Why the NEED to Lecture Gearless stranger on an EUC?

[Marty Backe]

2 hours ago, winterwheel said:

This has been my experience as well. I've always been a sports guy though, so used to falling in ways that don't cause too much damage.

I do a lot of riding around town without a helmet (when I'm going to the store, etc.), so I'm certainly not a "helmet all the time" kind of guy. But based on some rather bad falls that I've had, I never buy the argument that "I know how to fall". When you are blindsided you often have zero opportunity to prepare in anyway.

The many times that I've been thrown from a wheel when going straight and have some sense of the impending fall, I've handled hitting the ground just fine. But the few times a pedal caught or something else totally unexpected caused me to to hit the ground, I've been injured or by pure luck I was unscathed.

[Patton250]

17 minutes ago, Darrell Wesh said:

 

Well... which is true? we have two studies that are conflicting. 

@LanghamP perhaps your study didn’t take into account that more riders will mean more accidents by probability 

 

Just plain ole common sense will tell you which one is accurate 

[who_the]

Helmets save lives.

Especially at speeds now common among EUCs (~ 50kph). 

Here are actual links to actual studies with actual data you can choose to read or ignore:

Cranial and spinal injuries in motorcycle accidents: A hospital-based study, Özdöl, Gediz, Aghayev, 2019 – A detailed report of motorcycle accident-associated central nervous system injuries is provided. The use of protective equipment, such as helmets, significantly reduced the rate of cerebral injury and death.

https://www.journalagent.com/travma/pdfs/UTD-46116-CLINICAL_ARTICLE-OZDOL.pdf

The Effect of the 1992 California Motorcycle Helmet Use Law on Motorcycle Crash Fatalities and Injuries, Kraus, Peek, McArthur, et al, 1994 — After implementation of the helmet use law, statewide motorcycle crash fatalities decreased by 37.5%, from 523 fatalities in 1991 to 327 in 1992, more than 37%, and an estimated 92 to 122 fatalities were prevented. Motorcycle fatality rates were reduced by 26.5%, from 70.1 per 100,000 registered motorcycles in 1991 to 51.5 per 100,000 in 1992. Head injuries decreased significantly among both fatally and nonfatally injured motorcyclists.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/382651

Helmet use and motorcycle fatalities in Taiwan, Keng, 2005 – Without helmets, the number of motorcyclists killed in 2001 would have jumped by 51%. The estimated proportion of helmeted motorcyclists has increased from 71 to 78% between 1999 and 2001, suggesting that helmet use is rising after the implementation of mandatory helmet law in 1997. Also, helmets significantly reduce the likelihood of head and neck injuries in a crash by 53%, and lead to a 71% reduction in the probability of death caused by head and neck injuries.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457504001009

Motorcycle helmet use and injury outcome and hospitalization costs from crashes in Washington State, Rowland, Rivara, et al, 2011 – Although unhelmeted motorcyclists were only slightly more likely to be hospitalized overall, they were more severely injured, nearly three times more likely to have been head injured, and nearly four times more likely to have been severely or critically head injured than helmeted riders. Helmet use is strongly associated with reduced probability and severity of injury, reduced economic impact, and a reduction in motorcyclist deaths.

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.86.1.41

Other notable studies

69 percent of motorcycle fatalities in Arizona involved riders without helmets (Liu, 2019): https://repository.arizona.edu/handle/10150/633440

Here's the 2001 study (Branas, Knudson) I think others may have referenced which shows lower raw death rates in states without helmet laws. However, the study also says that "after controlling for other factors that affect motorcycle rider fatalities... death rates in states with full helmet laws were [emphasis added] shown to be lower on average." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457500000786

This study (Piantini, Pierini, 2019) finds that 80% of motorcycle fatalities occur at speeds above 50kph (~31 mph), with head injuries the most prevalent: https://trid.trb.org/view/1630036

Does adding attachments to approved helmets increase injury risk? Study (Leavy, Beck, 2018) says no. https://trid.trb.org/view/1603380

[Elliott Reitz]

1 hour ago, Darrell Wesh said:

 

Well... which is true? we have two studies that are conflicting. 

