> Of course, there is the website http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ that refutes
> the need for helmets when cycling.

It took me a while to figure out what the hell their deal was but I think 
I found it:  from the perspective of current cyclists, what improves 
safety even more than helmet usage is *more cyclists on the road*.  (I 
don't doubt this, and it's one reason I feel safer in New York City.  Cars 
being used to cyclists makes all the difference.)  So from their 
perspective, anything that presents a barrier to entry for cycling makes 
cycling more dangerous, even helmet use.

But most of the site is unforgivably disingenuous.


> And, hey, at least being a woman the article says you're less likely to get
> hit too -- so you'e got that going for you!

I wonder what's safer, a helmet a or a long, blonde, curly wig...



> On 9/22/06, bethany soule   wrote:
>>
>>   I wanted to send out a counter argument to this article claiming that
>> cycling (and we can probably infer skating too, though I guess drivers
>> are often so surprised to see you on the road, they're likely to give
>> you a pretty wide berth) with a helmet is actually "more dangerous":
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/5334208.stm
>> 
>> Check out this report from the NYC DOT on bicycle accidents in the
>> city over the past 10 years. Of 225 fatalities, 97% of the riders were
>> not wearing helmets, and 74% involved a head injury. Drivers may be
>> more reckless around you if you're wearing a helmet (because you look
>> more competent or something) -- but you're still at a much higher risk
>> of serious injury and death without the helmet.
>> www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/episrv/episrv-bike-report.pdf
>> 
>> (One could also conclude from the nycdot's data that nyc is actually a
>> pretty safe place to bike comparatively. The accident rate per million
>> is the same as 'elsewhere' in the country, while there are twice as
>> many cyclists per million out there. (#2 under the 'key findings'
>> section))
>> 
>> Bethany
>>  __._,_.___	Messages in this topic
>>  (
>> 1)  Reply (via web post)
>>  | 
>> Start
>> a new topic
>>  
>>  Messages 
>>  InlineNC.net * InlineNC-subscribe Æ yahoogroups.com
>>  [image: Yahoo! 
>> Groups] 
>> Change settings via the 
>> Web (Yahoo! 
>> ID required)
>> Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily 
>> Digest | 
>> Switch
>> format to 
>> Traditional 
>>  Visit Your Group
>>  | 
>> Yahoo!
>> Groups Terms of Use	 | Unsubscribe
>>  
>>   Recent Activity
>>
>>    -  1
>>    New 
>> Members 
>>
>>  Visit Your Group
>>  
>> SPONSORED LINKS
>>
>>    - High 
>> point 
>>    - Inline 
>> skating 
>>    - Aggressive inline 
>> skating 
>>    - Inline skating 
>> equipment 
>>
>>   Ads on Yahoo!
>> 
>> Learn more 
>> now. 
>> 
>> Reach customers
>> 
>> searching for you.
>>  Y! Toolbar
>> 
>> Get it 
>> Free! 
>> 
>> easy 1-click access
>> 
>> to your groups.
>>  Yahoo! Groups
>> 
>> Start a 
>> group 
>> 
>> in 3 easy steps.
>> 
>> Connect with others.
>>   .
>> 
>> __,_._,___
>> 
>

-- 
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -  search://"Daniel Reeves"

"I cannot overemphasize the importance of good grammar.  What a
crock.	I could easily overemphasize the importance of good
grammar.  For example, I could say: "Bad grammar is the leading
cause of slow, painful death in North America," or "Without good
grammar, the United States would have lost World War II."
   -- Dave Barry, "An Utterly Absurd Look at Grammar"