Paper Helmets

[Wobblers]

[QUOTE 2876296, member: 45"]Sorry, I thought I was being clear. Obviously not.

This is only a small point, but I feel it worthwhile to mention, but as with the last time I did it is turned in to a couple of pages of banter....

I could trip up a kerb while walking at 3mph. If there's a wall in front of the kerb the lever effect (if that's what it's called) could result in my head hitting the wall at a speed in excess of 3mph as I fell. Now, I could come off my bike at 30mph, scrub off most of my speed by sliding, and then make head contact with a kerb at a relatively low speed. I may end up with severe road rash though, as of course there's going to be more energy around at that speed as you say.

So what I'm saying is that the speed you're travelling at when you go into an incident does not link to the speed that your head might hit something (if it does hit anything). So when someone makes a claim that an incident when riding at say 30mph is outside of the design parameters of a cycle helmet it's not an accurate statement, because usually the person is relating the speed that the helmet hits the anvil in a test with what's showing on your Cateye.[/quote]

You might hit your head at a greater velocity but it most probably it would be slower. However, that does not detract from the principle that the probability that you will suffer an impact, or series of impacts that exceed the helmet's capacity of energy absorption scale with with the square of the speed you are travelling at.

But this really is a bit besides the point, isn't it? And certainly not worth a whole two pages of banter! (Sighs of relief all round ) What is important is this impression that cycling is some unusual activity with high risks. I don't think that educating people on statistics is the way forward. There are no shortage of people who're still scared of flying, despite all the statistics that abound showing that it's the safest way to travel. Instead we need to encourage the view that cycling is a normal everyday activity rather than some sporting activity done only by athletes who need special equipment (and that includes the hi-viz and helmets). After all, you don't see people strap on protective equipment for the everyday activity of crossing busy roads.

 

[ufkacbln]

Once again Linford is lying and making claims that contradict his own posts.

As explained multiple times before .....

When he continues to advocate helmets an the grounds that they should always be worn, and yet refuses to discuss their effectiveness outside cycling..... then hypocritically diverts to discussion to motorcycle helmets making yet again a mockery of his own claims

Even then the truth is that you don't act upon your own statements:

It is called AGATT (All The Gear, All The Time) because the prospect of getting it wrong isn't pretty....[

...I always buckle up, and at the very least always use a lid...

Not only is he again using scare tactics as opposed to any fact, but you admit to not following your own advice. You do not wear "always wear a lid" and stating that you do is another dishonest claim

Yet ironically calls others "trolls" ?

About as logical as many of the other deviations, untruths and absurd claims on this and other threads.

Now given the disparity between the claims that LInford is making:

Should helmets always be worn as stated above, or do you feel that motorcyclist can make the decision ride without a helmet as you have also stated?

Which one is the lie?

 

[Linford]

Once again Linford is lying and making claims that contradict his own posts.

As explained multiple times before .....

When you continue to advocate helmets, and yet refuse to discuss their effectiveness outside cycling..... then hypocritically divert on to motorcycle helmets.

Even then the truth is that you don't act upon your own statements:



Not only are you again using scare tactics as opposed to any fact, but you admit to not following your own advice. You do not wear "always wear a lid" and stating that you do is another dishonest claim

If you feel that moving a motorcycle around in a closed space at walking pace is as dangerous as getting on it and riding it at speed with similar forces in play, you clearly don't have even a loose grip on reality.

You are beyond help....

 

[Linford]

Stop introducing facts, you troll.....

Facts are usually followed by references to them. I've yet to see any from him to back his claims

 

[ufkacbln]

If you feel that moving a motorcycle around in a closed space at walking pace is as dangerous as getting on it and riding it at speed with similar forces in play, you clearly don't have even a loose grip on reality.

Your erroneous assumption yet again

You are beyond help....

Stop introducing facts, you troll.....

I know - it is noted that once again us trolls are not getting any answers apart from the usual though.

Again the asked a question, don't like the answer so switch into evasion mode

 

[ufkacbln]

You should give that a try then, Linford. I have yet to see you provide any evidence for your 'facts'...

... and the few times he has tried, he has posted links that contradict his own claims!

His entire argument seems to be based on

Motorcyclists always wear helmets (except when they decide not to) and therefore all cyclists should all wear helmets all the time.... and aren't allowed to decide for themselves whether they do or not

After that it is the usual emotive BS

How many times do you need to demonstrate it though?

You are right, I think a standard reply to LInford's postings is the step forward

 

[Dan B]

Irresistible force, immovable object innit.

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a wall stamping on a human head - forever

 

[Linford]

Your erroneous assumption yet again








I know - it is noted that once again us trolls are not getting any answers apart from the usual though.

Again the asked a question, don't like the answer so switch into evasion mode

I gave you your answer...i can't help you if you won't accept it through your lack of understanding

 

[Linford]

You should give that a try then, Linford. I have yet to see you provide any evidence for your 'facts'...

For what...the thudguard ?

 

[ufkacbln]

LInford was previously asked on a number of occasions (On this thread and others) whether he felt that it was acceptable for motorcyclists to assess their risk and decide whether or not to wear a helmet, given that he himself does this

The answer has not been given on any of these occasions therefore it can only be assumed that this would undermine the "wear a helmet all the time" for cyclists argument if they were allowed to risk assess and not wear one when they felt it was inappropriate

 

[Linford]

LInford was previously asked on a number of occasions (On this thread and others) whether he felt that it was acceptable for motorcyclists to assess their risk and decide whether or not to wear a helmet, given that he himself does this

The answer has not been given on any of these occasions therefore it can only be assumed that this would undermine the "wear a helmet all the time" for cyclists argument if they were allowed to risk assess and not wear one when they felt it was inappropriate

You have a furtive imagination Cunobelin

I have stated that I am happy to move the bike around a car park at walkiing speed. I have stated also that I am happy to cycle at walking speed without a lid. this is because I do not consider therisk to be any greater at these speeds than when walking because I consider my control to be sufficient.

Now would I cycle or motorcycle on black ice at walking speed without a lid....no I wouldn't...why, because I've had slides at walking speeds and I consider that the machine control is too unpredictable in these conditions.

I consider this an entirely reasonable course given my decades of experience and training on 2 wheels.

Now about these stats of yours for pedestrians with brain injuries from walking accidents...whilst quoting them, can you exclude the over 70's, registered disabled (infirm), and those who's balance has been impared by drink or drugs, also can you exclude those injured whilst running as well ...we need a 'like for like' comparison to give each side a fair crack of the whip.

 

[Linford]

Don't they ride bikes either then?

I've personally definitely failed on at least one of them.

Which one ?

 

[Poacher]

You have a furtive imagination Cunobelin.

 

[Linford]

One must also consider relevancy when selecting ones variables too, dont you think?

[Is it National Prissy Day or summink?]

I stopped taking Cunobelin seriously when he both asked why adults don't wear a babies thudguard (note he has shut up about that now), and that he is also an expert in human anatomy having spent many years as a radiologist

 

[Linford]

... and he quotes evidence and everything!

Now who's more credible?

Of the Thudguard ?

You still don't feel confident enough to follow me around Oulton Park on a motorbike....why not...lacK of experience perhaps ?...experience... that is why I understand and acknowledge the risks, and you can't quantify them...or perhaps it is that there is too much risk given your lack of ability ....?