@LanghamP perhaps your study didn’t take into account that more riders will mean more accidents by probability 

 

 

14 minutes ago, who_the said:

Helmets save lives.

... bla bla bla... OPEN SOURCE THE RAW DATA OR ITS JUST ANOTHER POLITICAL PILE OF #### just like Man Made Global Warming.

What I found out when I did my research and sold 500 copies of my book http://edans.org/Choose/choose.htm, was that helmet manufacturers were deleting the data from the internet and lobbying for legislation to force sale of their products.  Even the UN was pushing for laws, and some of the pushers wanted to prohibit motorcycles all together.

Quote

 

Laws in states requiring helmets are very annoying to motorcycle riders – especially harley riding USA loving people who cherish their freedoms.  The pro-helmet lobby includes helmet manufacturers, anti-motorcycle people (fearful and fundamentalist opposers of individual sovereignty), news companies such ABC World News, doctors, and insurance companies.  Reality is not what these lobbies preach with their slanted statistics.  Here's some better data.

The following is the justification of Bill Number A1956A pending in the New York legislature (provided to me by Assemblyman Robert J. Warner of the 124^th District who supports the bill):

The "Federal Aid Highway Act of 1975" abolished the power of the Department of Transportation to withhold highway safety funds for noncompliance with mandatory helmet laws.  Since then, thirty-two states have repealed their helmet laws, with the exception of California, which never had one.  Included in this number are such neighboring states as Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maryland, Delaware, New Hampshire, Maine, and Ohio, making New York law inconsistent with regional policy.

Statistics from NYS Motor Vehicle accident reports show the percentage of fatalities per number of accidents has not decreased as expected, but has actually increased by a small percentage since New York State required helmet usage.

The State Police of Maryland reported that, within the first 6 months of repeal, motorcyclist fatalities decreased by 30%.  The State of Rhode Island reported a 166.7% increase in fatalities in 1971 when their helmet regulation was in effect, but a 40% reduction in fatalities in 1979 when such regulation had been repealed.

Helmets-are an unnatural weight upon the head of the rider and radically increase cranial temperatures.  Helmets severely restrict peripheral vision and significantly reduce hearing.  No helmet, regardless of cost or design, is capable of resisting impact stresses above 13 m.p.h., as Federal Department of Transportation testing has evidenced, and, in lateral skids, helmets deteriorated at 2 1/2 m.p.h. The choice of when and where to wear the helmet would best be left up to the person operating the motorcycle, as is the case in other states.

I've been riding for 25 years.  7 of those years I lived in New Hampshire without a helmet law.  It's such a free and wonderful feeling to have the wind in my hair.  So who are you to require me to wear a helmet?  When I had a choice I did wear it for warmth sometimes, like when I rode in the snow. 

Here's more research to de-bunk the notion that helmets save lives, published on the ABATE of Arizona web site at http://www.primenet.com/~abate/library/library.htm:

The data used for this comparison was obtained from the 1994 Motorcycle Statistical Annual, Motorcycle Industry Council, Inc., 1994. The state motorcycle accident statistics were divided between states with a mandatory helmet law and those without.

The only variable used in this comparison is a mandatory helmet law. The results show that accident and fatality rates are higher, overall, in states with mandatory helmet laws. The total number of accidents and fatalities are also higher in these same states.

Comparing fatalities to registrations, Mandatory states average 6.61 fatalities per 10K registrations while Voluntary states average 5.63 fatalities per registration.   That's a 17% increase in the fatality rate induced by mandatory helmet use.  Similar math shows a 15% increase in reported accidents.

