Cycling is so very dangerous !!

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
landsurfer
Posts: 4089
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm
Location: Rotherham

Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby landsurfer » 6 Jan 2019, 5:13pm

Helmet manufactures.
They need to sell helmets and they need you to be too frightened to cycle without one.

ANGI

Cycling is so dangerous that you must wear a helmet that calls for help !
Has a "Safety Beacon".
A "Crash Detector"
A "Tracker".

ANGi / SPECIALIZED .... a brand i will never use ....
But ......
Watch the arms race begin as all the other manufactures of fear ... sorry "Helmets " ... jump on the band wagon !!

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
RSF.
Audax UK.
The road goes on forever.

whoof
Posts: 1505
Joined: 29 Apr 2014, 2:13pm

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby whoof » 6 Jan 2019, 8:37pm

It appears that it's as dangerous as driving.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-tech/ ... -explained

Samuel D
Posts: 2407
Joined: 8 Mar 2015, 11:05pm
Location: Paris

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby Samuel D » 7 Jan 2019, 8:18am

The scaredy-cats are winning. Recently a group ride I joined asked us to take a mobile phone for emergencies.

Marcus Aurelius
Posts: 283
Joined: 1 Feb 2018, 10:20am

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby Marcus Aurelius » 7 Jan 2019, 9:39am

It’s not so much ‘scaredy cat’ as doing what’s required by insurance companies a lot of the time.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 11463
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby mjr » 7 Jan 2019, 9:52am

Marcus Aurelius wrote:It’s not so much ‘scaredy cat’ as doing what’s required by insurance companies a lot of the time.

Prove it. Usually helmet zealots either won't show their insurance policy document (I suspect because it doesn't force helmets) or won't say whether they tried to get a policy without helmet forcing, such as getting event insurance through CUK instead of BC (I suspect because they offered to force helmets without being asked, which of course an insurer would accept because it limits participation numbers so reduces their risk overall even if it increases it slightly per rider).
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Phil Fouracre
Posts: 755
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 12:16pm
Location: Deepest Somerset

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby Phil Fouracre » 7 Jan 2019, 10:34am

landsurfer wrote:Helmet manufactures.
They need to sell helmets and they need you to be too frightened to cycle without one.

ANGI

Cycling is so dangerous that you must wear a helmet that calls for help !
Has a "Safety Beacon".
A "Crash Detector"
A "Tracker".

ANGi / SPECIALIZED .... a brand i will never use ....
But ......
Watch the arms race begin as all the other manufactures of fear ... sorry "Helmets " ... jump on the band wagon !!

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:


Thanks for nothing! You’ve just spoilt my week :-(

Looked up ANGi, I don’t believe it, where will it all end?? So depressing

Ps: I’ve got a better idea; stay in bed for the rest of your life.....
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

slowster
Posts: 429
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby slowster » 7 Jan 2019, 12:23pm

Phil Fouracre wrote:Thanks for nothing! You’ve just spoilt my week :-(

Looked up ANGi, I don’t believe it, where will it all end?? So depressing

Ps: I’ve got a better idea; stay in bed for the rest of your life.....

I strongly recommend you spend ten minutes looking at the photographs in the Roughstuff Fellowship archive as an antidote - https://www.instagram.com/rsfarchive/. People riding bikes and enjoying themselves with nary a helmet in sight.

Marcus Aurelius
Posts: 283
Joined: 1 Feb 2018, 10:20am

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby Marcus Aurelius » 7 Jan 2019, 12:45pm

mjr wrote:
Marcus Aurelius wrote:It’s not so much ‘scaredy cat’ as doing what’s required by insurance companies a lot of the time.

Prove it. Usually helmet zealots either won't show their insurance policy document (I suspect because it doesn't force helmets) or won't say whether they tried to get a policy without helmet forcing, such as getting event insurance through CUK instead of BC (I suspect because they offered to force helmets without being asked, which of course an insurer would accept because it limits participation numbers so reduces their risk overall even if it increases it slightly per rider).


As a BC ride leader you have to risk asses your routes to satisfy the insurance requirements. If you asses a part of a route as having a potential increased risk of riders falling, the mitigation could be using a lid. Then wearing a lid becomes a requirement for participation in the ride. I don’t personally include such things in my risk assessments, but I know lots of RLs that do. BC’s risk assessment for Ride Leaders on an official Guided ride does include these terms, so RLs have to wear a lid on an official Guided Ride. Personally, I’ve had a few ‘offs’ in the past, where my head has taken the brunt of the impact. Therefore I think a lid is a worthwhile thing to wear. I certainly don’t expect anyone else to wear a lid if they don’t want to. I wish they would, but I don’t try and make anyone do so.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 11463
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby mjr » 7 Jan 2019, 1:41pm

Marcus Aurelius wrote:
mjr wrote:
Marcus Aurelius wrote:It’s not so much ‘scaredy cat’ as doing what’s required by insurance companies a lot of the time.

Prove it. Usually helmet zealots either won't show their insurance policy document (I suspect because it doesn't force helmets) or won't say whether they tried to get a policy without helmet forcing, such as getting event insurance through CUK instead of BC (I suspect because they offered to force helmets without being asked, which of course an insurer would accept because it limits participation numbers so reduces their risk overall even if it increases it slightly per rider).


As a BC ride leader you have to risk asses your routes to satisfy the insurance requirements. [...various claims...]

Is BC's policy wording visible? Did BC try to get a policy without helmet forcing? (To be clear, I view certain BC managers I've interacted with as helmet zealots - I'm not saying anything against you.)
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8530
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby Cunobelin » 7 Jan 2019, 7:15pm

The ignorance of insurers and organisers is legendary


After several years of pointing out that UK Cycling Event's requirements excluded EN1078 helmets (the European standard) by insisting on up to date Snell and the long obsolete ANSI ......the EN1078 helmets do not comply with the tougher Snell Standards, and ANSI doesn't actually exist..... the majority of helmets on their ride were in fact banned by their own rules. They cannot even claim it is an insurance requirement as they clearly stated that wearing an EN1078 hemet were not covered by the event's insurance.

Now they have taken this on board and added EN 1078 to the list:

5. You must wear a safety-approved cycling helmet complying with latest EN1078, ANSI Z90/4 or SNELL standards during your participation in the event. Any rider not wearing a helmet will not be covered by the event insurance and will be disqualified from the event and could be liable for damages if involved in an accident on that basis. You must accept this as a condition of entry.




Surely any organisation would do basic research about what they required...... that would have discovered that the ANSI Z90/4 has't existed for many years. The committee last met in over 20 years, and was superseded by ATM some 15 years ago by the ASTM standard..... the stupidity and ignorance continues

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 8530
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby Cunobelin » 7 Jan 2019, 7:30pm

Phil Fouracre wrote:
landsurfer wrote:Helmet manufactures.
They need to sell helmets and they need you to be too frightened to cycle without one.

ANGI

Cycling is so dangerous that you must wear a helmet that calls for help !
Has a "Safety Beacon".
A "Crash Detector"
A "Tracker".

ANGi / SPECIALIZED .... a brand i will never use ....
But ......
Watch the arms race begin as all the other manufactures of fear ... sorry "Helmets " ... jump on the band wagon !!

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:


Thanks for nothing! You’ve just spoilt my week :-(

Looked up ANGi, I don’t believe it, where will it all end?? So depressing

Ps: I’ve got a better idea; stay in bed for the rest of your life.....



I hope you are wearing a helmet... on average 290 people died each year falling out of bed, and a large number of these are head injuries.

reohn2
Posts: 32302
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby reohn2 » 7 Jan 2019, 10:56pm

slowster wrote:
Phil Fouracre wrote:Thanks for nothing! You’ve just spoilt my week :-(

Looked up ANGi, I don’t believe it, where will it all end?? So depressing

Ps: I’ve got a better idea; stay in bed for the rest of your life.....

I strongly recommend you spend ten minutes looking at the photographs in the Roughstuff Fellowship archive as an antidote - https://www.instagram.com/rsfarchive/. People riding bikes and enjoying themselves with nary a helmet in sight.

+1
And say three times after me,bugger 'em,bugger'em,bugger'em,. :wink:
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.

landsurfer
Posts: 4089
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm
Location: Rotherham

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby landsurfer » 8 Jan 2019, 6:35am

Glad to be a RSF member myself .............
RSF.
Audax UK.
The road goes on forever.

Phil Fouracre
Posts: 755
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 12:16pm
Location: Deepest Somerset

Re: Cycling is so very dangerous !!

Postby Phil Fouracre » 8 Jan 2019, 5:17pm

Love the pics :-)
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 1852
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm

Re: CYCLING IS SO DANGEROUS !!

Postby The utility cyclist » 8 Jan 2019, 6:29pm

Marcus Aurelius wrote:
mjr wrote:
Marcus Aurelius wrote:It’s not so much ‘scaredy cat’ as doing what’s required by insurance companies a lot of the time.

Prove it. Usually helmet zealots either won't show their insurance policy document (I suspect because it doesn't force helmets) or won't say whether they tried to get a policy without helmet forcing, such as getting event insurance through CUK instead of BC (I suspect because they offered to force helmets without being asked, which of course an insurer would accept because it limits participation numbers so reduces their risk overall even if it increases it slightly per rider).


As a BC ride leader you have to risk asses your routes to satisfy the insurance requirements. If you asses a part of a route as having a potential increased risk of riders falling, the mitigation could be using a lid. Then wearing a lid becomes a requirement for participation in the ride. I don’t personally include such things in my risk assessments, but I know lots of RLs that do. BC’s risk assessment for Ride Leaders on an official Guided ride does include these terms, so RLs have to wear a lid on an official Guided Ride. Personally, I’ve had a few ‘offs’ in the past, where my head has taken the brunt of the impact. Therefore I think a lid is a worthwhile thing to wear. I certainly don’t expect anyone else to wear a lid if they don’t want to. I wish they would, but I don’t try and make anyone do so.


And as usual the logic for this thinking has none. Why is there a risk of coming off, is it because behahiour in the first instance is not appropriate for the conditions, usually going too fast, not paying attention to road surface despite already decreed in advance you know it to be not that great. So what happens when you wear a helmet, people take greater risk at those same points thus increases chance of an off than before, it does exacerbate this.
Doesn't wearing the helmet increase the chances of a head strike in any case where you are massively more likely to miss striking your head without?

Don't you find it somewhat more than coincidental that the weekend warrior and this is directly aimed at BC et al, that there has been significant increases in coming off the bike and getting injured/striking their heads, swiftly followed by the 'helmet saved my life' story, since helmet wearing became a thing?
I don't, they go hand in hand and is replicated in every country and at competition level. it's a total false logic that says, increased chance of coming off, so let's increase it further whilst increasing chance of a head strike by making our heads significantly heavier and bigger
Self serving to say the least.