Wiggins is now pro-compulsion it seems .... Nobber.

[pawl]

My point exactly Green.You make your own decision.Iwould never presume to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do.

 

[glenn forger]

30,000 miles a year for ninety years, my mistake.

 

[Dayvo]

Well, not really. I have an opinion formed by reading the evidence, looking at what experts say and making my own mind up after riding 3000 miles a year for thirty years.

Joffey has an opinion based on a collision involving a man he won't name in circumstances he refuses to describe involving a doctor who remains anonymous.

That's a lot of miles. And you must have cycled past a LOT of people, too. Can you name them all/any?

 

[screenman]

30,000 miles a year for ninety years, my mistake.

In that case you have earned the right to be a grumpy old person. If you choose to be of course.

 

[glenn forger]

That's a lot of miles. And you must have cycled past a LOT of people, too. Can you name them all/any?

Probably, but I'm not citing any of them to back up my view.

 

[doog]

So you wear one every time you get in a car, where you are far more likely to receive a head injury?

Im not sure there is any concrete evidence to support this ? No one has any idea how many miles are being done by cyclists, they have no idea how many come off their bikes and no idea how many suffer head impacts that dont require medical intervention. If 100 people came off today, 8 damaged their helmet but none needed treatment.....who's the wiser ? You cant estimate cycle mileage by sales either.

 

[glenn forger]

 

[screenman]

I think it fair to say that if you hurt your head slightly in a car accident it is way more likely to be reported or logged than if you hurt it slightly coming off a bike.

Anyways, that is how I choose to see it.

 

[glenn forger]

I think it fair to say that if you hurt your head slightly in a car accident it is way more likely to be reported or logged than if you hurt it slightly coming off a bike.

Anyways, that is how I choose to see it.

That's true, but it also works the other way:

the STATS19 data on which these figures are based include all serious or fatal injuries where the police are called and which involve a vehicle on the roads. So any cyclist collision – including potentially single-vehicle crashes – where the emergency services attend, will be counted. But a pedestrian injury with no vehicle involved (such as tripping on a paving stone) is not included and in fact even pedestrian injuries involving motor traffic are known to be under-reported (see “Road accident casualties: a comparison of STATS19 data with Hospital Episode Statistics” [PDF]). An accurate comparison is difficult because “bike” is ambiguous in reporting and STATS19 and HES data do not tally on a number of levels. DfT are trying to reduce this but they have not managed yet.

On top of that, the figures for exposure for pedestrians are recognised as being terribly inaccurate, so much so that you probably can’t trust them to be right within a factor of two or three at best.

The inescapable conclusion, as noted by economist Tim Harford in the BBC’s More Or Less broadcast in August 2010, is that cycling is not especially dangerous – unless you consider being a pedestrian to be especially dangerous.

http://www.nohelmetlaw.org.uk/headline-concepts/is-cycling-dangerous

Broadly, it makes as much sense to force peds top wear helmets as cyclists.

 

[doog]

The majority of cycling related injuries dont involve a mechanically propelled motor vehicle so they are not recorded.. you simply cant pluck figures from the air. I fell off my bike numerous times as a kid and several times as an adult - never recorded.

Even the majority of road traffic accidents arent reported or recorded.

 

[Fab Foodie]

The majority of cycling related injuries dont involve a mechanically propelled motor vehicle so they are not recorded.. you simply cant pluck figures from the air. I fell off my bike numerous times as a kid and several times as an adult - never recorded.

Even the majority of road traffic accidents arent reported or recorded.

In my local casualty department the form asks if you are in a cycling accident whether you were wearing a helmet or not.
I know this because the one time I fell off my bike in recent memory bad enough to require treatment was the only time I've worn a helmet in years on account of the club event rules .... make of that what you will. I no longer ride with that club ....

 

[screenman]

I also have had a few off's over the years as have my kids, none have been reported as far as I know of.

 

[benb]

Broadly, it makes as much sense to force peds top wear helmets as cyclists.

Further: broadly, it makes as much sense to even suggest that peds wear helmets as to suggest cyclists do.

 

[benb]

The majority of cycling related injuries dont involve a mechanically propelled motor vehicle so they are not recorded.

Are you suggesting that a cyclist who is hospitalised without having been in a collision with a motor vehicle is not recorded? Because that's rubbish.

 

[screenman]

Peds do 3mph, now a helmet rule for drinkers that could work.

Are you suggesting that a cyclist who is hospitalised without having been in a collision with a motor vehicle is not recorded? Because that's rubbish.

I think if you read it like it did, it says most cycling incidents of minor injury are not reported.