James.Arnold@anu.edu.au: 1993 data comparing registrations to fatalities between states with and without mandatory helmet use shows a 17.6% higher fatality rate in Mandatory states, and highly significant correlation calculation c² ₁  of 14.24, which exceeds the 0.01% level of significance. Were wearers and non-wearers recognizable (in optional states), one would expect the results to be even more spectacular and persuasive!

http://www.primenet.com/~abate/library/hmtlawst.htm: While helmet law states have 61% of all the registered motorcycles (2,457,637), they have recorded 64% of all accidents (52,955) and 66% of all fatalities (1,575), a significantly greater number of both accidents and fatalities.

http://www.primenet.com/~abate/library/hlmt_kil.htm:  K. Peter Krantz with the Department of Forensic Medicine at the University of Lund, Sweden, noted that ring fractures of the base of the skull were present in 21 out of 132 cases of motorcyclists whom he studied. Seventeen of these riders were wearing a helmet. Three riders suffering ring fractures of the base of the skull, and two riders who suffered disruption of the junction of the head and neck, did not show any sign of head impact, except for minor abrasions of the chin strap. These injuries are due to the result of a centripetal movement, owing to decreased velocity of the body in relation to the head.

Then there are even more obscure situations like my own.  I recently had a bee collide with my forehead.  Instead of bouncing off it slipped inside the helmet and stung me.  I had an allergic reaction that could have been fatal. Thus I'm tempted to ride without a helmet even thought it's still illegal.  My hope is that a jury would understand and exonerate me. Which leads to the FIJA thinking.  That is the Fully Informed Jury Association, http://www.fija.org.  Check that one out for yourself on the Internet.  It basically says you have a moral obligation to vote your conscience on a jury, and not just simply follow instructions of the judge.

Another side on helmet lobby activity.  Helmets are being studied and pushed for auto safety. 

A foreign study  http://www.globalx.net/ocbc/nigel.html concludes "Wearing helmets in cars has been proved more effective in preventing serious injury than cycle helmets, but promoting car helmets is likely to meet heavy opposition, writes Nigel Perry". 

I can concur with that conclusion since a car has a full windshield.  Wind resistance from the helmet and helmet weight won't contribute as much to accident rates in cars as they do on motorcycles.  Still I want my right to choose.  So much for custom of women going to the hairdresser.  Note the slant toward reducing fatalities in accidents that have already occurred.  On a motorcycle, that is too late.

So what do we do?  The best safety on a bike is to ride with more skill.  Thus the best thing to do is to learn to ride sliding and jumping on the dirt, or don't ride.

For those of us who do ride, help us repeal such stupid laws.  If we can't motivate our legislators then the courts will do.  It's important to the safety of riders that the public become more educated about the fallacy of helmets.  I've noticed that some people are riding without helmets in NY without getting stopped.  Some laws do die by non-enforcement too.

 

 

[LanghamP]

2 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

... which is true? we have two studies that are conflicting. 

@LanghamP perhaps your study didn’t take into account that more riders will mean more accidents by probability

Let me go dig up the NHTSA study.

Scroll to the may 2018 study, which shows a 18:1 versus 13:1 injury to fatality for helmet vs unhelmet.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety/motorcycle-safety

There might not be as big a contradiction as one initially thinks, simply because helmets don't protect the body. Higher speed crashes would show riders having a better outcome if they wore a helmet, because they'd wear other protection too.

Personally, I think Florida, with its emphasis on stroads, makes bicycles, mopeds, scooters, and motorcycles exceptionally dangerous, and that obviates studies done there. Ridiculous to wonder if helmets work when we have high speed collisions at Florida intersections in the first place. 

What did that pot smoker guy from Florida always say about riding motorcycles?

Anyway, should you wear a helmet?

Definitely if you're driving a car or riding a motorcycle, because people crash those vehicles a lot.

Maybe not if you're on a bicycle, because bicyclists rarely crash on their own, and drivers hit helmeted riders since they see the helmet and pass closer (risk compensation).

[Elliott Reitz]

1 hour ago, LanghamP said:

Let me go dig up the NHTSA study.

(propaganda to inflict helmet laws, and ultimately prohibit riding anytyhing)

What did that pot smoker guy from Florida always say about riding motorcycles?  (LINK??? That might be interesting)

Anyway, should you wear a helmet?

