Page 7 of 8

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 9:29am
by amediasatex
I make no judgement on the mis-remembering, I do it all the time, (which is why it's important to refernce and check these things!) i was just tickled by the magnitude of the difference ;-)

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 11:12am
by Brucey
Image

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 11:16am
by kwackers
Cugel wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:An expert explained that forgetting is necessary to create space for new memories


There was a New Scientist article a while back that was a series, really, of sub-articles all about the various aspects of memory as well as various findings concerning it's operation in humans. It's a slippery beast, the memory; and also a morpher, starting in one shape but often assuming several others as the years go by.

Being as how the rascal is always trying to either trip us up or please us by becoming what we prefer happened rather than what did, I am wary of mine. It's too easy to make up a nice story, which is what all history is really, including our personal history. "Based on a true story". A very fat oxymoron, that!

These days I ask my memory for some proof. Often it gives a shrug or a leer then shuffles off to make up some more stuff.

Cugel

I read that same article.
What was funny was the concept that the more often you recall a memory the more it morphs.

It's not too surprising as anyone confronted with old photos from years ago realises.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 5:37pm
by Syd
Cugel wrote:
.... And you only fall off 'cos your head's too hot in the hat. Oh yes you do!

Cugel

Evidence? Or anecdotal?

If the former then supply please.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 6:31pm
by Cugel
Syd wrote:
Cugel wrote:
.... And you only fall off 'cos your head's too hot in the hat. Oh yes you do!

Cugel

Evidence? Or anecdotal?

If the former then supply please.


I have measured the helmeted head temperature of 74.7 cyclists just before they fell off and it was 0.59 degrees warmer than an average of unhelmeted unheated cyclist that I picked at random. Does that answer your question? :-)

The scientific method is always best and I use it for everything, even selecting which 5 bananas to choose from a bunch of 8.

Cugel

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 7:07pm
by Syd
Cugel wrote:
Syd wrote:
Cugel wrote:
.... And you only fall off 'cos your head's too hot in the hat. Oh yes you do!

Cugel

Evidence? Or anecdotal?

If the former then supply please.


I have measured the helmeted head temperature of 74.7 cyclists just before they fell off and it was 0.59 degrees warmer than an average of unhelmeted unheated cyclist that I picked at random. Does that answer your question? :-)

The scientific method is always best and I use it for everything, even selecting which 5 bananas to choose from a bunch of 8.

Cugel

Are those numbers in Fahrenheit or Centigrade? If Fahrenheit it doesn’t seem particularly high and if Centigrade I would be genuinely surprised that either could reach that temperature without skin burns.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 7:08pm
by Bonefishblues
Bad Cugel.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 9:58pm
by Cugel
Syd wrote:
Cugel wrote:
Syd wrote: Evidence? Or anecdotal?

If the former then supply please.


I have measured the helmeted head temperature of 74.7 cyclists just before they fell off and it was 0.59 degrees warmer than an average of unhelmeted unheated cyclist that I picked at random. Does that answer your question? :-)

The scientific method is always best and I use it for everything, even selecting which 5 bananas to choose from a bunch of 8.

Cugel

Are those numbers in Fahrenheit or Centigrade? If Fahrenheit it doesn’t seem particularly high and if Centigrade I would be genuinely surprised that either could reach that temperature without skin burns.


Helmeted cyclists often have burn marks from where their plastic rubs on the head, especially if they are those weaving sorts that wriggle about on the saddle and wander in the road rather than maintaining their line, as the badly-fastened hat wobbles about. Sometimes the helmet will rub off the hair in patches. leading to a false diagnosis of alopecia!

There is further evidence that hot helmet heads result in a degree of brain-cook, such that the wearer makes mental errors such as believing a cycling helmet saved their lives, whether they've fallen off or not. Others admire Boris or Trump, believing all they promise! Oh yes they do.

Cugel, an independent researcher.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 10:00pm
by Cugel
Bonefishblues wrote:Bad Cugel.


I yam only being naughty! The bad ones are posting elsewhere, about other things.

