Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

For all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmet usage will be moved here.
User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10746
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Cunobelin » 17 Jul 2020, 6:59am

pjclinch wrote:
Jdsk wrote:Which datasets or original studies are you using to identify that jump, please?


You'll have to forgive my lack of rigour in not seeking out the original data reported on by Davis & Adams, but if you want a set of road accident figures for the UK as a whole, year to year, I imagine something like STATS19 is a typical first port of call.

Pete.


Road statistics are a deliberate fudge. the majority of head injuries are NOT recorded, it is an easy way of filtering out vast numbers of head injuries which are inconvenient for the pro-helmet debate

Cohort studies of hospital attendances and admissions are the truer picture, but unpopular as they persistently undermine claims that cyclists are a high-risk group.

Jdsk
Posts: 1292
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Jdsk » 17 Jul 2020, 10:03am

Jdsk wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote: I wonder if there's anything the medical profession involved in boxing can do but don't that could limit harm.

Have you had a chance to read the WMA statement?

I'll assume not.

There's a whole set of ethical issues for doctors in boxing:

1 Treating people who have been injured. That one's easy: it's not a doctor's rôle to judge and treatment should be according to need. (But see also decisions in war zone etc... )

2 Public education and campaigning. Also easy. And for boxing exemplified by the WMA and many other medical associations and many individuals who have spoken out and made recommendations. But it's not their job to regulate the activities of other competent adults, that falls to the state.

3 Being personally involved in the sport. Very difficult. If you do you might be propping it up, and you're very likely to be accused of that. If you don't then crucial rôles such as assessing fitness to participate might not be fulfilled. (And see also participation in capital punishment... )

Jonathan

Jdsk
Posts: 1292
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Jdsk » 17 Jul 2020, 10:11am

pjclinch wrote:
Jdsk wrote:Which datasets or original studies are you using to identify that jump, please?

You'll have to forgive my lack of rigour in not seeking out the original data reported on by Davis & Adams, but if you want a set of road accident figures for the UK as a whole, year to year, I imagine something like STATS19 is a typical first port of call.

Thanks for the straight answer.

This was about the effects of wearing belts/ mandated wearing of belts on harm to pedestrians and cyclists in the real world. I've now been through both Adams and Davis. The only reference to original work that I can find is Harvey and Durbin (1986). Can anyone find any others in there?

Thanks

Jonathan

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3950
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby pjclinch » 17 Jul 2020, 10:28am

Cunobelin wrote:
pjclinch wrote:
Jdsk wrote:Which datasets or original studies are you using to identify that jump, please?


You'll have to forgive my lack of rigour in not seeking out the original data reported on by Davis & Adams, but if you want a set of road accident figures for the UK as a whole, year to year, I imagine something like STATS19 is a typical first port of call.

Pete.


Road statistics are a deliberate fudge. the majority of head injuries are NOT recorded, it is an easy way of filtering out vast numbers of head injuries which are inconvenient for the pro-helmet debate

Cohort studies of hospital attendances and admissions are the truer picture, but unpopular as they persistently undermine claims that cyclists are a high-risk group.


Though here we were looking at the jump in overall cyclist/pedestrian (and also rear-seat passenger) casualties following seat belt legislation, for which something like the DfT's stats are, while far from perfect, still probably a fair way to look at it. Especially as you have a large, continuous and freely accessible (both cost and ease) data set where you can look at historical data dating back to before you thought of your study.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13756
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Leafy suburbia

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Cyril Haearn » 17 Jul 2020, 10:49am

Were boxing banned, it would continue underground, like foxhunting, cockfighting
Boxing is a bit busin€$$ too
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB, 60097
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

Jdsk
Posts: 1292
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Jdsk » 17 Jul 2020, 10:55am

pjclinch wrote:Though here we were looking at the jump in overall cyclist/pedestrian (and also rear-seat passenger) casualties following seat belt legislation, for which something like the DfT's stats are, while far from perfect, still probably a fair way to look at it. Especially as you have a large, continuous and freely accessible (both cost and ease) data set where you can look at historical data dating back to before you thought of your study.

