Forum home Road cycling forum Campaign

"Vain" helmetless riders risk head injury

«1

Posts

  • dondaredondare Posts: 2,113
    What a rambling, pointless, inconclusive article.
    This post contains traces of nuts.
  • NoodleyNoodley Posts: 1,725
    "A lucky 40 per cent walked away with just cuts and bruises, one in ten broke their arm and 14 per cent hurt their leg. It's not just cyclists themselves that are getting injured as 16 per cent have hit someone, or just managed to avoid them, when on a bike, the survey by insurance firm Cornhill Direct revealed..."

    Aye, 40% sounds like a real "lucky" number :wink:

    now let me think: 40% plus 10% with broken leg plus 14% with hurt leg, that would be 64% with either cuts and bruises, or arm or leg injuries. Where would the helmet help?

    Fecking numb-nutted twats.
  • Big Red SBig Red S Posts: 26,890
    edited July 2007
    It's data like that that tables were invented for.

    And is that first sentence saying that the other half of vain brits are happy to wear a helmet? What about the people who don't wear a helmet but aren't vain?
  • [quote=Fecking numb-nutted twats.[/quote] :D:D
  • YorkshiremanYorkshireman Posts: 999
    I reckon that whoever put that `report` here has a very deep and ironic (if not evil) sense of humour :wink:
    Colin N.


    Lincolnshire is mostly flat... but the wind is mostly in your face!
  • AndyGatesAndyGates Posts: 8,467
    Survey by an insurance company: not exactly neutral. Biased article, vis "lazy", "lucky", "vain" etc. Rubbish journalism.

    Most cycling falls are trivial. You're unlucky to take a serious knock, not lucky to avoid one. No discussion of any legitimate reasons a person may not wish to wear PPE to defend against equally lazy and dumbass drivers.

    Can't write more, the froth is making my keyboard malfunction. But you get the gist. :evil:
    Wanted: Penny farthing. Please PM me!
    Advice for kilted riders: top-tubes are cold.
  • CabCab Posts: 770
    Its a word for word repeat of Cornhills press release.

    See also:
    http://quickrelease.tv/?p=138
  • AndyGatesAndyGates Posts: 8,467
    I hope that's not a taste of Future's journalism in the future! :(
    Wanted: Penny farthing. Please PM me!
    Advice for kilted riders: top-tubes are cold.
  • CabCab Posts: 770
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,678
    Very worrying that so many cyclists consider something as superficial as their appearance to be more important than self-preservation. It shows that a lot of them consider safety to be less important than other things which in fact matter much, much less if at all. Another thing that many cyclists erroneously rank above safety is the persecution of the motorist, hence the fact that they still support speed cameras, even though they have been conclusively shown not to make the roads safer.

    Butchers on two wheels. Saying that you support speed cameras is the same as drifting a knife into someone. Let's make support of death cameras as socially unacceptable as drink driving.
  • Tourist TonyTourist Tony Posts: 8,628
    George...
    Love the new beard!
    Will it tickle?
    If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or censored
    http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?o=3 ... =3244&v=5K
  • Big Red SBig Red S Posts: 26,890
    Very worrying that so many cyclists consider something as superficial as their appearance to be more important than self-preservation.
    Well, it would be if that was why so many cyclists don't wear a helmet. I don't know what the reasons are, but I don't think it's entirely fair to blame it entirely on vanity.
    hence the fact that they still support speed cameras, even though they have been conclusively shown not to make the roads safer.
    Surely that's a problem with the execution, not the principle?
    I'd find it difficult to believe that the average speed checks had no effect on road safety.
  • nortones2nortones2 Posts: 208
    Re "conclusive" Asserting something repeatedly does not make it true. Evidence?
  • CunobelinCunobelin Posts: 11,792
    Very worrying that so many cyclists consider something as superficial as their appearance to be more important than self-preservation.

    Or are aware of the evidence and have made an informed choice?
    It shows that a lot of them consider safety to be less important than other things which in fact matter much, much less if at all.

    Care clarify this ramble?

    Safety is a whole spectrum of issues. Personally I would put a lot of safe riding techniques above helmet wearing.
    Another thing that many cyclists erroneously rank above safety is the persecution of the motorist,

    Wierd!
    hence the fact that they still support speed cameras, even though they have been conclusively shown not to make the roads safer.

    Care to put forward any peer reviewed references to back up this erroneous statement?


    Butchers on two wheels. Saying that you support speed cameras is the same as drifting a knife into someone. Let's make support of death cameras as socially unacceptable as drink driving.

    Why - Surely you are mistaken here - speeding is a better analogy.

    Of course I could paraphrase this:

    Butchers. Saying that you support cycle helmets is the same as drifting a knife into someone. Let's make support of cycle helmets as socially unacceptable as drink driving

    After all it makes as much sense!



