Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Tom Crispin <kije.remove@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:27:42 +0000
On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 12:29:57 +0000, Peter Clinch
<p.j.clinch@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Peter Clinch wrote:
If you think BHRF is about particularly /not/ wearing then it shows you
haven't read their material very well at all. AFAICT they aim to show
what can genuinely be expected of them, nothing more, nothing less.
As a postscript, before I started to not believe in great helmet
efficacy I went into the library specifically to prove to myself
that my decision to wear one every trip was a good one. So in
other words I wanted to /prove/ that they were good, working from
the original research and with a vested interest in proving they
were good.
After some time I found I couldn't do that. There were gaping
holes in the research saying they were really good. Though the
work that says they're indifferent is far from perfect and isn't an
absolutely safe conclusion IMHO (as a science professional) it's a
damn site less like a teabag than the "helmets are good stuff" as
regards the number of holes.
So apart from one TRL report, how much reading, of full, original
papers published independantly in peer reviewed journals, have you
actually done?
How about basing decisions as to the effectiveness on anecdotal
evidence?
Trevor, Simon Brooke and I have all suffered head injury in the past
three years.
Wearing a helmet in my case and Simon's case would not have saved our
lives as we weren't wearing one, but we both claim that our injuries
would have been less severe had we worn a helmet. Trevor was wearing a
helmet and says that he is pleased that he was.
No one in this group, as far as I know, had claimed that wearing a
helmet has increased the severity of any injury they have personally
suffered.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Rob Morley
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Ian Smith
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- References:
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Grange
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: JMS
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Grange
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: JMS
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Keller
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: delboy
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: delboy
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- From: Peter Clinch
- Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- Prev by Date: Re: Yet another pedestrian hurt
- Next by Date: Michelin Erilium 2 Kevlar - 2miles, then a puncture!
- Previous by thread: Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- Next by thread: Re: Another comment rejected by UCRM moderators!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|