Conference noted::bicycle

	Three years ago while at a training race I was hooked in a flat out
sprint with my Kucharik Super leather helmet on. While airborne I tried to
correct my fall but was going so fast at the time that I couldn't roll myself
over to break the impact. I landed sqaure on the nice, thickly padded forehead
protector. 
	I was unconcious for twenty minutes, during which time I had seizures.
After a complete workover, including CAT scan, I was released with no brain
damage (at least no more than I already had!). However, for at least a year
afterwards, I had occasional dizzy spells, equilibrium problems, and was
very succeptible to heat fatigue. Nevertheless, I rode from that day on with
a hardshell helmet. The following year I had problems with heat fatigue with
the hardshell, where I would get close to blackout and have to pull out of
the race before I hurt somebody. That all went away the year after, I still
raced under the same conditions with the same helmet, but with no problems.
	The point I'm trying to make is that head injuries are very, very
serious injuries with long lasting effects that even the neurosurgeons are
not totally familiar with. 99.9% of these racers have not had a serious head
injury so they don't know what it's like to go through one, and how it can
detrimentally effect your performance long after the "recovery" period. 
	I've been a Catagory II rider for 4 years now, and have had my share 
of crashes with the hardshell on, all with fairly hard knocks to the helmet
and no damage to me. Sure, it's hot, heavy, ugly etc. Other riders constantly
give me grief about the turtle that died on my head etc. but it didn't keep
it off my head. The helmet industry is starting to respond with better designs,
and by next year there will be some great products available. Until then,
I'll still ride my V1 Pro, hating every minute of it but feeling secure that
I most likely will never have to go through a head injury again. I didn't
need someone to tell me to wear it, like the seat belt in my car.
	It looks like the Federation has gotten the insurance thing figured
out for this season. Their current insurer has tentatively agreed to carry
the USCF for the same coverage as last year but for TEN times the premium.
All sanctioned sports are having this problem, but insofar as the risk for
the insurance companies, cycling is #2 right behind downhill skiing as the
riskiest. What this all boils down to is that each race promoter will be
asked to fork up $225 for each day of racing to cover this extra cost, which,
of course, will be passed along to the riders as increased entry fees. What
does this have to do with the helmet ruling? It is expressly stated in the
policy that each rider will be wearing the ANSI approved helmet, or else
there will be NO insurance and therefore NO SANCTIONED RACING. 
	These riders should stop wasting their time groaning to the USCF
and be more helpful to the helmet manufacturers in getting a better product
to market as soon as possible.

My $.02 worth,

CdH

First of all, most USCF races are not 100+ miles or in 100 degree weather.
Also, most of the contestants are not cat I or II's. Most are cat IV's
and many are inexperienced in racing and thus the races are more likely
to have accidents. It is easy for a young racer to have an attitude that he is
invincible or "it won't happen to me" but the fact is that he may have a 
lot to learn about bike accidents. If he crashes without a helmet, he may 
not get a second chance. Some riders do not realize the dangers of racing.

Maybe there is an small increased chance of heat problems in a long hot race but
if it is that hot there will be people with heat problems with or without 
a helmet. I will be willing to bet that there are more people who have had
a serious health problem because of not wearing a helmet than those who
have had a heat problem. Unless you really go off the deep end, most people
recover from heat problems quickly. That is not the case with a head injury.

Yes, I too have had a serious accident. It was not to my head but it did
damage my hip and shoulder and it was 2-3 years before the pain completely
disappeared. Before the accident, I did not wear a helmet. Now I wear one
every time I ride. I quess I learned the hard way. 

my 2 cents worth too,

    Keith

Here's my 2 cents...

If you don't want to wear a helmet while riding on your own then don't. 
But don't blame anyone else if you get a head injury in a crash.

If you don't want to wear a helmet in a race then you can't race.  If the
organizer sets the rules, then you agree to abide by the rules, or else you
don't race.