    So there we have it wear a helmet and abolish speed cameras ans you will be never hav an accident.
    <b><i>He that buys land buys many stones.
    He that buys flesh buys many bones.
    He that buys eggs buys many shells,
    But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.</b></i>
    (Unattributed Trad.)
  • Mister PaulMister Paul Posts: 719
    Very worrying that so many cyclists consider something as superficial as their appearance to be more important than self-preservation. It shows that a lot of them consider safety to be less important than other things which in fact matter much, much less if at all.

    Look at the stats, hairy lover.
    Another thing that many cyclists erroneously rank above safety is the persecution of the motorist, hence the fact that they still support speed cameras, even though they have been conclusively shown not to make the roads safer.

    Most cyclists are motorists. Eejit.
    __________________________________________________________
    <font>What we need is a new, national <b>White Bicycle Plan</b></font>
  • Very worrying that so many cyclists consider something as superficial as their appearance to be more important than self-preservation.

    [snip]

    Another thing that many cyclists erroneously rank above safety is the persecution of the motorist, hence the fact that they still support speed cameras,

    [snip]

    Alas, I have never managed to get a speed camera to flash while riding my bike. I don't wear a helmet, so they should be able to get a good picture.

    If I do get flashed, is there any way i could get a picture of myself, or would that be too dangerous. I understand they couldn't get me for speeding, but might for "riding furiously" or some such

    Jeremy Parker
  • ajohn9ajohn9 Posts: 260
    Wildboydave
    has been owned
  • YorkshiremanYorkshireman Posts: 999
    ajohn9 wrote:
    Wildboydave
    has been owned

    Many times :lol:

    He just loves it :( .
    Colin N.


    Lincolnshire is mostly flat... but the wind is mostly in your face!
  • ricadusricadus Posts: 2,379
    I suspect the article is what is known as an 'advertorial' – a commercial item masquerading as news.
  • The article came from a press release and generated some heated debate within the team about the level of scepticism with which such things should be rewritten. (I'd have torn it to pieces; some of my colleagues are less rabid about hacking apart anti-cycling drivel masquerading as information :) ).

    An advertorial is a paid-for feature. An advert that looks like editorial, hence the name. Nothing that you see presented as editorial on BikeRadar has been paid for.
    John Stevenson
  • CometGirlCometGirl Posts: 2,681

    Alas, I have never managed to get a speed camera to flash while riding my bike. I don't wear a helmet, so they should be able to get a good picture.

    If I do get flashed, is there any way i could get a picture of myself, or would that be too dangerous. I understand they couldn't get me for speeding, but might for "riding furiously" or some such

    Jeremy Parker

    I recommend the hill down from Ditchling to Brighton. The only place I've ever triggered a camera on my bike. :lol:
  • Very worrying that so many cyclists consider something as superficial as their appearance to be more important than self-preservation.

    Of course helmets are good are preventing certain kinds of head injury and nobody should allow superficial issues to interfere with self-preservation.......therefore it would be logical for all drivers and passengers in cars to wear helmets at all times - since there are a lot more of them than cyclists, and their potential to receive serious head injuries are much greater, the case is clear - helmets for all car users would prevent more injuries ;-)
  • Tourist TonyTourist Tony Posts: 8,628
    Carlos, no point in discussing with Wideboy---he's simply an SS troll. They come, they tell us we have blood on our hands, and they go away again.
    If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or censored
    http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?o=3 ... =3244&v=5K
  • Ah, but the debater in me loves a good counterpoint, whoever hears it ;-)
  • Tourist TonyTourist Tony Posts: 8,628
    Hmmmmmmmmm. Careful you don't get George's blood on your hands.....
    If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or censored
    http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?o=3 ... =3244&v=5K
  • Carlos, no point in discussing with Wideboy---he's simply an SS troll.

    And one whose account has been deactivated.
    John Stevenson
  • Big Red S wrote:
    It's data like that that tables were invented for.

    It's data like that that toilets were invented for.

    Marv
    What tree ? ...........

    Trek 8000 ZR XC hardtail.
  • Tourist TonyTourist Tony Posts: 8,628
    Carlos, no point in discussing with Wideboy---he's simply an SS troll.

    And one whose account has been deactivated.

    :D
    Slightly off topic, there has been a spate of SS trolls surfacing here with older registrations. Are we looking at hacking, or are the sad obsessives really setting up "sleeper" registrations?
    All very odd.
    If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or censored
    http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?o=3 ... =3244&v=5K
  • Slightly off topic, there has been a spate of SS trolls surfacing here with older registrations. Are we looking at hacking, or are the sad obsessives really setting up "sleeper" registrations?
    All very odd.

    Flag 'em and we'll ban 'em.
    John Stevenson
  • Tourist TonyTourist Tony Posts: 8,628
    Do you want to have my children?
    If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or censored
    http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?o=3 ... =3244&v=5K
Sign In or Register to comment.