Protection for casual rider

Unicycles and Equipment
41

Re: Protection for casual rider

On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, kington99 <> wrote:
>
> Ian Smith, why are you so forthright with your views on wearing helmets,
> but silent on all other subjects? I don’t believe I have ever seen you
> post on another subject,

Then you haven’t been looking very hard, in my opinion. I think more
research is called for before you make such sweeping statements.

> nor indeed do i believe that I have ever read
> a thread concerning whether we should wear helmets or not without you
> voicing your point of view.

So you’re saying no-one should ever voice any point of view they’ve
ever previously voiced? It would certainly cut down on bandwidth.

Alternatively, why should I not post on matters taht interest and
concern me? Or is it that it’s compulsory to post on matters that
don’t interest me, and about which I know nothing? I’m not sure
which approach you’re advocating.

> I see someone post something along the lines of ‘everyone should wear a
> helmet, it saved my life’ i wonder how long it will be until you post,

If someone posts such nonsense then yes, I try to respond - I don’t
like such statements to be in the public domain without challenge.

regards, Ian SMith

|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ |

42

For what it’s worth, I wear a helmet for some riding particularly muni, where I’ve hit my head loads of times, don’t for some types of riding, like hockey, where I don’t hit my head much, so I probably agree with you as far as helmet compulsion goes. Bike helmets are great for unicycling, because you have all the types of just falling off at slow speed crashes that they’re designed for. For example, I’ve hit my head without a helmet on a couple of times, every time made me feel really dizzy and hurt like mad, I’ve also hit my head several times with a helmet on, and it just glanced off, I certainly ride a lot faster nowadays, yet it doesn’t hurt anywhere near as much when I crash.

But whilst I agree helmet compulsion isn’t right the more you post obnoxious little rants on here every time someone says anything about helmets, and call people stupid, the less anyone listens to what you say. Whilst it might be okay to start ‘l33t flamewarz’ in nerdy groups like the linux kernel list or whatever, it’s just not appropriate to be so rude in a recreational newsgroup like this.

It’s also obviously silly to say that people wearing helmets because it makes them feel safer after they’ve seen head injuries is ‘bad logic’, because you’re failing to understand that wearing protection is an emotional issue as well as a physical issue, wearing helmets because they make you feel safer in a particular situation may be a good idea, even if you’re not likely to have a head injury.

Joe

43

I think helmet and 661 veggie shin wraps are perfect for casual riding.

44

Re: Protection for casual rider

On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, joemarshall <> wrote:
>
> Ian Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Jun 2006, kington99 <> wrote:[color=blue]
> > Alternatively, why should I not post on matters taht interest and
> > concern me? Or is it that it’s compulsory to post on matters that
> > don’t interest me, and about which I know nothing? I’m not sure
> > which approach you’re advocating.
>
> But whilst I agree helmet compulsion isn’t right the more you post
> obnoxious little rants on here every time someone says anything about
> helmets, and call people stupid, the less anyone listens to what you

I don’t think I’ve called anyone stupid. Please will you provide
a reference for where I’ve done such a thing.

> It’s also obviously silly to say that people wearing helmets because it
> makes them feel safer after they’ve seen head injuries is ‘bad logic’,

No it isn’t. If they are claiming there’s a logical reason (“I wear a
helmet because …”) and the logic is completely bogus, why is it
silly to point out that the reason they think is good is in fact bad?
Are you saying if someone believes something that is wrong, it is
obviously silly to try and correct them?

> because you’re failing to understand that wearing protection is an
> emotional issue as well as a physical issue, wearing helmets because
> they make you feel safer in a particular situation may be a good idea,
> even if you’re not likely to have a head injury.

But in practice, wearing something that only makes you feel safer is
probably a very bad idea, because of risk compensation. This is
indeed one of the possible explanations for why injury rates go up
when helmet wearing rates go up.

regards, Ian SMith

|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ |

45

Not necessarily, because even when a helmet-wearing unicyclist risk compensates to the point where they’re pushing their riding way beyond what they can safely do, they still are probably not travelling fast enough to cause a serious head injury while wearing a helmet.

Risk compensation is one of the main reasons I wear a helmet for muni, as it means I can ride flat out through the woods while knowing that if I hit my head on a tree I’m probavly notgoing to do much damage. Likewise, Cathwood may feel that she can ride at 10mph on her Coker with a helmet on, but not have the confidence to ride that fast without it. Cycle helmets are designed for low-speed impacts, and that is what most unicycle crashes are.

