Re: Helmet efficacy test

On 3/27/2025 1:25 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 3/27/2025 7:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 3/26/2025 10:46 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 3/26/2025 3:32 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:

On 3/26/2025 12:06 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

>
On average, bicycling is safer than walking by all those metrics.
You obviously don't believe that,

>
I don't? My, how kunich-esque of you.

>
Perhaps you should explicitly state your positions. As it is, you now
seem to be implying that you do think bicycling is safer than
walking. Yet you apparently think that bicyclists get great value
from special protective hats, but pedestrians don't need them. Those
two points seem inconsistent.
>
So am I misinterpreting your views? What exactly are your views?

>
My view is that helmets work. Wear them if you feel you need to extra
protection. Don't wear them if you don't feel that need.

 
That explains your personal choice, based on your "view" and your
"feel." But that doesn't explain your statement "I've always counseled
people riding on public roadways or riding for performance to wear
helmets." In fact, "Don't wear them if you don't feel that need" sounds
quite opposite.

>
It goes like this:
"I almost always wear a helmet. If you're riding in traffic or for
performance I would advise you to also, but it's your choice".
>
No contradiction there at all.
>

I often discuss actual data when I see that people's "feelings" are
belied by good data. That doesn't mean you're not allowed to wear what
you like. But it is certainly true that some personal ideas and
"feelings" are objectively incorrect.

>
You've interpreted data to support your position, I've interpreted data
to support mine. The difference is that I'm right :)