, but you're right. The prose is weird and the 'science' execrable.
Glad it's not just me then ....
I'm hoping somebody smart here can explain it to me.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Not my "point". just asking for a clarification.

Are these head injuries less painful, less traumatic or have less effect on family than those incured by cyclists, why not prevent them as well after all....none of it counts for a bean on the day that despite all this you do still actually fall off and start augering head first towards the floor.

Just wondered if you could explain why these head injuries are acceptable and not worth preventing as well?
To clarify, my pleasure.

Leaving aside helmets a moment to concentrate on your statement. All those things are all well and good, but if you're serious about safety you play every card in the deck - you don't cherry pick a few things, or pass the onus onto things over which you have no control.

I'm not saying lids do or don't work - ill leave that to your own conscience. I am saying don't sit about waiting for jam pie in the sky driver awareness schemes to arrive instead of taking safety seriously.
 

Licramite

Über Member
Location
wiltshire
ok , if we accept that a helmet will not protect you from say 99.9% of all causes of death or injury in the world

- why were they invented if they are so utterly irrelevant ?
 

threebikesmcginty

Corn Fed Hick...
Location
...on the slake
I look like a boiled egg on a bike without my helmet on.

6771583871_f3af5c89b2_z.jpg
 
ok , if we accept that a helmet will not protect you from say 99.9% of all causes of death or injury in the world

- why were they invented if they are so utterly irrelevant ?

... or if we accept that they save from injuries and are so relevant, why limit the benefit to the group that benefits least?
 

Licramite

Über Member
Location
wiltshire
... or if we accept that they save from injuries and are so relevant, why limit the benefit to the group that benefits least?

well actually lots of people wear helmets in all sorts of situations so the myth that they provide some protection does seam to have worked. - but of course they are all fooled. - as we all know - and can prove in extensive studies - that they don,t. - Haig(it might have been French) who objected to helmets in ww1 was clearly right.

I do wish you would read the knocked off my bike forum and you will see this crap about its more dangerous going up and down stairs and it being dangerous to ride in traffic is a myth as cycling is so safe - is what is , lots of theoretical crap , as it don,t mean a thing when you have been hit by a car. - cyclists are as vulnerable as pedestrians to traffic accidents - and pedestrians aren't traveling a 5-20mph before they head butt the floor - and they still get serious head injuries from doing it - so add 20mph to the impact and tell me a helmet isn't going to help. - of course we know it isn't .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom