MOD NOTE:
While appreciating that much of the talk/tweeting etc concerning CB's comments on the BBC programme, please can all Members avoid using this thread as a helmet-debating place.
You all know where that subject is to be discussed !
The pub?
Boardman on BBC Breakfast...
- Thread starter GrumpyGregry
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
The pub?
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
[QUOTE 3362006, member: 45"]It might help you if you understood a bit about how things work. Headway are one of the providers who work very closely with the NHS to provide support. They're not the only one. The NHS, and local authorities, use agencies with expertise to provide specific support to those who need it.[/QUOTE]
And do you feel that anyone who disagrees simply doesn't understand? I'm chronically ill, have been for a long time and I use NHS services frequently. I know these organisations (and far worse) are involved in delivering services, but that doesn't mean that I agree it should be that way.
Key phrase: they're not the only one. So if we stop this dysfunctional organisation, another way for its current experts to provide that expertise would appear - I'm talking about stopping an organisation, not killing all its workers.
And do you feel that anyone who disagrees simply doesn't understand? I'm chronically ill, have been for a long time and I use NHS services frequently. I know these organisations (and far worse) are involved in delivering services, but that doesn't mean that I agree it should be that way.
Key phrase: they're not the only one. So if we stop this dysfunctional organisation, another way for its current experts to provide that expertise would appear - I'm talking about stopping an organisation, not killing all its workers.
Asking if we can stop the tiny tiny element and let the bigger picture remain is not valuable??? I feel that there would be value in stopping Headway harming the health of far more people than it helps, which is what its bike-bashing campaign could do. If the only way to stop that campaign is to stop Headway, that's a bit sad, but so be it.
summerdays
Cycling in the sun
- Location
- Bristol
Now if they employees all moved, do you not think they might take their views with them?
And I think that the good they do in hospitals far outweighs what their opinion on helmets. Even without them there would still be others spouting the same. We live in a real world where nothing is all good or all bad.
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
Fab Foodie
hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
- Location
- Kirton, Devon.
Good response by Boardman I thought:
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/ca...Why-I-didn-t-wear-a-helmet-on-BBC-Breakfast-0
http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/ca...Why-I-didn-t-wear-a-helmet-on-BBC-Breakfast-0
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
[QUOTE 3362057, member: 45"]That's not the question you asked. You've asked how anyone can trust an organisation's hands-on services if they have a questionable view on helmet use. [/QUOTE]
No I haven't. I asked a practical question on HOW one can SUPPORT its other work without helping their dodgy helmet view get a wider audience. Here it is, in its original wording:
[QUOTE 3362057, member: 45"]The bit I've put in red highlights your ignorance. This is demonstrably not the case. [/QUOTE]
I consider it is demonstrably the case, but I'm not going to pursue that further else because we're not in the helmet forum, so let's just agree to disagree on the numbers that are helped and would be harmed.
[QUOTE 3362057, member: 45"]If you want to challenge them about their stance on helmets then please, go ahead. But either learn about the other aspects of the organisation that you're ignorantly bashing or listen to those with first-hand experience of the services that Headway provides.[/QUOTE]
I've no interest in merely challenging their stance - I want to stop it.
I've done no bashing about Headway's other aspects because they're simply nowhere near me, as far as I can tell, so that request is a bit disingenuous.
No I haven't. I asked a practical question on HOW one can SUPPORT its other work without helping their dodgy helmet view get a wider audience. Here it is, in its original wording:
I'm sorry if that was unclear to anyone, but it's nothing to do with trust, just if it's possible to support bits of Headway.
[QUOTE 3362057, member: 45"]The bit I've put in red highlights your ignorance. This is demonstrably not the case. [/QUOTE]
I consider it is demonstrably the case, but I'm not going to pursue that further else because we're not in the helmet forum, so let's just agree to disagree on the numbers that are helped and would be harmed.
[QUOTE 3362057, member: 45"]If you want to challenge them about their stance on helmets then please, go ahead. But either learn about the other aspects of the organisation that you're ignorantly bashing or listen to those with first-hand experience of the services that Headway provides.[/QUOTE]
I've no interest in merely challenging their stance - I want to stop it.
I've done no bashing about Headway's other aspects because they're simply nowhere near me, as far as I can tell, so that request is a bit disingenuous.