... not if you're on a bicycle, because bicyclists rarely crash on their own, and drivers hit helmeted riders since they see the helmet and pass closer (risk compensation).

Helmets are hell, and they kill people by breaking their necks and causing them to crash.

[LanghamP]

29 minutes ago, Elliott Reitz said:

Helmets are hell, and they kill people by breaking their necks and causing them to crash.

The perceived need to get somewhere fast is what kills vehicle drivers.

How often do shopping cart drivers kill each other? Not often compared to road users. Speed kills, and beyond a certain impact a helmet won't do much, but if your inpacts are expected to be lower than that, probably best to wear a helmet.

[Graniteone]

I don’t get all preachy about wearing protective gear but have experienced first hand the benefits of wearing quality safety gear. I ride adventure motorcycles many thousands of miles each year on and off road. I have experienced unforgettable accidents traveling at high speed by no fault of my own. Helmets work, no question! Quality textiles work! We all get to choose what risk we are willing to accept and play by our own rules. I hope nobody goes out and gets into any kind of mishap because it sucks. I have also seen first hand what folks who wore no gear look like after bad crashes and it ain’t pretty. Play the tough guy role all you want but the realty of your choice may or may not catch up to you but if it does and you didn’t plan well you will regret it. 

[Darrell Wesh]

5 hours ago, who_the said:

Helmets save lives.

Especially at speeds now common among EUCs (~ 50kph). 

Here are actual links to actual studies with actual data you can choose to read or ignore:

Cranial and spinal injuries in motorcycle accidents: A hospital-based study, Özdöl, Gediz, Aghayev, 2019 – A detailed report of motorcycle accident-associated central nervous system injuries is provided. The use of protective equipment, such as helmets, significantly reduced the rate of cerebral injury and death.

https://www.journalagent.com/travma/pdfs/UTD-46116-CLINICAL_ARTICLE-OZDOL.pdf

The Effect of the 1992 California Motorcycle Helmet Use Law on Motorcycle Crash Fatalities and Injuries, Kraus, Peek, McArthur, et al, 1994 — After implementation of the helmet use law, statewide motorcycle crash fatalities decreased by 37.5%, from 523 fatalities in 1991 to 327 in 1992, more than 37%, and an estimated 92 to 122 fatalities were prevented. Motorcycle fatality rates were reduced by 26.5%, from 70.1 per 100,000 registered motorcycles in 1991 to 51.5 per 100,000 in 1992. Head injuries decreased significantly among both fatally and nonfatally injured motorcyclists.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/382651

Helmet use and motorcycle fatalities in Taiwan, Keng, 2005 – Without helmets, the number of motorcyclists killed in 2001 would have jumped by 51%. The estimated proportion of helmeted motorcyclists has increased from 71 to 78% between 1999 and 2001, suggesting that helmet use is rising after the implementation of mandatory helmet law in 1997. Also, helmets significantly reduce the likelihood of head and neck injuries in a crash by 53%, and lead to a 71% reduction in the probability of death caused by head and neck injuries.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457504001009

Motorcycle helmet use and injury outcome and hospitalization costs from crashes in Washington State, Rowland, Rivara, et al, 2011 – Although unhelmeted motorcyclists were only slightly more likely to be hospitalized overall, they were more severely injured, nearly three times more likely to have been head injured, and nearly four times more likely to have been severely or critically head injured than helmeted riders. Helmet use is strongly associated with reduced probability and severity of injury, reduced economic impact, and a reduction in motorcyclist deaths.

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.86.1.41

Other notable studies

69 percent of motorcycle fatalities in Arizona involved riders without helmets (Liu, 2019): https://repository.arizona.edu/handle/10150/633440

Here's the 2001 study (Branas, Knudson) I think others may have referenced which shows lower raw death rates in states without helmet laws. However, the study also says that "after controlling for other factors that affect motorcycle rider fatalities... death rates in states with full helmet laws were [emphasis added] shown to be lower on average." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457500000786

This study (Piantini, Pierini, 2019) finds that 80% of motorcycle fatalities occur at speeds above 50kph (~31 mph), with head injuries the most prevalent: https://trid.trb.org/view/1630036

Does adding attachments to approved helmets increase injury risk? Study (Leavy, Beck, 2018) says no. https://trid.trb.org/view/1603380

Unfortunately none of these studies are relevant to EUC’s. 

Like I said prior, handlebars predispose you to higher likelihood of hitting your head. There have been no studies because they don’t have mass used handsfree vehicles to compare it to. 

Riding an EUC puts you in a natural forward facing position with hands free and available to assist, as well as standing up with legs pre-tensed and available to step out. No other vehicle does this. Skateboards put you in an awkward sideways stance and the board running out from under you predisposes you to head injuries from falling backwards/sideways. 

This is so significantly different from a bicycle or motorcycle that I don’t want to hear or see any more crash statistic studies about those two and how they correlate to an EUC. All we have is anecdotes for this new territory. 

 

Edited August 21, 2019 by Darrell Wesh

[Darrell Wesh]

6 hours ago, Marty Backe said:

I do a lot of riding around town without a helmet (when I'm going to the store, etc.), so I'm certainly not a "helmet all the time" kind of guy. But based on some rather bad falls that I've had, I never buy the argument that "I know how to fall". When you are blindsided you often have zero opportunity to prepare in anyway.

The many times that I've been thrown from a wheel when going straight and have some sense of the impending fall, I've handled hitting the ground just fine. But the few times a pedal caught or something else totally unexpected caused me to to hit the ground, I've been injured or by pure luck I was unscathed.

This.

It’s why I can’t comprehend people trying to practice falling. Whether you roll or slide is more likely dependent on the gear you have on then any martial arts training you’ve done. 

[Patton250]

4 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

Unfortunately none of these studies are relevant to EUC’s. 

Like I said prior, handlebars predispose you to higher likelihood of hitting your head. There have been no studies because they don’t have mass used handsfree vehicles to compare it to. 

Riding an EUC puts you in a natural forward facing position with hands free and available to assist, as well as standing up with legs pre-tensed and available to step out. No other vehicle does this. Skateboards put you in an awkward sideways stance and the board running out from under you predisposes you to head injuries from falling backwards/sideways. 

This is so significantly different from a bicycle or motorcycle that I don’t want to hear or see any more crash statistic studies about those two and how they correlate to an EUC. All we have is anecdotes for this new territory. 

 

 It’s funny when I was reading his post I said to myself Darrell is going to come back and say that’s fine for motorcycles but has nothing to do with EUC’s. Lol

[Patton250]

5 hours ago, Graniteone said:

I don’t get all preachy about wearing protective gear but have experienced first hand the benefits of wearing quality safety gear. I ride adventure motorcycles many thousands of miles each year on and off road. I have experienced unforgettable accidents traveling at high speed by no fault of my own. Helmets work, no question! Quality textiles work! We all get to choose what risk we are willing to accept and play by our own rules. I hope nobody goes out and gets into any kind of mishap because it sucks. I have also seen first hand what folks who wore no gear look like after bad crashes and it ain’t pretty. Play the tough guy role all you want but the realty of your choice may or may not catch up to you but if it does and you didn’t plan well you will regret it. 

 Extremely well said. Also extremely true.  I remember some friends in the early 90s when seatbelt use got seriously heated up, arguing that wearing a seatbelt was more dangerous then not. 

[LanghamP]

2 hours ago, Patton250 said:

 It’s funny when I was reading his post I said to myself Darrell is going to come back and say that’s fine for motorcycles but has nothing to do with EUC’s. Lol

It's crazy think, man! Of course it's relevant, because both activities (2 and 1 wheel kind) involve crashing. While on an EUC you might be more likely to stay upright (I personally think the bicyclist has a better chance of staying upright during a crash, but for others the opposite might be true), you're still tumbling if your pedals get caught, and in that situation a helmet provides a better outcome.

[winterwheel]

14 hours ago, Marty Backe said:

I do a lot of riding around town without a helmet (when I'm going to the store, etc.), so I'm certainly not a "helmet all the time" kind of guy. But based on some rather bad falls that I've had, I never buy the argument that "I know how to fall". When you are blindsided you often have zero opportunity to prepare in anyway.

The many times that I've been thrown from a wheel when going straight and have some sense of the impending fall, I've handled hitting the ground just fine. But the few times a pedal caught or something else totally unexpected caused me to to hit the ground, I've been injured or by pure luck I was unscathed.

It's not so much knowing how to fall, maybe that's bad wording. I agree there's often no time to contemplate a solution while flying through the air; it's more about having useful automatic reflex responses to protect yourself. It could be complete crap, for sure, just feels that way to me.

Ultimately my view is if you ride defensively you don't have anything to worry about. If, once you know your way around your wheel, you want to push things then you get to decide if and how to protect yourself.

[who_the]

10 hours ago, Darrell Wesh said:

Unfortunately none of these studies are relevant to EUC’s.

True, but I posted to give context to the question of whether helmets reduce or enhance risk of injury in crashes at all, which was somehow being questioned. Also, the Piantini spe ifically describes 50kph as a speed threshold for significantly increased risk of head injury and death. 

[Hsiang]

12 hours ago, winterwheel said:

It's not so much knowing how to fall, maybe that's bad wording. I agree there's often no time to contemplate a solution while flying through the air; it's more about having useful automatic reflex responses to protect yourself. It could be complete crap, for sure, just feels that way to me.

That is exactly how one "learn how to fall" just as a martial artist, practice the same set of motion until it becomes reflex. The same can be done with falls.

I always land on my right side, even my violent z10 fall where I found my self on the ground bloodied before realizing it, I chipped my right front tooth.

Also, I define public consensus as whatever law is on the book, if there isn't a law requiring bicycle helmet. as an adult I felt that it's my right to choose if I want to wear a helmet or not, I am sure people would be greatly annoyed if i.walk down the street telling people not to smoke.

[Mike Sacristan]

5 hours ago, Hsiang said:

That is exactly how one "learn how to fall" just as a martial artist, practice the same set of motion until it becomes reflex. The same can be done with falls.

I always land on my right side, even my violent z10 fall where I found my self on the ground bloodied before realizing it, I chipped my right front tooth.

Also, I define public consensus as whatever law is on the book, if there isn't a law requiring bicycle helmet. as an adult I felt that it's my right to choose if I want to wear a helmet or not, I am sure people would be greatly annoyed if i.walk down the street telling people not to smoke.

Totally agree. I practiced falling years ago. When the time comes though I fall like a pancake.
My 16X should arrive today though. When I tried one last week I got a tilt at 43kmh and oscillation at 47kmh.
So it looks like I am going to practice falling haha. I will gear up for this though as the 16X will have to learn my trust.

No law in Sweden either regarding helmet. Law requiring a bike bell however. Which I always wear.

Here are some more comments from Reddit.
Perhaps they can post pictures of themselves so I can tell them if they are overweight or not. Then I can give them some diet tips, exercise tips, etc.
They might be endangering their health.

 

[ir_fuel]

On 8/21/2019 at 2:18 AM, Elliott Reitz said:

What I found out when I did my research and sold 500 copies of my book http://edans.org/Choose/choose.htm, was that helmet manufacturers were deleting the data from the internet and lobbying for legislation to force sale of their products.  Even the UN was pushing for laws, and some of the pushers wanted to prohibit motorcycles all together

So after Big Pharma we now have Big Helmet.

Ok.

[Patton250]

 

7 hours ago, Hsiang said:

That is exactly how one "learn how to fall" just as a martial artist, practice the same set of motion until it becomes reflex. The same can be done with falls.

I always land on my right side, even my violent z10 fall where I found my self on the ground bloodied before realizing it, I chipped my right front tooth.

Also, I define public consensus as whatever law is on the book, if there isn't a law requiring bicycle helmet. as an adult I felt that it's my right to choose if I want to wear a helmet or not, I am sure people would be greatly annoyed if i.walk down the street telling people not to smoke.

 

1 hour ago, Mike Sacristan said:

Totally agree. I practiced falling years ago. When the time comes though I fall like a pancake.
My 16X should arrive today though. When I tried one last week I got a tilt at 43kmh and oscillation at 47kmh.
So it looks like I am going to practice falling haha. I will gear up for this though as the 16X will have to learn my trust.

No law in Sweden either regarding helmet. Law requiring a bike bell however. Which I always wear.

Here are some more comments from Reddit.
Perhaps they can post pictures of themselves so I can tell them if they are overweight or not. Then I can give them some diet tips, exercise tips, etc.
They might be endangering their health.

 

I think we can all agree that what another man does with his body is nobody’s business. I am against all helmet laws. I am for total freedom. Believe me you don’t get any more freedom oriented then me.  I am against most laws. You don’t want to hear my views on government interference with freedom. Trust me. LOL. But some of the reasoning you guys have to justify for yourselves to not wear safety equipment is confusing at best and something I’m too polite to say here at worst.  Let me put it this way. Had my son said something similar to what you two just said we would’ve had one heck of a conversation.  If I were you guys I would stick with “it’s nobody’s business what I do with my head” rather than try to explain to all of us how you are going to ninja yourself out of a brain trauma during an accident.  It’s actually kind of embarrassing.  I really didn’t expect that kind of an explanation out of two older gentleman.  Under 25 years old possibly, a teenager definitely, but certainly not over 30 years old. This thread has gotten weird. 

Edited August 22, 2019 by Patton250

[RoadRunner]

1 hour ago, Mike Sacristan said:

My 16X should arrive today though

Awesome, you will love it specially with the new FW. It rides like a champ.

[ir_fuel]

On 8/21/2019 at 5:10 AM, Elliott Reitz said:

Helmets are hell, and they kill people by breaking their necks and causing them to crash.

The only way to break your neck with a helmet is when you are strapped in a race car and doing a high speed crash, whereby the seatbelts hold your entire body, shoulders included in place and your head including helmet is thrown forwards. That's why HANS devices are mandatory now (and I'll never get in a race car without them).

If you claim that you break your neck because your heavy helmet bent your head in a certain way on impact, I wonder what the head would have looked like without a helmet.

 

But then again, after browsing that scientific masterpiece that you wrote, I don't think it's very useful to have a discussion based on facts with you about these things:

Quote

Helmets severely restrict peripheral vision and significantly reduce hearing.

No they don't. Unless you are using a car helmet on a motorcycle. And most certainly not open face helmets.

 

Quote

No helmet, regardless of cost or design, is capable of resisting impact stresses above 13 m.p.h., as Federal Department of Transportation testing has evidenced, and, in lateral skids, helmets deteriorated at 2 1/2 m.p.h

That's just a lie. 

Quote

Then there are even more obscure situations like my own.  I recently had a bee collide with my forehead.  Instead of bouncing off it slipped inside the helmet and stung me.  I had an allergic reaction that could have been fatal. Thus I'm tempted to ride without a helmet even thought it's still illegal.  My hope is that a jury would understand and exonerate me. 

You could opt for a full-face helmet with closed visor maybe?

And then some statistics that don't make sense at all

Quote

Comparing fatalities to registrations, Mandatory states average 6.61 fatalities per 10K registrations while Voluntary states average 5.63 fatalities per registration.   That's a 17% increase in the fatality rate induced by mandatory helmet use.  Similar math shows a 15% increase in reported accidents.

What do registrations say, if those people leave their bikes at home?

Quote

Wind resistance from the helmet and helmet weight won't contribute as much to accident rates in cars as they do on motorcycles.

Oh really?

 

And let's not get started about the nonsense you wrote about why seat belts, air bags or car insurance shouldn't be mandatory. 

