Wrong people wrong helmets

[psmiffy]

Yup - image is image google tells no lies

however, I can only speak for what I have observed -

the vast majority of people using bikes where I live dont indulge in helmets and and/or lycra

a minority of cyclists in the mainstream cycling countries of europe wear cycling specific lyrca and or helmets

It is not black and white or the cycling equivalent of that despite what the press and cycling organisations make out

 

[Glow worm]

The Dutch Google search comes up with some brilliant pictures like this....

The British equivalent just showed loads of very dull looking helmeted sporty types holding up medals and the like and advertising Sky Telly for some reason. How disheartening!

 

[Cush]

I stopped cycling to work for several years because it was bloody dangerous approaching one of the M6 slip roads at night. I think it is a bit better now but I can understand why people see cycling as dangerous and it has little to do with helmets.

 

[totallyfixed]

I don't have today's figures, but I would think nearly 50% of cyclists wear a helmet now, and yet it would appear that after reading helmet related threads on CC, close to 100% of accidents happen to those wearing helmets. Purely anecdotal of course.

 

[Cush]

No one is disputing that your experience of that bit of road is correct, but that doesn't mean that cycling in general is 'dangerous'. Do you not see the difference?

I did not say that it is generally dangerous. When I gave over, there were not the safety aids we have now and the roundabout I am talking about was notorious for accidents. Actually at the moment with so many cycle lanes and the added awareness of the driving public to the cyclist, cycling is probably the safest it has been for years but if you are a journalist or some one who dislikes cyclist's it is very easy to pick up stats concerning cyclists involved in accidents and quote them out of context to prove to gullible people that cycling is dangerous.

 

[ufkacbln]

I did not say that it is generally dangerous. When I gave over, there were not the safety aids we have now and the roundabout I am talking about was notorious for accidents. Actually at the moment with so many cycle lanes and the added awareness of the driving public to the cyclist, cycling is probably the safest it has been for years but if you are a journalist or some one who dislikes cyclist's it is very easy to pick up stats concerning cyclists involved in accidents and quote them out of context to prove to gullible people that cycling is dangerous.

The trick used by Headway, BHIT and al is even more corrupt that that!
Take Headway's "Key facts"

It is estimated that 90,000 on-road and 100,000 off-road cycling accidents occur every year in the UK, of which a disproportionate number involve children under 16.

Child cyclists in the UK deserve the same protection as those in countries such as USA, Canada and Australia which have introduced compulsory helmet laws for children.

Headway - the brain injury association along with other national charities and the British Medical Association, believe that cycle helmets can save lives and prevent lifelong disability.

When you actually look at the figures in the original paper this is a gross and deliberate misrepresentation of both the figures and the context

When this was queried the reply was that:

The statistic relating to the 90,000 on-road and 100,000 off-road
accidents comes from the following reference: Bicycle Helmets 1 - Does
the dental profession have a role in promoting their use? Chapman HR,
Curran ALM. British Dental Journal 2004;196(9):555-560.

The actual paper stated that :

EPIDEMIOLOGY OF HEAD INJURY AFTER BICYCLE ACCIDENTS
Across all ages in the UK it is estimated that there are 90,000 road-
related and 100,000 off-road cycling accidents per year. Of these
accidents, 100,000 (53%) involved children under 16, suggesting
that children are at greater risk of injury during cycling than adults.
In the UK, there were between 127 and 203 cycling fatalities
per year between 1996 and 2002, of which 70–80% were
caused by traumatic brain injury (TBI).The most recent Gov-
ernment death and serious injury figures2 are summarised in
Table 1. In children under 16, two-thirds of cycle-related deaths
occur in road traffic accidents (RTAs) with the remaining third
occurring whilst the child is cycling off road. The majority of
injuries, however, occur when children are cycling off road3–6
and, of these, traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the most likely to
have long-term consequences.

They have simply quoted the figure for ALL cycle accidents and implied that they are all serious head injuries!

When you actually look at the figures in the paper 100,000 becomes - 150!

Of course 150 accidents in ALL cyclists will be even less if you just count children, and even less still if you look at non- vehicular accidents, probably as few as 20 or 30

Then there is the other misquote:

he number of pedal cyclists killed or seriously injured (KSI) in road accidents in 2007 was 2,564. This included 136 deaths. 522 children were among the KSI total. (Cycle Helmets, Lee AJ, Mann NP, Arch Dis Child 2003)

Again quoting ALL injuries and implying that they are head injuries.

The paper is here and again the quote from Headway does not actually occur in the paper, even by implication. They do not even mention 2007!