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Don't you think advising people to do something to prevent a brain injury, which has never been proven to reduce brain injury levels, somewhat negates the good work they do?
subaqua
What’s the point
- Location
- Leytonstone
[QUOTE 3362116, member: 45"]
But you are. You're suggesting that the organisation could be doing more harm than good. That's ridiculously wrong. You're questioning an organisation you know very little about, while not being interested in educating yourself.[/QUOTE]
segregationist . sounds similar to creationist
But you are. You're suggesting that the organisation could be doing more harm than good. That's ridiculously wrong. You're questioning an organisation you know very little about, while not being interested in educating yourself.[/QUOTE]
segregationist . sounds similar to creationist
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Just that. Somewhat, a small amount.
Not everyone who dons a lid on their advice will come a cropper. But inevitably, statistically, some will. If even one person wears a bonce potty on their advice and and finds out the hard way that the helmet won't prevent a brain jury then they have failed... somewhat.
Deary me, you're trying to defend what you claim to be a valid argument and the best you can do when asked a polite question is descend to semantics?
Not everyone who dons a lid on their advice will come a cropper. But inevitably, statistically, some will. If even one person wears a bonce potty on their advice and and finds out the hard way that the helmet won't prevent a brain jury then they have failed... somewhat.
Deary me, you're trying to defend what you claim to be a valid argument and the best you can do when asked a polite question is descend to semantics?
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
To put a figure on it you'd need to know the number of helmet wearers, and the number of those then injured, and one can then do some maths and get a firm figure.
In the absence of those numbers we do not have a firm figure. The word 'somewhat' illustrates the point well enough for general chit chat and I find it hard to believe that a person of reasonable intelligence, as you would otherwise appear to be, does not know that to which the term pertains. You simply chose to be obstructive and petty instead of responding to a reasonable question with a reasonable answer.
In the absence of those numbers we do not have a firm figure. The word 'somewhat' illustrates the point well enough for general chit chat and I find it hard to believe that a person of reasonable intelligence, as you would otherwise appear to be, does not know that to which the term pertains. You simply chose to be obstructive and petty instead of responding to a reasonable question with a reasonable answer.
OP
OP
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
I think advising people to do something to prevent a brain injury, which has never been proven to reduce brain injury levels, is somewhat ill-advised, but has only the most minimal impact on the other good work they do.
I like to think that my advice to other cyclists when descending hills, "Don't touch the brakes and give it some beans", is good advice even though some who have followed it have found themselves, ultimately, ill-advised to do so. Does my giving this advice somewhat negate the good work I do when I, say, stop and repair a puncture for someone?
Last edited:
Eh?
Drago said...."Presumption of guilt is against European law....."
You said "No it not"
plus:
I was under the impression that "adverse inference" related to the right to silence, not in any way to presumption/inference of guilt by nature of the putative crime
(Section 34 allows an inference to be drawn when a suspect is silent when questioned under caution prior to charge (section 34(1)(a))
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
Really? I thought it was a bit rubbish - it was reading that that prompted me to fantasise about the bastard offspring of Boardman and Geffen
Fab Foodie
hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
- Location
- Kirton, Devon.
I read it from the standpoint of the joe public for which it was probably intended and thought it covered some main points that never get pointed out: normalising cycling, body armour, effect of compulsion, safety in numbers, relative risk, potential impact/benefit for wider society/obesity etc.
Not perfect, but a good start. At least he's putting his head above the parapet.
MOD NOTE 2:
Somehow, we seem to have moved the discussion on from what CB said (and is saying) on BBC Breakfast, to discussing the pros and cons of private/charitable bodies providing health care !
Please keep it on track, discussing CB and the BBC Breakfast programmes's daily topic of cycling and the infrastructure - which is what we all want to see being improved and made safer.
There is no objection to anyone having a thread about NHS/charity/private etc health care/support etc - just not here ! SC&P is the best place for that.
Thank you.
Somehow, we seem to have moved the discussion on from what CB said (and is saying) on BBC Breakfast, to discussing the pros and cons of private/charitable bodies providing health care !
Please keep it on track, discussing CB and the BBC Breakfast programmes's daily topic of cycling and the infrastructure - which is what we all want to see being improved and made safer.
There is no objection to anyone having a thread about NHS/charity/private etc health care/support etc - just not here ! SC&P is the best place for that.
Thank you.