Cugel, affected by the heat and too much dandelion & burdock.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 23 Jul 2019, 10:48pm
by The utility cyclist
simonhill wrote:Much as I don't want compulsion, it does beg the question, who would enforce it?

When did you last see a Copper on the street?

As per Australia, low hanging fruit, NSW sees millions of dollars in fines for no helmet use, prosecutions for close passes since the introduction of the law there barely a handful. The motoring backers are extremely powerful and work at the very highest levels, punishing the weak that do little harm to society is standard fayre these days :x

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 24 Jul 2019, 5:19am
by Cyril Haearn
The weak who do NO harm?
..
I do not wear a Helmut but I wonder if most on here do wear them, but do not bother arguing because the opponents are so active. Who knows? Nobody!

Thought of starting a poll, but only a few dozen vote, does that mean 28 000 dinnae have opinions?

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 24 Jul 2019, 6:25am
by Syd
Cugel wrote:.....Others admire Boris or Trump, believing all they promise! Oh yes they do.

Cugel, an independent researcher.


Now that’s unfortunately one thing i can believe and it’s not confined to cyclists, helmeted or otherwise

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 24 Jul 2019, 12:02pm
by Cugel
Syd wrote:
Cugel wrote:.....Others admire Boris or Trump, believing all they promise! Oh yes they do.

Cugel, an independent researcher.


Now that’s unfortunately one thing i can believe and it’s not confined to cyclists, helmeted or otherwise


In truth my research had only three samples so may be rejected by the authorities.

However, there is a human mind-phenomenon commonly encountered known as "being naive" which, in this day & age, is surprising. When I were a lad, 187 years ago, I was naive, as were virtually all of my peers, about vast swathes of stuff. Information was not so common then. Our experiences were also canalised by various adamantine authorities who insisted that ever so many things were "certain".

Nowadays one may employ vast reams of information and oodles of experience concerning it's testing for various kinds of truth .... yet the seriously naive are not just still about but increasing! Why do people believe so much obvious tripe? There are lots of theories, virtually all of which require us to regard ourselves not as rational, reasonable or logical but as mad emotionally-driven loons.

Applying a certain train of logic, I believe this means the unavoidable conclusion is that we're all doomed. Not even a cycling helmet can save our lives!

Cugel

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 24 Jul 2019, 2:51pm
by De Sisti
Two non-helmet wearing riders in our club have recently been in collisions with cars.
The first suffered cuts and light bruising to arms and legs and has vowed to wear a
helmet from now on. The other rider was in very serious incident with a car in France
(about 10 days ago) and has only just been released from hospital. Neither of them
suffered head injuries. Wish them well in their recoveries.

Re: Helmets?

Posted: 24 Jul 2019, 5:08pm
by atoz
Brucey wrote:
atoz wrote:…. In particular, they never seem to appreciate that it's actually the soft foam pads in helmets that do the job of absorbing shock of impact...


Nope. It is the main part of the shell which absorbs the impact (*). Typically this is made of expanded polystyrene; this compresses when impacted in such a way as it can prevent your skull from fracturing or not; it won't prevent all concussion or injury but it will nearly always very greatly lessen it.

When a helmet has seen a heavy impact of this type the shell is permanently deformed (crushed). Momentarily the shell has probably been compressed to about 3/4 of the remaining thickness and will have partially recovered to whatever thickness remains. The shell can also crack of course; although it provides some scuff resistance, the main function of the outer (micro) shell is to simply hold the main shell together even if it is cracked and broken.

(*) think about it; some brands of helmet adjust for size/fit by varying the thickness of the foam pads from ~10mm to about 2mm. If they 'absorbed impact' they wouldn't be made like this.... Motorcycle helmets work a similar way; a squashy liner (which can have tailored pads to get a good fit if necessary) and about 1" of expanded polystyrene to actually absorb the impact.

cheers


It doesn't take that much force to deform a cycle helmet, so regardless of which part of the helmet is supposed to do the job of protecting you, I am cnot convinced they're much good. If my skull was so weak, I would be dead several times over. Our skulls are the result of millions of years of evolution across many species- including the dinosaurs. Somehow I don't think the average T rex would be impressed by BS 1078..