All Forums Forum List Register Members List Calendar Bike Rack Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Cycling Mob > Road Biking Forums > Road Bike Chat > Re: published helmet research - not troll


Reply
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-17-2004, 01:07 PM   #41 (permalink)
Just zis Guy, you know?
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 01:48:42 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].edu>:

>Both of those are helmet skeptic sites. To be fair, I must also point
>you to the rabidly pro-helmet "Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute",
>[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] This "institute" (named Randy Swart) is working to make
>it illegal for anyone of any age to ride a bike at any time without a
>helmet. I quote: "The Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute supports
>carefully drawn mandatory helmet laws covering all age groups."


And Randyt thinks that stopping using the Thompson, Rivara and
Thompson figure of 85% efficacy would be "unhelpful" despite it's
being derived by comparing entirely different populations and
ascribing all the difference to helmet use. In other words, he is a
True Believer :-)

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 01:08 PM   #42 (permalink)
Just zis Guy, you know?
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

> He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
>disparages it.


No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 01:08 PM   #43 (permalink)
Just zis Guy, you know?
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

> He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
>disparages it.


No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 01:08 PM   #44 (permalink)
Just zis Guy, you know?
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

> He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
>disparages it.


No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 01:08 PM   #45 (permalink)
Just zis Guy, you know?
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

> He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
>disparages it.


No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 01:08 PM   #46 (permalink)
Just zis Guy, you know?
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 06:09:37 GMT, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bill Z.)
wrote in message <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>:

> He posts a link to Randy's site for "balance" but immediately
>disparages it.


No need - Randy does his own auto-disparaging.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 02:26 PM   #47 (permalink)
John Forrest Tomlinson
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:37:51 -0400, Mitch Haley <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>I read in my local paper (The Lansing State Journal) that riding without
>a helmet makes you 14 times more likely to get killed.


Assuming that's true, what does that matter if the odds of being
killed are extremely small.?

JT
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 02:26 PM   #48 (permalink)
John Forrest Tomlinson
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:37:51 -0400, Mitch Haley <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>I read in my local paper (The Lansing State Journal) that riding without
>a helmet makes you 14 times more likely to get killed.


Assuming that's true, what does that matter if the odds of being
killed are extremely small.?

JT
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 02:26 PM   #49 (permalink)
John Forrest Tomlinson
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:37:51 -0400, Mitch Haley <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>I read in my local paper (The Lansing State Journal) that riding without
>a helmet makes you 14 times more likely to get killed.


Assuming that's true, what does that matter if the odds of being
killed are extremely small.?

JT
  Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2004, 02:26 PM   #50 (permalink)
John Forrest Tomlinson
 
Posts: n/a
Re: published helmet research - not troll

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 10:37:51 -0400, Mitch Haley <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>
wrote:

>I read in my local paper (The Lansing State Journal) that riding without
>a helmet makes you 14 times more likely to get killed.


Assuming that's true, what does that matter if the odds of being
killed are extremely small.?

JT
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Add this thread to:  Tag This Thread Tag This Thread  Submit to Clesto Clesto  Submit to Digg Digg  Submit to Reddit Reddit  Submit to Furl Furl  Submit to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us  Submit to Spurl Spurl


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
Style Design by vBStyles.com

Directory of Sports Blogs



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21