| Re: A Pleasant Helmet Debate
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 17:59:12 -0800, Chalo wrote:
> Dave Salovesh <darsal@example.com> wrote:
>
>> But for a couple of years running, every second time I put it on to JRA
>> I had an accident, whereas I -never- did without it.
>>
>> It must have been a curse upon that particular helmet though.
>
> Perhaps you were wearing that helmet backwards, making you dangerously
> unstable aerodynamically. ;-D
>
> The remedy would be to ditch the helmet and wear a tall Mohawk,
> stiffly molded with gelatin into an effective vertical stabilizer.
> That way folks will know you are a serious cyclist at a glance.
>
> Chalo Colina
Much of the ineffectiveness of helmets may be due to their not being worn
correctly. When worn correctly, there should be no more than 3cm of
forwards-backwards movement of the helmet on the skull, when pushed. This
necessitates doing up the chin-strap very tightly. A bicyclist so
equipped can bask in the glory that he is doing everything correctly for
his safety. However, s/he won't be able to swallow, and will barely be
able to breathe. These problems can be simply overcome by the use of a
portable heart-lung machine towed behind the bicycle for breathing
purposes, and an intravenous infusion strapped to the handlebars for
nourishment purposes. All very simple, really.
A somewhat less cumbersome solution would be for all bicyclists to be
required to have threaded posts implanted into their skulls, onto which
helmets can be bolted firmly.
Peter.
--
This transmission is certified free of viruses as no Microsoft products
were used in its preparation or propagation.
|