🚀 go-pugleaf

And the licenses were just for jobs BTW

"smn" <yellowsubmarine@telusnospam.net> wrote in message 
news:WJFeg.3059$wu.315@edtnps82...
>    That would depend on what severity each non-helmutted and helmutted (is 
> that a word?)  accident was being compared with..
> If a helmut was thrown off a cliff for example and you compare that to 
> falling off a tricycle I do not think so.
> not enough information DD
>    it seems like a cat and mouse game here in Surrey
> Too many stupid drivers on the road for me to feel safe enough without a 
> helmut.  I have class 4, 5, and 6 licences by the way and have been riding 
> since I was 8.      Prefer pedaling over driving for  life.
>    Besides I can dress it up and model it for them too. : )
>
> "DiscoDuck" <fornewsgroups@shaw.ca> wrote in message 
> news:1148756028.855884.319890@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> from: http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc/
>>
>> Brian Walker of Head Protection Evaluations, the principal UK test
>> laboratory for helmets, says that medical case studies commonly quoted
>> as evidence for the effectiveness of cycle helmets arrive at erroneous
>> conclusions. His views are expressed on the website of the Bicycle
>> Helmet Research Foundation. Walker also authored an article "Heads Up"
>> for Cycle Magazine, the bi-monthly journal of CTC, the UK's national
>> cyclists' organisation.
>>
>> In both opinion pieces, Walker describes a court case in which he
>> appeared as an expert witness. Apparently, a lawyer had repeatedly
>> tried to persuade three neurosurgeons to state that one must be safer
>> wearing a helmet than would be the case if one were not. All three
>> disagreed, claiming that they had seen severe brain damage and fatal
>> injury both with and without cycle helmets being worn. The judge
>> accepted the views of the neurosurgeons in handing down his ruling.
>>
>> Also on the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation website are links to
>> four reports that find little evidence of the effectiveness of helmets.
>>
>
>