"Helmet usage should not be elevated among implementation of infrastructural efforts to improve bicycling safety." Pretty sure I was doing the exact opposite.
In any event, I hope your tin-foil hats work well to prevent brain injuries, fellas. Glad to know our GoTriangle employees are so on top of it...
Please see http://www.cycle-helmets.com/Elvik2011_helmet_reanalysis.pdf
Key conclusion: "When the analysis is updated by adding four new studies, the protective effects attributed to bicycle helmets are further reduced. According to the new studies, no overall effect of bicy- cle helmets could be found when injuries to head, face or neck are considered as a whole."
Also: "The findings of this study are inconsistent with other meta- analyses, in particular a Cochrane review published in 2009. However, the study inclusion criteria applied in the Cochrane review are debatable."
A final note from the article: "On balance, the evidence suggests that: (1) soft shell helmets offer less protec- tion than hard shell helmets, and (2) soft shell helmets appear to have become more common over time." From my unscientific observations, most bicyclists wearing helmets wear soft-shell helmets.
Aa 2000 meta-analysis that has been seriously questioned in the intervening 16 years is not "an excellent article on the issue." More importantly, helmet usage should not be elevated among implementation of infrastructural efforts to improve bicycling safety.
(Full disclosure: I work with Erik but not for him.)
The degree to which helmets provide protection is indeed a point of debate, Erik. And there is consensus that helmets do create some safety problems for cyclists and, of course, that helmets are not a panacea for bike safety issues. (No one has really ever argued they are.) We need a better bike infrastructure, and we need better education among both cyclists and drivers to make the roads safer for everyone.
In the meantime, helmets do provide a necessary and helpful barrier between your skull and the street. And here's "an excellent article on the issue": http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…, which concludes: "This review included five well conducted case‐control studies and found that helmets provide a 63–88% reduction in the risk of head, brain and severe brain injury for all ages of bicyclists. Helmets were found to provide equal levels of protection for crashes involving motor vehicles (69%) and crashes from all other causes (68%). Furthermore, injuries to the upper and mid facial areas were found to be reduced by 65%, although helmets did not prevent lower facial injuries. The review authors concluded that bicycle helmets are an effective means of preventing head injury."
Suggesting that "provide virtually no actual safety benefits for cyclists" is completely irresponsible.
Signed, someone who has banged his head more than once while cycling, thankfully while wearing a helmet.
How so? There is no consensus in the scientific community about the safety benefits of wearing a helmet while cycling. I understand that runs counter to what you've been told your whole life, but it's true.
Here's an excellent article on the issue: http://www.cnet.com/news/brain-surgeon-the…
Better yet is the video embedded in that article - start around 4:00 mark for the parts about how safe bike helmets really are: https://youtu.be/07o-TASvIxY
Wow, that's some real C-grade sophistry from a transportation official, Erik.
You mean they are going to do some real police work as opposed to....locking up homeless people for looking poor.
DJ17 McCory has never been right on anything....He has his head so far up duke powers ass and he cant see for all the BS...Every time he opens his mouth he tells another lie.......2016 will be good riddance to that useless taint.
Helmets provide the illusion of safety, but provide virtually no actual safety benefits for cyclists. In fact, safety outcomes would improve more for pedestrians and motorists if they wore helmets than cyclists. So if you think cyclists should wear helmets, do you also think motorists and pedestrians should too?
McCory=One term asshole.....see ya bye bye....
hanks for the data about the N&O reorg..
For an article that talks about how to bicycle safely in the city, it is incongruous that the biker is not wearing a helmet!
Thanks for mentioning the Carolina Kayak Club. We do have beginning, intermediate, and advanced trips all the time, and instructional classes, too. But we're geared for flatwater rivers, lakes, and tidal estuaries. Whitewater kayakers around the Triangle join the Carolina Canoe Club. Despite their name, they love kayaking down rivers with lots of whitewater. And it's all good!
I'm no staunch conservative and have no strong opinion of the judge but I don't think that statement means what the author is implying it means.
Was it the best way to put that sentinent? I'd say probably not. But I think it makes much more sense that the nuances of an unfamiliar culture can be difficult to adapt to make more sense when talking about parenting and custody than a blatantly racist or culturally insensitive statement.
What I do know from someone who has worked in his office is that he is fair, fastidious (some might say takes a long time to make decisions but they're well thought out when he does), and can smell crazy. The things I think you want in a Family Court judge.
Just another case of a religious idiot who thinks his Bible trumps science.
Vote them ALL out this November!
No scientific proof that transgenders are trapped in the wrong body.., climate change, no ransom paid, no confidential email on the servers, didn't know it was not approved, Does anyone notice a common theme to those statements from the leadership in D.C. ? Lies / half truths. All to keep the Democrats in power. America, wake up. Take back your country. Vote Trump 2016. Any other vote is just a continuation of the present crash course.
DJ17 - Your referenced professor is also an unabashed conservative who is on the BOD of a right wing think tank (and I know "right wing think tank" is an oxymoron)
i am embarrassed to live in the same country as this moron and his ilk.
Ha! Of course McCrory tries to say that Monmouth is a terrible pollster despite the fact that they're one of six pollsters out of several hundred to earn an A+ rating from 538, who are arguably more knowledgeable about quality of pollsters than anybody else.
Thanks, Paul! Our apologies. This link has been fixed.
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation