All, particularly Seth and whoever ekoral is: Sorry, I did not mean to sound snarky. I really think Jan can do many, if not all, cyclists a great favor by intelligently analyzing the data pro and con. AFAIK, there is no comprehensive, statistically competent review of the primary statistics.
If statistically it can be proven that helmets (1) do good and (2) are more useful on a bike than, say, walking or driving, I want to know because I will start wearing one. I am skeptical but not stupid (not *reeeeel* stoopid, anyway). Anyway, I hope we can discuss this with a minimum of heat and a maximum of light and I again apologize for my abruptness. On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:26 AM, PATRICK MOORE <bertin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 1:00 AM, ekoral <eko...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If you look at this website: http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm , you can > see that of all bicycle deaths in 2008, 91% were not wearing helmets, > while the other 9% were. I think that's a rather clear statistic. You > may have a low chance of actually getting in an accident on your > bicycle compared to lets say, driving a car, but if you do, it looks > as though helmets will save your life. > > This is exactly the kind of statistic that needs careful scrutiny: as > stated, it means nothing. Please go forward, Jan. > -- Patrick Moore Albuquerque, NM For professional resumes, contact Patrick Moore, ACRW at patrickmo...@resumespecialties.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