46

well, i only wear a helmet for normal riding because i am forced to by the law, under the wheeled recrational vehicle act or whatever it was i couldnt hear the copper over the motorbike he was on, however i will wear a helmet when trying something like a decent sized drop or similar

47

But your point of view is not necessarily the right one, have you concidered the possibilety that you might in fact be wring yourself?
By the way, there is really no such thing as right or wrong only a gray-area defined by different peoples different oppinions. They are just words made up to simplyfy our lives

Enough home-made philosophy now, you say that people who wear helmets because they know its dangerous to crash without one are irrational. I’d say common sense prevails here. WHAT is so bad about falling onto a paved road going 20 km/h (12 mph) if you use a helmet? We all know (or are you going to argue on this too?) that a helmet decreases the risk of head injury. So where are you trying to get at?
I, for one, don’t understand your point.

48

In order to save some time replying to Ian I offer you all a fantastic summary of the argument that you’re about to have and to save Ian some time writing rude responses to everyone.

Joe

49

please stop…

I’m with joe. Enough.

I officially apologize for triggering this flurry by starting this thread and mentioning the word “helmet”. I appreciate the good feedback on injury protection. A pair of 661 4x4’s are definitely in my future…

For someone who has only been on this list for about a week, and am still getting my uni legs back (I rode about 15 feet last night…), I sure have stirred things up.

May all your rides be injury free.

Peace,
Tom

50

I started riding 2 years ago and have always worn a helmet, full finger gloves, and 661 4x4s. When you are just starting out, you fall in wierd ways and at unexpected times. Now I am a much better rider, enjoy muni, and I fall in weird ways at unexpected times. For reference, I am about 5’7" and a medium build (I guess?) and wear size medium 4x4. And thanks for stirring things up, welcome to the forum!

51

Re: Protection for casual rider

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, domesticated ape <> wrote:
>
> Ian Smith wrote:
> >
> > But in practice, wearing something that only makes you feel safer is
> > probably a very bad idea, because of risk compensation. This is
> > indeed one of the possible explanations for why injury rates go up
> > when helmet wearing rates go up.
>
> Not necessarily, because even when a helmet-wearing unicyclist risk
> compensates to the point where they’re pushing their riding way beyond
> what they can safely do, they still are probably not travelling fast
> enough to cause a serious head injury while wearing a helmet.

Exactly, so (as I said) “wearing something that only makes you feel
safer is probably a very bad idea”.

If you think it will protect you, but actually it won’t, and you
consequently ride in such a way that you are more prone to an injury,
surely that’s a bad idea?

regards, Ian SMith

|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ |

52

Re: Protection for casual rider

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, henque19 <> wrote:
>
> Ian Smith wrote:
> >
> >
> > No it isn’t. If they are claiming there’s a logical reason (“I wear a
> > helmet because …”) and the logic is completely bogus, why is it
> > silly to point out that the reason they think is good is in fact bad?
> > Are you saying if someone believes something that is wrong, it is
> > obviously silly to try and correct them?
>
> But your point of view is not necessarily the right one, have you
> concidered the possibilety that you might in fact be wring yourself?

I have, why would you imply I have not?

Presumably ytou think some statement I have made is wrong.
What was it? Which statement do you disagree with?

> By the way, there is really no such thing as right or wrong only a
> gray-area defined by different peoples different oppinions. They are
> just words made up to simplyfy our lives

No, the overall decision may be a grey area, the logic presented was
(as I said) very very wrong.

There’s no fundamental reason why it’s impossible to observe that the
logic is completely wrong, without knowing what the right answer is.
For example, it’s possible to say “the sun will rise in the East
tomorrow, because I just tossed a coin and it came up heads”. Right
answer, totally bogus logic. Similarly, you could make a statement
the truthfulness or otherwise of which is not be known, attribute it
to any old nonsense (be it lucky rabbits feet, plastic hats or tossed
coins) and it would be entirely valid to observe that the logic is
very very bad, without knowing the actual answer.

> We all know (or
> are you going to argue on this too?) that a helmet decreases the risk
> of head injury.

No, we don’t know that. The observed population level statistics are
that when helmet wearing rates increase, injury rates do not fall.
If helmets reduced injuries then as more people wear helmets, fewer
people should get serious head injuries. Unfortunately, that doesn’t
happen. If anything, head injury rates go up. The reasons are not
obvious, and while there are all sorts of possible explanations (risk
compensation, rotational injury, fewer cyclists etc. etc.) there is no
definitive answer yet.

regards, Ian SMith

|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ |

53

Re: Protection for casual rider

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, joemarshall <> wrote:
>
> In order to save some time replying to Ian I offer you all a fantastic
> summary of the argument that you’re about to have and to save Ian some
> time writing rude responses to everyone.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/hz8pt

Actually Joe, you may remember you recently said I’ve been calling
people stupid, and I asked for you to substantiate that claim. I
haven’t yet seen any evidence of that. Are you going to show where
I’ve called anyone stupid?