 

What a point to make on why poor people shouldn't pay car insurance while driving cars:

Quote

Next, why should you expect a welfare or a low income person to pay for an accidental scratch in your corvette?  Shame on you for that (unless you are actively working to repeal such inhumane laws).

When I ride a motorcycle I take my own risk on the whole situation with my health and safety as well as my property.  The idea that our property is safe if we can blame someone else for its destruction is destructive to our freedoms.

If you want to drive a Corvette and have insurance against accidental damage then buy your own insurance and leave me alone!  I'll skip the insurance altogether thank you very much.  Yes I'll drive carefully.

So someone crashes into your car and is to blame, but hey "it's your risk, your loss!" so you just pay up for it. Not their problem.

 

I'm sorry, but for me you have zero credibility in this thread.

[ir_fuel]

11 minutes ago, Patton250 said:

If I were you guys I would stick with “it’s nobody’s business what I do with my head” rather than try to explain to all of us how you are going to ninja yourself out of a brain trauma during an accident. 

I think there is a term for it, but I can't remember it. People who fall and don't get hurt will say it's because of their skills. People who fall and do get hurt will say it's because of lack of protective equipment (and will be indirectly blamed because of "lack of falling skills" by the other party, even if they would be polite enough not to say it out loud).

I completely agree with your statements. If you want to ride your EUC dressed as Borat, it's your right to do so. If I want to ride mine dressed like a knight from the middle ages it's my right too, but giving "logical" arguments against protective equipment makes no sense imo. Just say you are willing to take the risk, just as all of us here are willing to take the risk to ride an EUC and not a bicycle or (the safest) a car.

[Patton250]

5 minutes ago, ir_fuel said:

I think there is a term for it, but I can't remember it. People who fall and don't get hurt will say it's because of their skills. People who fall and do get hurt will say it's because of lack of protective equipment (and will be indirectly blamed because of "lack of falling skills" by the other party, even if they would be polite enough not to say it out loud).

I completely agree with your statements. If you want to ride your EUC dressed as Borat, it's your right to do so. If I want to ride mine dressed like a knight from the middle ages it's my right too, but giving "logical" arguments against protective equipment makes no sense imo. Just say you are willing to take the risk, just as all of us here are willing to take the risk to ride an EUC and not a bicycle or (the safest) a car.

Yes.  I think we can all agree it’s rude to walk up to a stranger and ask them why they’re not wearing safety equipment. It’s more than rude it’s wrong.  But this thread feels more like a conversation of men in their early 20s at a drinking party. 

 

 

[Nic]

Anyone choosing not to wear a helmet should try headbutting the ground without a helmet to see if they still think its a good idea. If they are going to be riding at low speed (10 mph or less) in traffic free areas (not on the road) then the risk is pretty low, so it might be alright, but it comes down to your own risk appetite. Its much easier to be injured in a fall than you think and this becomes increasingly likely as you get older.

[Mike Sacristan]

2 hours ago, Mike Sacristan said:

Totally agree. I practiced falling years ago. When the time comes though I fall like a pancake.

1 hour ago, Patton250 said:

I really didn’t expect that kind of an explanation out of two older gentleman.  Under 25 years old possibly, a teenager definitely, but certainly not over 30 years old. This thread has gotten weird. 

Haha I think you misunderstood me.
I am 100% sure that I will NOT be able to ninja myself out of a fall. Both times I have fallen I was teleported to the ground in 0.001 seconds.

8 hours ago, Hsiang said:

Also, I define public consensus as whatever law is on the book, if there isn't a law requiring bicycle helmet. as an adult I felt that it's my right to choose if I want to wear a helmet or not, I am sure people would be greatly annoyed if i.walk down the street telling people not to smoke.

The quote right above is what I meant I agree with.

1 hour ago, RoadRunner said:

Awesome, you will love it specially with the new FW. It rides like a champ.

Phew! Thanks! I'm almost dying of anxiety from the 16X threads lol.

 

Edited August 22, 2019 by Mike Sacristan