CPSC, ANSI, Snell for starters
Pro cyclists wearing helmets
- Thread starter Rebel Ian
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
CPSC, ANSI, Snell for starters
tigger
Über Member
tigger
Über Member
Wikipedia has a page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_cyclists_who_died_during_a_race - it should be fairly simple for anyone who follows the sport seriously to go through it and strike out the deaths that were clearly not head injuries
I'm not offering to, (a) because I don't know that much of the history myself and so it would take me ages to look up each rider, and (b)_because I think it'd be a pointless exercise because the numbers are simply not large enough to be meaningful - but perhaps someone of the general opinion that individual experiences trump "surveys" and "statistics" might want to have a go?
I'm not offering to, (a) because I don't know that much of the history myself and so it would take me ages to look up each rider, and (b)_because I think it'd be a pointless exercise because the numbers are simply not large enough to be meaningful - but perhaps someone of the general opinion that individual experiences trump "surveys" and "statistics" might want to have a go?
tigger
Über Member
Yeah seen that Dan. I've found most of the info on the riders. I'm sorry to say it does not support the "statistics" as they were presented. Of course there were head injuries, both with and without helmets, but many heart attacks and others. I'd offer the view that the spike in this period could be mopre EPO related.
I agree, its too small a sample anyway.
Its important to point out though Dan, as this was offered as compelling "evidence". People could read and rely on this...
I agree, its too small a sample anyway.
Its important to point out though Dan, as this was offered as compelling "evidence". People could read and rely on this...
OK, so take that list and take the post 1999 deaths section and tell me which ones of those would not count? After all that's the region with the slope you are looking to reduce. Then you need to remove the ones that are not directly related to racing incidents e.g the four heart attacks during a race two of which, Ceriani and Neves, Wikipedia has missed.
To get it back on the pre 2000 track you have to reduce Wikipedia's 12 down to just two. Good luck.
Really? I thought it was a humorous point made in response to the "pros wear helmets therefore they must have a good reason for it" argument. As you've said, the numbers are too small to make any sensible decision on that basis as to whether pros have a good safety reason for wearing helmets. (They may of course have access to other data, but I'm not quite paranoid enough to believe they're keeping that data from us)
If it was offered as compelling evidence of anything in either direction, it is 100% failing to compel me.
Ravenbait
Someone's imaginary friend
- Location
- The Seventh Level of Hell
That's an interesting approach to the notion of peer-review. Imagine what would happen if scientists the world over decided that they couldn't be bothered to review each other's work.
"Well, Dr Boffin. I suggest that as it's your data the onus is on you to prove that cigarettes are bad for the health. So let's not waste any more time and agree that your study is utterly useless, shall we?"
Sam
When I originally posted it was triggered by the comment about pro-cyclists and safety and my wondering what evidence there was. What came out completely surprised me both as to the size and suddenness of the change and despite the low numbers the very significant statistical difference.
I posted it originally as an interesting observation in response to the comment because it is. There are lots of caveats such as we don't (or I don't) know the actual helmet wearing rates by year other than there was a riders strike over being made to wear them in 1991 and pivotal changes from the high profile Kivilev and Casartelli deaths in 2003 and 1995 that kind of lined up with the change in slope.
We also don't know the total race miles ridden, the numbers of riders, the numbers of races etc over that period but one would expect them to grow slowly rather than a sudden change. Regardless I think it is an interesting enough observation to trigger questions about what has caused the big rise in the competition death rate over the past decade and is there any association with helmets.
The data itself was collated from a number of sources, not just Wikipedia which for example has missed two deaths in 2004 from heart attacks in competition (interestingly more riders died from heart attacks in and out of competition in 2003/4 than from head injuries in the decade). Only those directly related to racing incidents were retained so e.g. heart attacks were removed. Crash deaths not involving head injuries were not removed on the basis that it was racing safety that was in question. That could be affected by exacerbated injuries or riding behavioural changes (rider faster, taking more risks etc). Restricting it to just head injuries drops the rates but still retains a significant difference between the two periods.
As is often the case in science, it starts with an interesting observation which people then work to explain. I know it has already triggered others with better access to other data sets, to start investigating in more detail both to confirm whether these preliminary indications are right, and if so what it the cause. It may all peter out or it may lead ultimately to changes that could save riders lives.
HTH
It would be a field day for scientific fraud for sure if no one bothered to do their own independent checking of results and just asked the original investigator to do it for them.
david k
Hi
- Location
- North West
dont scientists check their own data first before opening up for others to analyse?
Ravenbait
Someone's imaginary friend
- Location
- The Seventh Level of Hell
Cold Fusion would have been patented by now!
Homeopaths everywhere would be charging Harley Street prices!
Chiropacters could claim freely to treat everything from migraine to piles!
Just imagine what Uri Geller could have got up to!
Gillian McKeith would be a household name and Ben Goldacre would be out of a job.
I'm going to have nightmares tonight
.Sam
They don't already?
tigger
Über Member
Ha ha... its a fair point. I was rather hoping Red Light would have put some sanity check in place before posting. I'm nearly done on the checking front, not sure I can be arsed to finish because as stated it proves nothing other than its worthless - takes twice as long with one hand too. 
It would be easier for me to say that graph showed 15 deaths in 16 years. I could also post a graph showing there were 25 death in the 1900s alone. Or 34 deaths between 1900-14. etc etc. Don't think many pros used helmets then so we can conclude helmets must be saving lives! But I know thats a load of bollocks too!!
It would be easier for me to say that graph showed 15 deaths in 16 years. I could also post a graph showing there were 25 death in the 1900s alone. Or 34 deaths between 1900-14. etc etc. Don't think many pros used helmets then so we can conclude helmets must be saving lives! But I know thats a load of bollocks too!!
- Status
