Let's have a mass debate. Helmets... (again)

CiB

Actually let's not bother, suffice to say that someone who was knocked off his bike and would have been killed - his doctor told him so - has troubled himself to write to the paper asking why helmets aren't compulsory like they are in Australia etc.

www.telegraph.co.uk -> comment -> letters -> scroll half way down. Luckily I can't see the comments from work, but I can hazard a guess.

Back on your heads chaps.

rjsterry

I've told you before about reading the Telegraph :P

Jay dubbleU

Sorry - got distracted by the homosexual caveman article :shock:

UndercoverElephant

Jay dubbleU wrote:

Sorry - got distracted by the homosexual caveman article :shock:

Was he... erm... wearing a helmet? :oops:

essex-commuter

MassDebate? :shock:

ndru

Can't find it. Link?

gbsahne001

I agree with the article, it should be compulsory to wear helmets, anyone not wearing a helmet should not be allowed to ride a bicycle





........ goes to get popcorn

sheep_go_baa

WHAT???!!!! FORCED TO WEAR A HELMET???!!!! THAT CANNOT BE OF BENEFIT TO ANYONE!!!!


Goes to join gbsahne at the popcorn counter

Kieran_Burns

ndru wrote:

Can't find it. Link?

me either

tarquin_foxglove

Kieran_Burns wrote:

ndru wrote:

Can't find it. Link?

me either

Me three :?

While we are waiting for the OP to provide the link, have a read of Boris' column on skiing helmets...

CiB

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/lett ... ities.html

dhope

In Australia, it is illegal to ride a bike or for a child to use a scooter without a helmet. Cyclists have accepted this law. Are Australians more law-abiding than we are?

My favourite lack of logic. Aussies follow a law. We don't have that law. Are they better at following laws? :? :shock:

t4tomo

No need to make it compulsory, its a form of natural selection, sooner or later the idiots who don't wear them will die out.

bails87

t4tomo wrote:

No need to make it compulsory, its a form of natural selection, sooner or later the idiots who don't wear them will die out.

They probably won't, seeing as cycling is a safe activity.


Alternatively...
good trolling

MaxwellBygraves

If you meant this...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/

Can't see it on there either...

iPete

t4tomo wrote:

No need to make it compulsory, its a form of natural selection, sooner or later the idiots who don't wear them will die out.

Skydiving without a parachute is clearly Darwinism, cycling without a helmet is not.

p.s. Helmets have saved me a few times but I still do not advocate compulsory use.

bails87

Every cyclist should be subject to an annual running-over. That way everyone with helmets will be fine and everyone without will be punished.

ndru

No activities are risk free. There always is a chance that you can die. Everywhere and anytime. These are the two facts one must accept. Now the thing is - how far are we willing to go to protect ourselves from risks, and how high the risk should be for us to be concerned about it. I think we can all agree that if we were to protect ourselves in every possible way from every possible risk we wouldn't be able to lead normal lives. I don't even think it's possible to eliminate/protect from all risks in our lives. Thus we protect ourselves from the most probable risks causing most severe damage to us/society.
Now the problem here seems to be the gauging process of the risks and safety measurements. For some reason people think that if something happens in their surrounding, or to themselves it automatically means that is happening everywhere and is a big issue. Because very often fear-mongering and fear itself override logic and statistics people are made to believe that they are much less safer than they really are. This is true not only for bicycle helmets.
Before one makes up his mind about helmets, I suggest one follows these steps:

1) do not buy into mass histeria, ever, not only when it comes to helmets
2) look at the statistics, not anectodal evidence. My grandfather died because he suffocated himself under his own pillow - this doesn't mean that pillows should be banned
3) estimate how high is your risk of head trauma - do you fall very often?
4) read scientific data about the protection bicycle helmets give you - establish if this is enough for your needs
5) make your decision and then carry on with your life - don't make other's follow you - their circumstances and conclusions might be different from yours.

tailwindhome

ndru wrote:

look at the statistics.....read scientific data.

Who does that?

I mean I understand that the internet is populated with geeky types with frig all better to do than quote the sciency bits* for 13 pages until the rest of us lose the will to live, but seriously, who researchs statistics and scientific data before making such a straightforward decision?

You'd never get anything done.

* I miss Always Tyred. Don't you?