This litigous society of ours is out of whack, if people would just take
responsibility for their own actions, and assume the risk inherrent in their
activities, then, insurance rates would not skyrocket like they have.

As an avid skier, I'm tired of paying $25 for a lift ticket when $10 of that
goes for insurance premiums.  It looks like the way its going entry fees
to bike races will be going up too.

I (almost) always wear my helmet, and my seatbelt too.  But I don't want
anyone telling me I have to, unless I'm in a race.  Then I play by their
rules.

Bob Hatcher

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"decvax!tektronix!tekred!joels"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 11 Feb 86 01:34:47 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR

It never ceases to amaze me how bicycle racers are vehemently against safety
equipment. This doesn't seem to be true in any other sport. No professional
auto racer would go out without a helmet, fire suit and lots of in-car safety
equipment. Baseball players don't complain about having to wear a helmet
at the plate. Motorcycle racers never complain about wearing helmet and
leathers. Football players are glad to wear lots of protective padding.
I'm sure there are lots of other examples. Bicycle racers, though, insist
on their right to bleed and die. Maybe you just have to be stupid to get
into bicycle racing in the first place.

Joel Swank
Tektronix, Redmond Oregon

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

	A little crazy maybe, but not stupid.

Professional hockey players faced this same issue several years ago. The
NHL required all new rookie players to use the new helmets, not the veterans.
At first, everyone bitched about it. Watch a hockey game nowadays and notice
how many veteran players are using them. And they're crazier than we are!!!

8^) 8^)

CdH

I think that the local clubs that sponsor rides - not races - should put more
emphasis on wearing helmets.  Last year at Tiverton I was surprised at how
many people were without helmets.  Even if all they do is strong recommend
helmet usage, the clubs can perform a great service to their members. 

Walter, a friend at work, went over his handlebars bareheaded, and had amnesia
for days, and missed several weeks of work.  Since then I have been suggesting
to both family and friends that they wear helmets.  As they say in the
motorcycle world, "If you have a $10 head, wear a $10 helmet."  A lot of
bicyclists must think nothing of their health. 

cbs

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"ihnp4!seismo!rochester!ur-tut!tuba"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 10 Feb 86 15:57:12 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Rochester Computing Center

I don't believe anyone should be REQUIRED to wear helmets.

I don't believe anyone should be REQUIRED to use basic safety
equipment anywhere.

But I suggest follow-ups be directed to net.suicide.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uiucdcsb!winters"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 11 Feb 86 00:43:00 GMT
Organization: 

Regardless of whether racers think the hard shell helmets are cmfortable
or not, the real incentive behind the USCF ruling has to do with getting
insurance and keeping insurance rates down, just as is the case with auto-
mobile seatbelt laws to some extent. Crashes are a part of bike racing,
and head injuries can be serious and result in big lawsuits. 
 
I personally crashed in a race, and later noticed that my (hardshell) helmet
had sustained some damage. Better the helmet than my head. As far as the
heat is concerned, not all of the hardshell helmets are unbearably hot, alth
oughI agree they are not as comfortable as no helmet. I have a V1-Pro which
has alot of ventillation, and I survived alot of very hot, humid days last
summer during long training rides. 
 
I guess my attitude is that the hard shell helmet ruling keeps USCF insurance 
rates down (and thus membership fees) and makes bike racing a safer sport, both
of which result in increased participation which is something U.S. cycling can
benefit from. I think the U.S. situation as far as insurance goes is alot
different than that in Europe where bike racing is an established sport and
the dangers are readily accepted and/or there is enough participation to offset
the cost of insurance.
 
 
L.W.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!tekchips!eirik"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 11 Feb 86 23:40:45 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR

I have a vague memory of controversy in college hockey a few years
ago about the new (at the time) helmet rule.  Of course, we know that
hockey is such a wimpy sport, no one could possibly want protection :-).  

