This is a helmet debate

[Red Light]

No apple & custard?!

I'm a cheesecake man myself.

What's interesting (and I know the scale is quite small) but it's not just a rise, it's quite a dramatic rise.

Yes, all the usual caveats but if the trend line to the mid-90's had continued there would have been about six fewer deaths (40% less) by 2011.

Anyone got any idea where I can find some normalising data such as the number of competitors/races/distance?

 

[david k]

"it should be law"

http://www.cyclechat...ost__p__1672021

If you've now changed your mind and now accept it's ok for people to make their own choice, then this is good, and these threads haven't all been in vain :-)

youve quoted me as saying it should be law but i cannot see where i have said that, can you clarify please, put post number and line

 

[gavroche]

Well ....

More cyclists, makes the roads safer* for cycling. This has been demonstrated.
More cyclists means there are potentially** less cars on the road, which is safer for cyclists, other motorists, pedestrians and playing children.
More cyclists/less cars means less polution.

Not a big leap of imagination is it?

*Safer - reduced accidents, reduced effects of pollution, particularly particulates.
**Of course not all cyclist are converts from car driving, but a proportion undoubtably are.

Most cyclists are also motorists and only use their bikes for short distances ( like me).
Despite what the media keeps telling us, cars are getting cleaner and more efficient all the time so pollution is not such a bit debate in my book ( not for cars anyway).
Cyclists also create pollution by breathing out ( co2) faster than pedestrians. It may seem strange but it is true so forget the " save the planet" crap and enjoy living.

 

[philipbh]

youve quoted me as saying it should be law but i cannot see where i have said that, can you clarify please, put post number and line

The link back to the original post seems problematic - but here is the text

Posted 17 May 2011 - 21:49:50

i think you should, but cannot make you. it makes me feel better and is more likely to help me than hinder me if i had an accident, regardless of this people thin its a bad idea. thats why it should be law, to protect people from themselves

 

[Rebel Ian]

"To protect people from themselves"??? Ha! That sounds like some of the people we get knocking on our door at the weekend!!

Loosely translated as I want to interfere in your life because it's something I believe in when in reality it has sod all to do with me!

 

[david k]

"I think you should but cannot make you" was my view then and hasnt changed despite the points raised.

Some of the points appear to offer credible counter arguments and are ones I am not knowledgeable or experienced enough to counter. I am not sure that the people raising counter arguments have the background to advise otherwise either, but as I cannot prove that one way or the other will have to accept them as your points. I also feel some counter arguments are very flawed such as falling off bikes and injuring other parts of the body meant wearing a helmet is pointless.

I have posted that implementing this as law would be a brave and difficult step and one I dont think could be policed successfully. My point on law was meant as more general in response to previous discussions regarding ppe regs, seat belts etc etc and the fact that they are made to protect people from themselves. Talking generally I still feel laws of this nature are justified.

there are obviously manner emotional arguments and scientific points raised for and against, and for now at least maybe the best way is to advise people on the pros and cons, give the advice based on knowledge thus far and hope people make the correct judgement, this may alter in future and if this is for the good and health of all cyclists then i would support it wholeheartedly.

 

[Rebel Ian]

there are obviously manner emotional arguments and scientific points raised for and against, and for now at least maybe the best way is to advise people on the pros and cons, give the advice based on knowledge thus far and hope people make the correct judgement, this may alter in future and if this is for the good and health of all cyclists then i would support it wholeheartedly.

Sorry to carry this debate on, but "make the correct judgement" for who, david? Anyone else's judgement where my personal safety is concerned is entirely irrelevant.

 

[Red Light]

Cyclists also create pollution by breathing out ( co2) faster than pedestrians. It may seem strange but it is true so forget the " save the planet" crap and enjoy living.

Thus demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of the issues. Respired CO2 is very different in the global warming context to fossil fuel derived CO2.

Also cyclists may be breathing out faster but they are also traveling faster so doing it for a shorter time. Given that overall cycling is quite a lot more efficient than walking, the respired CO2 for a specific journey will be less for cyclists.

 

[Crackle]

"I think you should but cannot make you" was my view then and hasnt changed despite the points raised.

Some of the points appear to offer credible counter arguments and are ones I am not knowledgeable or experienced enough to counter. I am not sure that the people raising counter arguments have the background to advise otherwise either, but as I cannot prove that one way or the other will have to accept them as your points. I also feel some counter arguments are very flawed such as falling off bikes and injuring other parts of the body meant wearing a helmet is pointless.