The reason I ask, you see, is that the summary you highlighted
includes the observation that certain people, rather than address the
points at hand, choose to make baseless accustaions about what others
have said. They might, for example, accuse someone of calling people
stupid. If the person so accused has not in fact done any such thing,
slandering them like that is not very productive. If, of course, they
have said such a thing, it would be easy to simply post the reference,
and everyone will see the truth.

The summary makes the fundamental mistake of assuming that no-one
really cares about the truth. It implies that if someone lies about
you, hey, doesn’t matter. If they claim you said black is white -
doesn’t matter. Unfortunately, I disagree - I think making false
accusations about what others have said is actually of critical
importance.

Surely you can trivially show where I’ve said what you claim.

regards, Ian SMith

|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ |

54

Nope, unless you’re riding in heavy traffic or on the edge of a cliff, it’s a good idea because you can enjoy yourself more and push your limits. If you injure yourself it’s unlikely to be life-threatening, because you’re wearing a helmet and travelling relatively slowly!

Anyway, I agree with about helmet compulsion, but I do think that you could be a bit more polite in your posts. I’m not going to post again in this thread, because the World Cup is on, and because I think Kington99 summed up the helmet issue perfectly well on the first page. Edit: And I also don’t want to get into a ‘quote war’!

55

Hi Spock, I mean Ian,
We’re unicyclists not logicians. If we were logicians we’d hang out on some logic forum or something. You might find good company there. :wink: Maybe that’s illogical. Too bad.

As for the nature of this thread.

What is CASUAL riding any way? Is there a casual way to balance your mass on one wheel while moving from one place to another? Is there casual bloodletting? Casual cult worship? Casual insanity? Unicycling is a passion, it’s it’s own church to some. Nothing casual about it. :wink: jk

I always wear a ton of padding. Helmet, knee and or shin protection, elbow pads, wrist protection. I like riding; I don’t like injuries. I don’t mind wearing the pads at all.

56

Just to change the topic slightly, does anyone ride in sandals?

I would love to ride in sadals cos I hate my feet being constricted and constrained by trainers but I feel a bit nervous about doing this. Anyone had any experience or views on the subject?

Cathy

57

Re: Protection for casual rider

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, domesticated ape <> wrote:
> Ian Smith wrote:
> >
> > Exactly, so (as I said) “wearing something that only makes you feel
> > safer is probably a very bad idea”.
> >
> > If you think it will protect you, but actually it won’t, and you
> > consequently ride in such a way that you are more prone to an injury,
> > surely that’s a bad idea?
>
> Nope,

Personally, I’m not all that keen on pain and prefer not to be
injured. Things that increase my chance of injury are generally bad
things, in my opinion. I’m surprised you believe otherwise.

> unless you’re riding in heavy traffic or on the edge of a cliff,
> it’s a good idea because you can enjoy yourself more and push your
> limits. If you injure yourself it’s unlikely to be life-threatening,
> because you’re wearing a helmet and travelling relatively slowly!

You’re unlikely to have a life-threatening injury regardless of
whether you’re wearing a hat. Remote from cars, it’s rare even for
cyclists at much higher than unicycling speeds to kill themselves.

regards, Ian SMith

|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ |

58

I’m with Joe on this too. If I’d have read that post from a year ago, I woundn’t have become embroiled in this discussion.
Tom, you have no need to apologise. You asked a reasonable question, and probably didn’t expect it to blow up into this broo-ha-ha. No fault of yours.

Ian Smith wrote:

I’m still waiting to see this evidence Ian.

Don’t forget that yes, while pottering about on the cycle path at a walking pace, you may think that nothing will happen, don’t forget that it just takes one idiot on the bike path, be they a rollerblader, BMXer, mountain biker or roadie cyclist (even in some cases down my way, uninsured boy racers on mopeds or minibikes), to plough into you.

I genuinely hope you never get hurt, as I hope none of us on this forum will.
Me? I’ll stick with my helmet, thanks.

59

Ok, I have one question…
Why are we all in here arguing about something and knowing that its not going to lead anywhere but to frustration, when we can all be outside having heaps of fun unicycling?

Answer that, or stop arguing!

60

new argument

Let’s argue about something else.

Red wine is better than white wine.

Discuss :slight_smile:

–Tom