Wednesday, December 1, 2010

TED's case' for' and 'against' Helmets

TED has some great speakers from time to time and is well worth the visit to the site . Here I grabbed a couple of video's one by the well known bicycle ambassador Mikael Colville-Andersen and another by neuropsychologist Kim Gorgens.


The case against............


                  

The case for.............


4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Kim Gorgens, while passionate, is guilty of a logical flaw in her speech. Helmets may reduce the extent of non-lethal injuries to the head but they do not prevent concussion. Kim Gorgens thesis assumes they do.

Something that hard with no padding cannot reduce the impact to the head. It might spread it but that is all. You still suffer concussion.

Sue 'sans' helmet said...

Good old TED talks

- Mikael rational

- Kim neurotic...talk about fixed-held beliefs, and scary thing is people would class her as an expert

(sigh!)

Paul Jackson said...

Whoa, where did we go from football injury to bicycle injury? Does she see no difference between running around on the battlefield with a bunch of armoured violent-minded adolescents determined to do you harm with quietly riding your bike to school or wherever on our legislated separated bicycling infrastructure...oh wait, maybe she has a point =P
Anyway, her alarmist "I'm a mother so I know what's good for society" attitude was extremely annoying and more interested in pushing buttons than presenting a rational argument. A big thumbs down!

Anonymous said...

Bicycle helmets don't even spread the impact like a good motorcycle helmet.

I wonder what Kim Gorgens opinion is on having your child's neck snapped because they were wearing helmet? And injury due to rotation of the brain.