Charity Bike Ride - Compulsory Helmet

[Paulus]

I expect you'd know if you'd ever skidded off at high speed* and tried to save yourself with your hands....

Friction burns.

*Not that I have, I don't do high speed.

I always had you down as fast lady Arch!

 

[screenman]

So if track mits do that, then surely a helmet would! You know what I am getting at.

45 years of cycling and always wear gloves.

 

[classic33]

So if track mits do that, then surely a helmet would! You know what I am getting at.

45 years of cycling and always wear gloves.

How would a helmet prevent friction burns??

 

[threebikesmcginty]

The helmet debate is thataway...

 

[david k]

My work has organised a bike ride to raise funds for a charity it supports.

I said I'd take part, even though after years of pestering they refused to take part in the C2W scheme (thanks for your help with the facts and figures Norm) so we have to do the ride on bikes paid for by ourselves and not helped out in any way by The Man.

Just noticed yesterday that Rule No1 is compulsory helmet wearing. I questioned the rationale behind this as I don't wear a helmet and was told it was for safety reasons and to minimise risk.

Now, this isn't a helmet good thing/helmet waste of time debate for me - not interested in that part of it, but am I being childish in thinking I don't want to do the ride if I have to wear a helmet? That's how I feel about it, not childish but that I don't want to do the ride.

good that they insist on safety

 

[ufkacbln]

I expect you'd know if you'd ever skidded off at high speed* and tried to save yourself with your hands....

Friction burns.

*Not that I have, I don't do high speed.

(Like me) - you also haven't got far to fall either!

Personally I think recumbent trikes are the answer!

 

[ufkacbln]

Ok, I've asked if there can be exemptions for those that don't want to wear a helmet. They've agreed to this providing you sign a disclaimer saying you won't be wearing a helmet at your own risk. Fine by me.

Now all those banging on about it's for the charity and that's all that matters, please form an orderly queue and tell me how much you fancy coughing up please!

All gratefully received!

I don't do charity donations.

I spend time and my personal skills with the charities I choose to support.

Much more valuable and much more satisfying than handing over a few pence to soothe one's guilt

 

[evilclive]

Ok, I've asked if there can be exemptions for those that don't want to wear a helmet. They've agreed to this providing you sign a disclaimer saying you won't be wearing a helmet at your own risk. Fine by me.

Nice one - that's actualy an excellent and slightly surprising result.

 

[Red Light]

It's not really, as there is no clear evidence either way.

There is a fair amount of population epidemiology that is reasonably reliable and clear - have a look at the couple of papers by Paul Hewson for example based on the UK data sets. Just because there is a lot of poor studies out there confusing the picture it doesn't mean they are all poor. The problem is a lot of the debate centres around the poor studies.

 

[Fiona N]

Ironically - as I usually don't wear a cycling helmet (except for mtbiking and riding on icy days) - this sort of charity ride would be just the sort of event to get me looking the helmet out...loads of inexperienced, over-excited cyclists with insufficient road sense - it's harder to keep out of their way than avoid the cars

 

[screenman]

Having just ridden a charity even at the weekend I can see exactly where you are coming from, extremely good points.

 

[david k]

Ironically - as I usually don't wear a cycling helmet (except for mtbiking and riding on icy days) - this sort of charity ride would be just the sort of event to get me looking the helmet out...loads of inexperienced, over-excited cyclists with insufficient road sense - it's harder to keep out of their way than avoid the cars

why do you only wear them when mounting biking and on icy days? i presume its because you feel theres an increased risk?