I have posted that implementing this as law would be a brave and difficult step and one I dont think could be policed successfully. My point on law was meant as more general in response to previous discussions regarding ppe regs, seat belts etc etc and the fact that they are made to protect people from themselves. Talking generally I still feel laws of this nature are justified.

there are obviously manner emotional arguments and scientific points raised for and against, and for now at least maybe the best way is to advise people on the pros and cons, give the advice based on knowledge thus far and hope people make the correct judgement, this may alter in future and if this is for the good and health of all cyclists then i would support it wholeheartedly.

So far you've not presented one jot of evidence that wearing a cycle helmet might actually be of benefit other than your views which by implication, see highlighted sentence, you seem to think have more value because of your self proclaimed H&S background. That's an impression, I could be wrong but I certainly don't remember seeing any evidence.

 

[4F]

said that several pages ago, its the anti helmet brigade who have more posts on the subject

There is no anti helmet brigade. There is the pro choice group who get rather sick and tired of pro helmeters trying to tell others what they should or should not wear.

I do not wear a helmet however I respect the right for each and everyone to make their own choice.

 

[Campfire]

Absolutely right, talk to Graham Obree about the UCI, and if you don't know who G.O is, shame on you, get googling.

It's surprising how many people DON'T know of Graeme Obree?

 

[david k]

Sorry to carry this debate on, but "make the correct judgement" for who, david? Anyone else's judgement where my personal safety is concerned is entirely irrelevant.

make the correct judgement for yourself. so you want to wear one then wear one

 

[david k]

So far you've not presented one jot of evidence that wearing a cycle helmet might actually be of benefit other than your views which by implication, see highlighted sentence, you seem to think have more value because of your self proclaimed H&S background. That's an impression, I could be wrong but I certainly don't remember seeing any evidence.

Your correct, i haven't based my own views on actual evidence other than my own thoughts on the matter, and have always maintained as such. I also added that i do not have the experience or knowledge to counter anyones argument so will have to accept it, as their point of view anyway. I dont know what experience others have either I will have to take comments at face value. This is the nature of the beast with a forum.

People seem to have issue with my opinion that I like to wear a helmet and I think it is of value. I suppose I also feel that others should feel the same way but then it comes down to (for the time being) a persons right to wear or not to wear. There are many who oppose drinking alcohol, others say its their right to drink what they want, these differences of opinion go on in society.

Self proclaimed, well I suppose everything anyone says abouts oneself on a forum is self proclaimed isnt it?

 

[Crackle]

Your correct, i haven't based my own views on actual evidence other than my own thoughts on the matter, and have always maintained as such. I also added that i do not have the experience or knowledge to counter anyones argument so will have to accept it, as their point of view anyway. I dont know what experience others have either I will have to take comments at face value. This is the nature of the beast with a forum.

People seem to have issue with my opinion that I like to wear a helmet and I think it is of value. I suppose I also feel that others should feel the same way but then it comes down to (for the time being) a persons right to wear or not to wear. There are many who oppose drinking alcohol, others say its their right to drink what they want, these differences of opinion go on in society.

Self proclaimed, well I suppose everything anyone says abouts oneself on a forum is self proclaimed isnt it?

Fine but it doesn't come down to individual opinions and that's why there's little point in you continuing to say you wear one, seemingly everywhere, as Dan B pointed out.

If helmets are to become compulsory, it needs to be on some form of evidence that they benefit everyone. You seem to be ignoring the fact the evidence doesn't exist, well, there is a meta-study but........... Not only that it needs not to detract from cycling as a form of healthy excercise, any law which reduces cycling levels is counter productive.

I wear a helmet by the way. Having fractured my skull in a cycling accident I know the effects but I am for choice and against compulsion. I'm also for people being informed about what level of protection people can really expect from a helmet, there's often a shocking level of naivety about that.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Most cyclists are also motorists and only use their bikes for short distances ( like me).
Despite what the media keeps telling us, cars are getting cleaner and more efficient all the time so pollution is not such a bit debate in my book ( not for cars anyway).
Cyclists also create pollution by breathing out ( co2) faster than pedestrians. It may seem strange but it is true so forget the " save the planet" crap and enjoy living.

Cars maybe getting cleaner but they're still a significant cause of pollution in urban areas, especially considering most are used for relatively short journeys at their least efficient. Journeys that are readily replaced by the bike
There's also pollution in terms of noise as well.
It's not a case of 'save the planet' crap it's about creating a better local environment for everybody, what's so wrong with that?