Deaths when not using helmet

[david k]

ive read things, ive seen things that suggest it was good exercise yes, but tbh, i already knew. ive done enough training in my time to know what is good exercise

 

[Angelfishsolo]

ive read things, ive seen things that suggest it was good exercise yes, but tbh, i already knew. ive done enough training in my time to know what is good exercise

Thus you had data available to you to allow you to make an informed descision.

 

[benb]

because i enjoy it, its good exercise and it gets me round

If it gets you round, you're still eating too much!
I used to be round, but then I started cycling.

 

[david k]

Thus you had data available to you to allow you to make an informed descision.

if i needed it yes but i didnt, its a no brainer. i dont need evidence to tell me cycling is good exercise

 

[david k]

If it gets you round, you're still eating too much!
I used to be round, but then I started cycling.

lol, yes i carry too much weight, yes i have a big appetite, i used to play pro rugby and took on many many calories just to maintain weight. i stopped playing rugby but carried on eating!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

if i needed it yes but i didnt, its a no brainer. i dont need evidence to tell me cycling is good exercise

I squash good exercise?

 

[david k]

ii would think so yes,

however it isnt just the activity but how it is done

 

[Angelfishsolo]

ii would think so yes,

however it isnt just the activity but how it is done

Well available evidence suggests that it is only a game fit people should play.

 

[david k]

probably because of its intensity, however you could lower the intensity to suit your fitness level, if your so unfit its dangerous then you need to build up to it with a different activity. Regardless really as your initial question was do i think its good exercise, and the answer is still yes it is

 

[Angelfishsolo]

probably because of its intensity, however you could lower the intensity to suit your fitness level, if your so unfit its dangerous then you need to build up to it with a different activity. Regardless really as your initial question was do i think its good exercise, and the answer is still yes it is

Low intensity squash. Hummm. I guess you are the type of person with instinctual knowledge and has no need to research anything?

 

[david k]

im not sure low intensity is possible, but the amount of time you play, time between points etc is variable. If your not to that level as i say you can build up to it if this is the sport you wish to play. regardless it is good exercise for the right person

i dont have to research squash as i have no reason to have a knowledge of it

 

[ufkacbln]

i do not need to have evidence before 'popping' up with belief and views. My beliefs and views are my beliefs and views whether backed up by evidence or not

the fact you cannot trust or even have an opinion without hard evidence is worrying

I sincerely hope you never intend to work in the Medical profession!

 

[lukesdad]

Here's the problem as I see it.

The majority of people who have decided not to wear a helmet started from the position that helmets must do something. They just must. Then, when they examined the evidence, they found that there was no evidence that cycle helmets reduced head injuries. Furthermore, that cycle helmets may in fact increase injuries. The decision not to wear a helmet is a rational decision based on the available facts.

The majority of people who do wear helmets are not fully informed or aware of the evidence. Like the first group, they assume that helmets must have a protective effect, but have not been made aware of the evidence that shows this not to be the case. This is not an irrational decision, but it is not fully informed.

There is a minority of people who have looked at or been shown the evidence, but nevertheless insist that helmets have a protective effect - usually along the lines of "I crashed, my helmet split. If it wasn't for the helmet my head would have split for sure." These people are holding an irrational faith-based position, and we have had people say as much - something along the lines of "I don't care what the evidence says, I will always believe that helmets are protective, and no matter what evidence I am shown, I will never change my mind"

Now if the first group were not under the constant background threat of prohibition, it wouldn't matter so much. But we have real examples of creeping prohibition:
-training courses (which definitely do have a protective effect) being denied to people who do not wish to wear a helmet
-many sportives and other events now state that a helmet is mandatory
-lobby groups and some politicians proposing legislation to make helmets mandatory

There is no prospect of helmets being banned, none. So the people in groups 2 and 3 will always be free to exercise their choice (whether that choice is informed or not) to wear a helmet, but the people in group 1 are always having to justify their choice, as if they are the irrational ones!

Now if you want to wear a helmet, that's up to you, but you cannot pretend the evidence shows them to be effective, and if you make claims that cannot be backed up, expect to be challenged on it - because these are exactly the same claims that compulsionists use, and they need to be challenged wherever they are made.

Thats a pretty clear position, so in summary;

You belong to group 1. Group 1 greatest fear is compulsion and to fight this the concensus is to prove helmets are unsafe and the wearers of ill informed.

 

[lukesdad]

Not even the majority of non wearers ride without them because they believe they are unsafe. They do so because they dont like wearing them simple.

 

[ufkacbln]

The problem is when the expectations are really unrealsitic, for instance full face helmets are unnecessary because:

no, with the helmet being wider than my face im guessing that will take the impact if i fall