Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

[theclaud]

Only if you're playing the victimised minority card,

No. You don't seriously think there would be this much discussion of the issue if it were merely a matter of understanding and quantifying relatively minor risks? The wearing or not of helmets is not about helmets - it's about what they stand for, either in their presence or in their absence.

 

[Boris Bajic]

No. You don't seriously think there would be this much discussion of the issue if it were merely a matter of understanding and quantifying relatively minor risks? The wearing or not of helmets is not about helmets - it's about what they stand for, either in their presence or in their absence.

What little was left of my already-small brain just melted.

Might that cerebral overheating have been prevented by my wearing or otherwise of whatever it is the presence or absence of a helmet stands for?

But seriously for a moment: I just went for a short and gentle training ride with my just-back-from-overseas 18yo daughter. I wore a helmet (something I rarely do) because I thought that by doing so I would encourage her to wear one. It worked. She wore one. But I'm not sure what was achieved. I'm not even sure if I agree with the motives I thought I had.

 

[green1]

Falls from height and speed don't happen like this though. when you fall, you have no control over the way you land or tumble - such is the un predictable nature of an accident.

You better go tell all the jockeys that then.
I'm constantly amazed the pro cyclists have never been taught to fall properly. It was one of the first things I was taught when I got on a horse (I still wasn't very good at it but that's another story). It would cut the amount of broken collarbones hugely.

 

[snorri]

. But I'm not sure what was achieved. I'm not even sure if I agree with the motives I thought I had.

We'll put you down as a Don't Know then it's allowed

 

[theclaud]

What little was left of my already-small brain just melted.

Might that cerebral overheating have been prevented by my wearing or otherwise of whatever it is the presence or absence of a helmet stands for?

But seriously for a moment: I just went for a short and gentle training ride with my just-back-from-overseas 18yo daughter. I wore a helmet (something I rarely do) because I thought that by doing so I would encourage her to wear one. It worked. She wore one. But I'm not sure what was achieved. I'm not even sure if I agree with the motives I thought I had.

Ask yourself why you use up a substantial chunk of the internet telling us anecdotes that demonstrate your equanimity on the subject of helmets. And if you get an answer, be so good as to share it with us.

 

[srw]

Credibility as in compulsory cycle helmets have a net negative impact on the population's health. Have you still not taken this on board? Is there any point whatsoever in discussing this with you, or are you blinded to reason?

You need to ask?

 

[srw]

I did do 17 miles last night though, so im hoping that today is my day in the sun.

Hooray! Smeggers is back on a bike!

 

[theclaud]

Which is what is muddying the waters in the interests of "safety". It needs taking out of the discussion completely.

What does? I'm not quite following...

 

[srw]

Its competely irrelevent to the issue of whether helmets are safe or not.

To be all serious for a moment, there are two completely different, but related questions. They are perpetually confused by people who really ought to know better.

1. Does wearing a helmet make the individual rider less exposed to risk? That is a factual question which is open to scientific and statistical analysis.

2. Should helmet-wearing be made compulsory? That is a political question whose answer may be influenced (but can never be determined) by the answer to question 1.

The answer to question 1 is "no-one knows - there is a mass of contradictory evidence, and the answer will probably be conditional on the specific individual rider".

The answer to question 2 is, at the moment, unequivocally "no" - both because the evidence from Australia and elsewhere is that the introduction of such a law results in a bad outcome (fewer cyclists) and because it is important not to unnecessarily restrict personal liberty. It is possible see circumstances in which the answer might become "yes".

 

[theclaud]

Using politics as a valid excuse not to wear a helmet.

Or have I misunderstood?

I just don't think we're coming from the same place. By any reasonable understanding of risk, helmets are an irrelevance to questions of safety in cycling. (I exclude extreme cycling activities and competitive sports from that, but in all honesty I think they are mostly an irrelevance there too.) If people who are interested in dancing about on pinheads (sometimes very elegantly) want to quantify this irrelevance, then that's fine, but it doesn't account for everyone getting in a tizz about it. It's a symbolic battleground.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

Helmets are s***.

 

[Linford]

No. You don't seriously think there would be this much discussion of the issue if it were merely a matter of understanding and quantifying relatively minor risks? The wearing or not of helmets is not about helmets - it's about what they stand for, either in their presence or in their absence.

Do you or not wear a cycling hat yourself ?

 

[theclaud]

Do you or not wear a cycling hat yourself ?

I don't wear one. Next!

 

[Boris Bajic]

Ask yourself why you use up a substantial chunk of the internet telling us anecdotes that demonstrate your equanimity on the subject of helmets. And if you get an answer, be so good as to share it with us.

I am often accused of having an ambivalent attitude towards helmet use. I think this a fair observation.

I've even been told I display equanimity in certain unpleasant situations. I think this has been generous when used.

Until now, I'd never been accused of demonstrating equanimity on the subject of a debate. How would one do that if one could?

As you may have predicted when asking, I am unable to answer as I'm not sure I understrand the question.

It makes no sense to my fast-melting brain.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Its competely irrelevent to the issue of whether helmets are safe or not.

Freakanomincs logic

Depends. They are trip hazards if you leave them lying around, according to the lovely Helen, and there's always that nasty nip you can get on the oh so sensitive skin under the chin when you do the buckle up. That really does smart and I've seen it draw blood.

But stored properly in boxes on a retailer's shelves they are relatively safe.