Pro-helmet article on BBC One Show right now

[MacB]

Well hello there!

up until now I always thought some internet responses were over the top, like 'you just made me puke a bit in my mouth', after that I'm not so sure....not the piccy, your reply I mean!!!!

 

[Zoiders]

Compulsion for cyclists should mean compulsion for drivers to wear helmets as well considering the rate of head an neck injuries that drivers suffer in the event of a crash.

 

[screenman]

Interesting example of a crash helmet working in the TOC 6.7 mile from the end you can actually see the guy doing a head stand on the road at speed. Would have been a nasty case of gravel rash without it.

 

[david k]

"Intransigent" was not abusive, anyway, my replies concerned views aired by "Snorri", that I agreed with, but that you called " a load of rubbish"! You continue with the Health & Safety book of revelations.

were did i say abusive?, your making quotes up now to continue your point.

If i quote H&S its because wearing of protective equipment is in realtion to health and safety.

 

[Bman]

as the severity of a fall is likely to be less than a fall from a cycle then i judge walking not worthy of wearing a helmet. I think this is also the opinion of the majority, i often see cyclists with helmets on, I dont think I have ever seen a walker with a helmet on

Risk assessments dont have to be written, they can be done in your head, i guess people do them all the time without knowing it. H&S laws have just given it a name now

It could be that some of them have had the wool pulled over their eyes by the media/helmet manufacturers too?

I dont think in this current stage, with no scientific proof either way, we should take helmet usage as a gauge of how effective they are. Like previously mentioned, for all we know, it could be putting them at more risk.

 

[Bman]

<snip>
The biggest risks I face are from HGV's and stupid car drivers - neither is massively mitigated by a helmet.
<snip>

Exactly. I prefer to keep my wits about me, rather than wearing a polystyrene placebo that might prevent a bit of “gravel rash”.

 

[threebikesmcginty]

up until now I always thought some internet responses were over the top, like 'you just made me puke a bit in my mouth', after that I'm not so sure....not the piccy, your reply I mean!!!!

He's a fast mover though, the sly old dog - must've been a tough choice too, Norm or rich p.

 

[downfader]

A thought popped in my head today. No one ever looks at a smashed up car, with the roof all in and the bonnet pushed right back, and says "wow, looks like the car saved the guy's life!"

They look at the car and go "Jesus. How did anyone survive?"

People look at a smashed cycle helmet and instantly say "helmet must have saved a life."

 

[ufkacbln]

I think it's safe to say that after nearly 230 posts, we have came to the logical conclusion that all cyclists should wear motorcycle helmets.

Spoken in jest, but sadly the answer.....

Motorcyle helmets are more appropriate for the speeed of racing cyclists, and also would prevent the many facial and dental injuries that cyclists experience. The British Dental Association are querying why present cycle helmet design does not address these issues

Perhaps we should be asking whether Cracknell's injuries would have been far less if he had been wearing a fill motorcycle helmet as opposed to a flimsy polystyrene shell?

 

[ufkacbln]

as the severity of a fall is likely to be less than a fall from a cycle then i judge walking not worthy of wearing a helmet. I think this is also the opinion of the majority, i often see cyclists with helmets on, I dont think I have ever seen a walker with a helmet on

Risk assessments dont have to be written, they can be done in your head, i guess people do them all the time without knowing it. H&S laws have just given it a name now

The Health and Safety Executive is an interesting addition as they refused to support the Post Office when they tried to make cycle helmets compulsory for their staff. The declaration was that cycle helmets did not come under the definition of PPE and hence the PO was forced to institute it as a uniform policy.

 

[totallyfixed]

as the severity of a fall is likely to be less than a fall from a cycle then i judge walking not worthy of wearing a helmet. I think this is also the opinion of the majority, i often see cyclists with helmets on, I dont think I have ever seen a walker with a helmet on

Risk assessments dont have to be written, they can be done in your head, i guess people do them all the time without knowing it. H&S laws have just given it a name now

You are obviously a person who has a healthy respect for H&S and abides by the rules. Risk assessment is one of the basic tenets from which H&S laws are arrived at. another important aspect are statistics, if it has been shown that a particular action when performed poorly results in an accident which in turn has a probability of a head injury you would take notice and take appropriate measures to protect yourself, yes?
I take it then you wear a helmet when driving your car, yes?
If you don't then I find your logic difficult to understand.

 

[david k]

You are obviously a person who has a healthy respect for H&S and abides by the rules. Risk assessment is one of the basic tenets from which H&S laws are arrived at. another important aspect are statistics, if it has been shown that a particular action when performed poorly results in an accident which in turn has a probability of a head injury you would take notice and take appropriate measures to protect yourself, yes?
I take it then you wear a helmet when driving your car, yes?
If you don't then I find your logic difficult to understand.

you may find the logic difficult but i dont, if i am wrong for wearing a helmet when riding and not when driving, then i am not on my own as the majority of people i see on bikes or in cars are in agreement with me. You appear to be in the minority, that in turn doesnt mean you are wrong. But it still means i dont agree with your views

 

[Bman]

you may find the logic difficult but i dont, if i am wrong for wearing a helmet when riding and not when driving, then i am not on my own as the majority of people i see on bikes or in cars are in agreement with me. You appear to be in the minority, that in turn doesnt mean you are wrong. But it still means i dont agree with your views

cough

It could be that some of them have had the wool pulled over their eyes by the media/helmet manufacturers too?

I dont think in this current stage, with no scientific proof either way, we should take helmet usage as a gauge of how effective they are. Like previously mentioned, for all we know, it could be putting them at more risk.

A lot of people have IPhones too. But I wont go into that

 

[Norm]

You are obviously a person who has a healthy respect for H&S and abides by the rules. Risk assessment is one of the basic tenets from which H&S laws are arrived at. another important aspect are statistics, if it has been shown that a particular action when performed poorly results in an accident which in turn has a probability of a head injury you would take notice and take appropriate measures to protect yourself, yes?
I take it then you wear a helmet when driving your car, yes?
If you don't then I find your logic difficult to understand.

I think you skipped a step which incorporates the probability of the accident but, even without that, I think that the difference between the probability of a head injury in a car accident and the probability of a head injury in a bike accident would be enough of a basis to take different approaches to helmet use.

 

[Mad at urage]

you may find the logic difficult but i dont, if i am wrong for wearing a helmet when riding and not when driving, then i am not on my own as the majority of people i see on bikes or in cars are in agreement with me. You appear to be in the minority, that in turn doesnt mean you are wrong. But it still means i dont agree with your views

Known as the Lemming argument