kgdykes@watbun.UUCP (07/30/86)
The repeal of mandatory helmet legislation in 32 states since 1976
has been a postive move that has been instrumental in the reduction
of motorcyclist fatalities.
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fatalities in 1979 when such regulation had been repealed.
Such reports of reduced fatalities following repeal are not unusual.
New York and New Jersey have maintained the helmet regulation and
fatalities in NJ have increased 349% since the implementation
of its helmet regulations. Last year helmet-related fatalities
increased 41% in New York.
The 1980 Nat'nl Highway Traffic Safety Administration report on
morotcycle helmets claiming increased fatalities has disregarded these
facts. The report is based primarily on projections and incomplete
statistics and is limited to only 4 states with information
predominantly current to 1978.
Morotcycle helmets are a cosmetic device that do not prevent
accidents but do aggravate injuries. The State of Kansas Health &
Environment Dept. noted in 1979 that no concrete evidence could be found
to support the concept that any increase in motorcyclist fatalities had
resulted from the repeal of helmet regulations.
Helmets are an unnatural weight upon the head of the rider and radically
increase cranial temperatures. Helmets severly restrict peripheral
vision and significantly reduce hearing. No helmet, regardless of cost
or design, is capable of rejecting impact stresses above 13 mph, as Federal
Dept. of Transportation testing has evidenced, and in lateral skids,
helmets deteriorate at 2.5mph.
-David S. Mangeim
Executive Director
New York Motorcycle Coalition 1983
--
- Ken Dykes
{ihnp4,decvax,allegra}!watmath!watbun!kgdykeskehoe@reed.UUCP (Dave Kehoe) (08/03/86)
> [statistical evidence that helmet use increases motorcycle fatalities] > > Helmets are an unnatural weight upon the head of the rider and radically >increase cranial temperatures. Helmets severly restrict peripheral >vision and significantly reduce hearing. No helmet, regardless of cost >or design, is capable of rejecting impact stresses above 13 mph, as Federal >Dept. of Transportation testing has evidenced, and in lateral skids, >helmets deteriorate at 2.5mph. Any other explanations as to why helmets would kill riders? These explanations are vague and/or ambiguous: -- "helmet weight": do motorcyclists' necks snap or something? What did the helmets weigh? Maybe I should where my featherweight Kiwi instead of my fiberglass Bell Star LTD. What speeds were the victims driving at? I rarely drive over 60mph, so maybe I'm safer than the dudes who cruise by me at 90mph. -- "higher cranial temperatures" sure are nice in the cool weather Portland usually has. -- "restricted peripheral vision": not that I've noticed. And my helmet vastly improves my straight-ahead vision when bugs hit. -- "significantly reduce hearing": Helmets (and earplugs) significantly reduce hearing *LOSS* too. Ask any hearing pathologist. -- "helmets are damaged by impacts above 13mph": so are bare heads. If helmets are so lethal, why don't the pro racers die whenever they dump there bikes during races? -- "If you hear of any technical writing job openings, let me know" -- D.Kehoe, whose employer recently went belly-up Dave Kehoe (503) 230-9454 ...tektronix!reed!kehoe
pmd@cbdkc1.UUCP (Paul M. Dubuc) (08/04/86)
In article <484@water.UUCP> kgdykes@watbun.UUCP writes: > >... No helmet, regardless of cost >or design, is capable of rejecting impact stresses above 13 mph, as Federal >Dept. of Transportation testing has evidenced, and in lateral skids, >helmets deteriorate at 2.5mph. > -David S. Mangeim > Executive Director > New York Motorcycle Coalition 1983 Do you have any specs on how unhelmeted heads hold up? -- Paul Dubuc cbdkc1!pmd
draper@tallis.dec.com (08/04/86)
---------------------Reply to mail dated 3-AUG-1986 20:36--------------------- >>vision and significantly reduce hearing. No helmet, regardless of cost >>or design, is capable of rejecting impact stresses above 13 mph, as Federal >>Dept. of Transportation testing has evidenced, and in lateral skids, >>helmets deteriorate at 2.5mph. as other replies have pointed out, skulls deteriorate (severely) at less than 13 mph. my real point, tho, is that i don't agree with your claim that no helmet can withstand impact stresses > 13mph. personnally, i've put a bike down at 60-65mph and ended up with some substantial battle scars on my bell star II and leathers for my efforts. i ended up with a hell of a headache and 20 minutes of nap time on the shoulder, but am otherwise no more brain damaged than before. try that with your bare head or $30 no-name helmet. the bell bumper sticker says it best of all: "buy a $10 helmet for your $10 head" (standard disclaimers; plus, i have no connection with bell other than as a satisfied consummer)