>... Bicycle racers, though, insist
>on their right to bleed and die. Maybe you just have to be stupid to get
>into bicycle racing in the first place.
 
I'm not sure how seriously to take this. A :-) or two might have
helped me decide. Oh well, here goes.
 
As a 'stupid' bicyclist (not racer, though), I find it quite easy to
relate to an attitude which favors comfort over the protection
offered by a helmet. I'm not too fond of insurance companies either.
 
I don't think there is a correlation between this attitude and
intelligence. This attitude might be truly 'stupid' if it lacked an
awareness of the risks, but I haven't fooled myself into believing
that I will never crack my skull open. By the same token, I don't
believe that I will never break my spine getting run over either.
It's not something I expect to happen frequently.
 
I have had two head injuries while bicycling in recent years.
Neither of them had lingering effects beyond imperceptible scars.
I'm not convinced one way or another what effect a helmet would have
had in either case; both incidents involved facial injuries. In the
first case I was blind sided by a pedestrian in a large crowd; I
wouldn't have been any safer on foot. Do you wear your helmet
walking in large crowds? In the other case, I have no clue what
happened, and may never know; I woke up in the hospital a few hours
later. Neither incident affected my attitude about helmets.
 
One more comment.  I can foresee changing my mind (if I live that
long :-).  Not because my attitude is wrong, but because my attitudes
are changing all the time as I get older.  I would prefer to wear a
helmet because I want to, not because someone insists on it.  I doubt
some 'preacher' will 'convert' me; I'll make the decision on my own.
As I already have.  
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"decvax!cca!diego"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 13 Feb 86 16:28:08 GMT
Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge

As a long-time non-helmet cyclist with very few accidents (in 26 years
of riding) I was very reluctant to accept helmet use.  I have used a
helmet regularly for the past 5 years and would like to offer these
observations.

Cyclists, whether motor or pedal, operate with no intervening materials
(except clothing) between themselves and the pavement, poles, walls, and
motor vehicles.  There is a high inherent risk of physical injury in any
accident.  Head injuries, however infrequent, are the most serious that
might be sustained in a biking accident.

In general, I consider myself too be a very good rider with above
average cycling skills.  I have fallen a number of times and managed to
protect my person and my bike.  I have never had a head or face injury
while cycling.  However, considering the potentially irretrievable
damage that might occur in any fall, it seems to make sense to use
available technology for protection.  I have ridden on hot days and
remember in the last miles thinking only of the moment I could stop and
take my helmet off.  There are definitely heat build-up problems with
some models (my **old** Brancale, for one).  But I say that heat
problems are better than "dead" problems any day.

But I'll tell you the main reason why I finally accepted helmet use as a
matter of course.  My wife.  She feels much more reassured of my safety
regardless of my riding prowess.  In a sense, I feel that I am doing
what I can to ensure a successful ride.  I suppose those who feel that
there's nothing worth living for take a different attitude.  I consider
them in the same class with cigarette smokers and drivers who refuse to
wear seat belts.  It's not that someone **wants** to tell others what to
do.  It's that common sense does not always prevail and so costs society
in medical research, hospitalization, and rehabilitation.

Local race and tour sponsors have for several years required
participants to wear helmets for their own safety and to ensure a
tragedy-free experience for all.  That makes sense.  I think the basic
rule of democracy is that one should be free to do as one wishes so long
as one's actions have no adverse effects on others.  When people act in
ways that bring risk or cost to others, then it becomes necessary to
introduce regulations.  Sometimes there isn't time to allow everyone to
evolve to better attitudes.  In a way it's too bad, but in a way it's
not either.  I hope you make a positive decision soon.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"ihnp4!seismo!rochester!ur-tut!junk"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 13 Feb 86 17:42:34 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Rochester Computing Center

Safety should always be an issue, no matter where. One of the problems
with bicycle helmets is that many are ill designed. According to a friend
who worked at a Hospital's emergency, the helmets would save your head
but snap the nek where the helmet ended. This is of course annoying. 
She figured that you are better of without a helmet than with a bad helmet.
(outside of traffic that is.)
JV.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: RHEA::DECWRL::"ihnp4!seismo!rochester!ritcv!jxs7451"
Subject: Re: USCF HELMET RULE
Posted: 14 Feb 86 15:23:34 GMT
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
 
To the non helmet believers:
 
Sure a helmet might be uncomfortable, but your head smashing into
the (pavement | car | curb | dirt | ...) is also uncomfortable.
 
