Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

[Linford]

I am absolutely and unequivocally in favour of compulsory thongs!

... or maybe not:

Perhaps it should be an informed choice after weighing up the evidence.

A self portrait taken on a 'beach' near Gosport ?

 

[Wobblers]

Why not supply the source when you make these claims so we know what the hell you are on about ?

Why not supply us peer reviewed scientific papers to back up your claims?

 

[Linford]

Why not supply us peer reviewed scientific papers to back up your claims?

Take your pick.

 

[david k]

I do wear a helmet.

if you chose to agree with all the claims such as:

1- Wearing a helmet makes people think cycling is dangerous
2 - Less people cycle when they see others wearing helmets
3 - Less people cycling means more people get obese
4 - The levels of obesity mean that our average age of death reduces
5 - You cannot have an opinion unless you have read all the data and evidence
6 - You are ignorant if you wear a helmet without reading all the evidence and data

I suggest your decision to wear a helmet makes you a hypocrite

So for once and for all, do you or anybody else think that when a cyclist goes for a ride, the decision to wear a helmet is wrong if:

a) you have not read all the evidence and/or,
b) you believe it will contribute to lower life expectancy of the nation and/or,

or do you believe you can make your own judgement regardless ?

 

[StuAff]

this is exactly what has been said.
You cannot say every helmet wearer is contributing to obesity and therefore making a larger difference to health and then say wear one if you want, there are some mixed up views.

If i have misunderstood i will apologies, but you and others have made very conflicting views and contradict yourselfs when you support the logic then wear a helmet

Nothing contradictory here. I'll spell it out for you, again, as the past seventy six pages seem to have somehow missed your attention.

I choose to wear a helmet. And again, the key word is 'choose'. Claud chooses not to wear a helmet. Neither does DZ. Of all the many subjects I've discussed with them over the years, I'm pretty sure helmet wearing has never been one. And why would it be? I respect their choice on the matter, they respect mine. We just don't need to talk about it.

Helmets are of benefit only in certain circumstances. For avoidance of doubt, if it doesn't involve some kind of impact with your head, it's of no use whatsoever. I've been in accidents where wearing a helmet was almost certainly of great benefit, where it was possibly of benefit, and where it did absolutely nothing either way.

You seem to have confused helmet wearing with lifestyle choices, particularly those of diet and exercise. Eating too much and not getting enough exercise makes you fat. Wearing a helmet has no impact on calorific consumption or expenditure. I suppose you could try eating one, but polystyrene doesn't taste nice I imagine. I really don't intend to test this hypothesis, feel free to do so if you're inclined.

Now, here's the tricky bit. What myself, and Claud, and others, have repeatedly pointed out is that if people perceive cycling to involve lots of complication, potential danger, expense (etc), they may well be discouraged. Helmet compulsion has been shown to encourage this perception. There is substantial evidence for this. It may have been linked to several thousand times (metaphorically) already in this thread. The actual complication, potential danger, expense of cycling is an entirely different matter. You do not need hi-viz. You do not need a helmet. You do not need segregated lanes. You need a bicycle. The less issues- perceived or real- that people have with actually getting on a bike, the better.

 

[theclaud]

Nothing contradictory here. I'll spell it out for you, again, as the past seventy six pages seem to have somehow missed your attention.

I choose to wear a helmet. And again, the key word is 'choose'. Claud chooses not to wear a helmet. Neither does DZ. Of all the many subjects I've discussed with them over the years, I'm pretty sure helmet wearing has never been one. And why would it be? I respect their choice on the matter, they respect mine. We just don't need to talk about it.

Helmets are of benefit only in certain circumstances. For avoidance of doubt, if it doesn't involve some kind of impact with your head, it's of no use whatsoever. I've been in accidents where wearing a helmet was almost certainly of great benefit, where it was possibly of benefit, and where it did absolutely nothing either way.