Nik Cube

The wearing of a helmet should be compulsory .

and not just for cycling etc... just all the time

True story;

I was leaving work the other day and was locking up as normal ( we have a big gate that I close most evenings) and I dropped my key I bent down to pick up the keys and as I came up I hit my head on the gate with force.
The good new I was wearing my helmet thus saving me from pain probable death or a least disability. I now wear my helmet all the time and make my three year old wear his too.
The moral of this story is you can never be too safe; helmet gloves flame proof pants and a condom all on for good measure all the time

dondare

"It's a car problem. Why ask cyclists to fix it with a Styrofoam hat?" - Yehuda Moon.

http://www.yehudamoon.com/index.php?date=2008-07-09

mtb-idle

iss ver nannee stayt innit

fnegroni

Nik Cube wrote:

The wearing of a helmet should be compulsory .

and not just for cycling etc... just all the time

True story;

I was leaving work the other day and was locking up as normal ( we have a big gate that I close most evenings) and I dropped my key I bent down to pick up the keys and as I came up I hit my head on the gate with force.
The good new I was wearing my helmet thus saving me from pain probable death or a least disability. I now wear my helmet all the time and make my three year old wear his too.
The moral of this story is you can never be too safe; helmet gloves flame proof pants and a condom all on for good measure all the time

LOL
My thoughts exactly!

shouldbeinbed

Nik Cube wrote:

The moral of this story is you can never be too safe; helmet gloves flame proof pants and a condom all on for good measure all the time

Ha ha. I think the 1st 3 will negate the need for the last one, unless its protection against wind chill

dondare

Now this literally just makes my blood boil.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4d7db22-61f3 ... z1J0WDeASh

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011 ... ike-helmet

deptfordmarmoset

dondare wrote:

Now this literally just makes my blood boil.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4d7db22-61f3 ... z1J0WDeASh

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011 ... ike-helmet

I hit a paywall on the first link but found the Guardian article interesting to compare with their latest bike blog article, where Boris appears to have been media-bullied into hiding his bad hair days under a helmet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/b ... nal-choice

EDIT: In a moment of irritation I decided to go to work without a helmet today for the first time in years. I think it's because I keep my hair short that I had absolutely no hairy moments.

colsoop

Due to the number of people who trip and fall and hurt themselves while walking. I have started to sell bubble wrap suits, if you buy 2 suits you get a free pedestrain helmet.

Elbow pads, stabilisers and hi vis vests are optional extras.

Anybody who doesn't wear one of my suits clearly shouldbn't be allowed to walk.

ThatBikeGuy

colsoop wrote:

Due to the number of people who trip and fall and hurt themselves while walking. I have started to sell bubble wrap suits, if you buy 2 suits you get a free pedestrain helmet.

Elbow pads, stabilisers and hi vis vests are optional extras.

Anybody who doesn't wear one of my suits clearly shouldbn't be allowed to walk.

How much would these be!?

thelawnet

dondare wrote:

Now this literally just makes my blood boil.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4d7db22-61f3 ... z1J0WDeASh

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011 ... ike-helmet

Brake sez:

Joel Hickman, spokesman for the road safety charity Brake, said that Baker was setting a terrible example and the evidence was conclusive that helmets saved lives. "Last year, over 17,000 cyclists were injured on UK roads with over 2,500 killed or seriously injured. The vast majority of these deaths and serious injuries were the result of a head injury. This is precisely why many of our international and European partners have already introduced compulsory helmet wearing," he said.

"Ministers should practise what they preach and when a minister directly responsible for cycling safety refuses to wear a cycle helmet, we then have to look at their suitability for the role."

Which makes it sound like cycling is so dangerous you'd best stay indoors (or perhaps drive instead).

It also says on their website:
"Road crashes are not road accidents. They are preventable and must be stopped. "

It is unclear how a bicycle helmet can prevent road crashes.

On page 13 of their 'About Us' brochure (http://www.brake.org.uk/assets/docs/about-brake.pdf), it says: "Lynne cycled the length of Britain in memory of her colleague, Kevin, killed in a crash. "Life just seems to whiz by and sometimes I wonder what's it all about? How can we make a difference? This is my contribution to Brake's work."

Lynne is pictured without a helmet!

Jay dubbleU

dondare wrote:

Now this literally just makes my blood boil.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4d7db22-61f3 ... z1J0WDeASh

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011 ... ike-helmet

I rarely agree with politicians of any party but in this case good for him

tarquin_foxglove

Interesting report on cycle helmets from the Insitute of Transport Economics in Norway

Institute of Transport Economics, Norway wrote:

"According to the new studies, no overall [protective] effect of bicycle helmets could be found when injuries to head, face or neck are considered as a whole."

Could explain why, despite the reported protection offered by helmets, legislation forcing helmet wearing on cyclists has not shown a clear decline in the number of head injuries among cyclists.

Access to full report here...