J. Smith			Rochester NY
 
{allegra, siesmo}!rochester!ritcv!jxs7451
 
PS: And don't say "I dont plan to crash"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

	This is starting to become a (selective) reprint of the 
bicycle net.  A lot of us are on it already, if you are trying to 
spread their words I prefer that you either be less selective or post 
a pointer so that others may subscribe and get all the views expressed 
there.

	An underlying assumption in most of the arguements so far
seems to have been that there will be a crash and that the head will
come into contact with something hard/sharp.  From this it is 
concluded that a helmet is necessary and the added protection is worth 
(almost) any discomfort.  There was some mention of the european 
(racing) attitude, which (among other things) recommends the learning
of good falling technique. 

	Very little has been said so far about helmets as contributory 
causes of accidents.  I would like to hear from those who have had 
accidents or close calls in which the helmet impeded their 
(peripheral) vision or hearing in some way.  The heat build up has 
only been mentioned as a comfort factor, not much has been said on the 
effect of that heat stress on ones other senses (vision, hearing etc.) 
or capabilities (judgement, balance etc.)  Does anyone know if the 16 
or so ozs of added weight on the head affects balance anyway ?

	Statistics and scientific study notwithstanding the whole
thing may be a self fulfilling prophecy.  If person A feels safer with
a helmet, then the added confidence will probably make them so, but if
person B fells that they "can't see or hear as much and the heat makes
me dizzy" then they will probably blame the helmet if they go down.
(Whether it caused the accident or not, if they believe it did -
then...) 

	Well, that should get a coupla flames - eh ?

	Reg

    Nothing selective about it.  I've reprinted every article
I've gotten with that subject line in it.
    I'll stop, though, and start a new note explaining how to
subscribe to the newsgroup.
		<_Jym_>

    Another $.02 worth! If it keeps going like this we may even get
    common sense!:-}  
    I have been riding for 22 of my 26 years. In that time I have only
    fallen twice where I felt the helmet made a difference.
    the first time was riding in light traffic a car swerved to miss
    another car forcing me to leave the road in a somewhat less than
    graceful way. I hit the curb with the front wheel(steel) which bent
    beyond repair. I took a quick fly over the bars to land with my
    head resting against a "mile marker" made of steel. The helmet(Bell)
    recieved a crack about 2" long 1/8" wide and 1/8"deep. Design function
    served! Other that road rash(minor) I suffered nothing more than
    damaged pride and wheel. 
    The second time was of simular nature.
    In both cases I was glad I had the burden of weight with me!!
    
    In another case, I was working in an Emergency Room taking Medical
    Technician training (EMT). We recieved a cyclist that had been hit
    from behind by a car, the victim had been thrown backwards from
    his bike into the bumper of the offending car. She had been unconcious
    from the time it all started. Surgery was started within twenty
    min. of being recieved(45 min+/- from time of the accident) the
    only noted injuries were to the head. The victim a 23 year old
     student never opened her eyes again. Surgery had been termed
    successful by the attending surgeons. Complications arose and
    not much could be done.
    This is all a bit windy but if you have ever seen life slip away
    without a fair chance, you also understand.
    Wear a helmet and see what old age is all about! (not too bad I'm
    told)                        Jerry

    re: 11  read:from her bike.
            also read 'thrown backward hitting her head on the bumper.
    
    sorry proof reading is my second weak spot:-}
    -J