You seem to have confused helmet wearing with lifestyle choices, particularly those of diet and exercise. Eating too much and not getting enough exercise makes you fat. Wearing a helmet has no impact on calorific consumption or expenditure. I suppose you could try eating one, but polystyrene doesn't taste nice I imagine. I really don't intend to test this hypothesis, feel free to do so if you're inclined.

Now, here's the tricky bit. What myself, and Claud, and others, have repeatedly pointed out is that if people perceive cycling to involve lots of complication, potential danger, expense (etc), they may well be discouraged. Helmet compulsion has been shown to encourage this perception. There is substantial evidence for this. It may have been linked to several thousand times (metaphorically) already in this thread. The actual complication, potential danger, expense of cycling is an entirely different matter. You do not need hi-viz. You do not need a helmet. You do not need segregated lanes. You need a bicycle. The less issues- perceived or real- that people have with actually getting on a bike, the better.

Ahem! Fewer. Good post though!

 

[theclaud]

[QUOTE 1985043, member: 45"]Rob Brydon? Do you rate him?[/quote]
He outclasses the competition in Pick Up Song.

 

[StuAff]

if you chose to agree with all the claims such as:

1- Wearing a helmet makes people think cycling is dangerous
2 - Less people cycle when they see others wearing helmets
3 - Less people cycling means more people get obese
4 - The levels of obesity mean that our average age of death reduces
5 - You cannot have an opinion unless you have read all the data and evidence
6 - You are ignorant if you wear a helmet without reading all the evidence and data

I suggest your decision to wear a helmet makes you a hypocrite

So for once and for all, do you or anybody else think that when a cyclist goes for a ride, the decision to wear a helmet is wrong if:

a) you have not read all the evidence and/or,
b) you believe it will contribute to lower life expectancy of the nation and/or,

or do you believe you can make your own judgement regardless ?

1. Balderdash.
2. Piffle.
3. Not if they do equivalent exercise. It does if they don't.
4. I think that's been scientifically proven. Repeatedly.
5. Bunk.
6. Twaddle.

(a) Utterly irrelevant. As I stated previously.
(b) See 3.
And as should have been obvious, I'm perfectly capable of making my own judgements.

 

[StuAff]

Ahem! Fewer. Good post though!

Thanks for the correction

 

[ufkacbln]

Do you still maintain that somebody wearing a helmet without studying the evidence is not in a position to wear a helmet?

Never did say this.... I have and till maintained that it is a choice that should be informed. That is the evidence should be read, weighed up and the decision made to suit your personal circumstances.

What I have said is that someone who is ignorant of the evidence should not give advice and information that is demonstrably stupid, wrong and dangerous.

And that somebody wearing a helmet puts people off cycling and therefore contributes to obesity and this takes more lives?

Again not something I have ever said....... however having now looked into this, I have an informed knowledge of the research. The literature certainly seem to show that where helmets have been made compulsory this seems to be the caseto be the case

 

[theclaud]

Thanks for the correction

If you're hanging about in this thread for long, you might need some more words for what you're up against. I suggest hogwash, cobblers, garbage, guff and horseshit. That should see you through till about 2am.

 

[ufkacbln]

A self portrait taken on a 'beach' near Gosport ?

Once again you have displayed a stunning ignorance of reality!

 

[benb]

If it is opinion then whos to say it is insane ? as the one who owns the opinion obviously thinks not

So any opinion is valid, no matter how barmy? Are you a Scientologist?

[you're not entitled to your own facts]
Not sure I follow what you mean here?

I mean that you are quite entitled to an opinion on the merits of helmet wearing, but you're not entitled to claim things that are demonstrably untrue, such as "The world is flat"

 

[ufkacbln]

IIRC the next claim that David K makes is that we all hate him personally because he wears a helmet!

 

[StuAff]

If you're hanging about in this thread for long, you might need some more words for what you're up against. I suggest hogwash, cobblers, garbage, guff and horseshit. That should see you through till about 2am.

I'll be onto the theasaurus before too long I'm sure.....