Have you got a link to a convenient set of those for the relevant period, please?

Thanks

Jonathan

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3950
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby pjclinch » 17 Jul 2020, 11:06am

Jdsk wrote:
pjclinch wrote:Though here we were looking at the jump in overall cyclist/pedestrian (and also rear-seat passenger) casualties following seat belt legislation, for which something like the DfT's stats are, while far from perfect, still probably a fair way to look at it. Especially as you have a large, continuous and freely accessible (both cost and ease) data set where you can look at historical data dating back to before you thought of your study.

Have you got a link to a convenient set of those for the relevant period, please?


Not that I'll be able to find any quicker than you. It's been years since I downloaded stats from the DfT website, but aside from working out just what it was I needed the downloading itself was pretty painless.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10746
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Cunobelin » 17 Jul 2020, 6:08pm

Jdsk wrote:Totally agree.

In healthcare there might be some examples where there's direct harm to Patient B, but there are many where it's indirect such as antibiotics and resistance, and one where it's universal: the allocation of resources.

But I don't see the need for an analogy from another sector: there's obviously an ethical problem with any activity that causes the death of anybody. Has anyone ever denied that?

Jonathan

PS: Have I found the right papers?


What about PAtient C?

Patient C is in a group which has a higher incidence of the disease, and the drug is equally (even more effective) yet because someone says it is silly tio give it to Patient C they die in their hundreds

PaulaT
Posts: 125
Joined: 20 Dec 2018, 6:41pm
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby PaulaT » 18 Jul 2020, 12:39pm

pjclinch wrote:The main evidence was a clear jump in reported casualties amongst vulnerable road users following seat belt legislation (and commensurately greater use of safety equipment).


But is that evidence or coincidence? Many people (I'd say most) were wearing seat belts before it became mandatory. I'm afraid I don't have detailed access to the historical data. The only thing I've found so far is in

https://researchbriefings.files.parliam ... N06224.pdf

where table A1 reports 320 deaths in 1979, 302 in 1980, 310 in 1981 and 294 in 1982. There's a slight increase up to 1984 after which it drops away. Do we infer from this that after 1984 motorists en masse decided the ignore the seatbelt law? We do need to be cautious about such "peaks". We're dealing with a system where the risk to the individual is tiny. The chance of being seriously injured is less than 1 per 300,000 miles cycled and we're dealing with quite small numbers (low hundreds) of incidents so the error bars will be quite big.

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3950
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby pjclinch » 18 Jul 2020, 4:33pm

PaulaT wrote:But is that evidence or coincidence? Many people (I'd say most) were wearing seat belts before it became mandatory. I'm afraid I don't have detailed access to the historical data.


Exec Summary "I don't know"

But note that DFT stats are, I think, generally freely available, though working out what you're after is part of the game. Robert Davis is fairly accessible through the Road Danger Reduction Forum (https://rdrf.org.uk/) and as @CHAIRRDRF on Twitter and would be a much better person to ask than me.

Pete
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

PaulaT
Posts: 125
Joined: 20 Dec 2018, 6:41pm
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby PaulaT » 18 Jul 2020, 8:53pm

pjclinch wrote:
PaulaT wrote:But is that evidence or coincidence? Many people (I'd say most) were wearing seat belts before it became mandatory. I'm afraid I don't have detailed access to the historical data.


Exec Summary "I don't know"

But note that DFT stats are, I think, generally freely available, though working out what you're after is part of the game. Robert Davis is fairly accessible through the Road Danger Reduction Forum (https://rdrf.org.uk/) and as @CHAIRRDRF on Twitter and would be a much better person to ask than me.

Pete


Thanks for the info :)

RH20
Posts: 34
Joined: 25 Aug 2019, 6:37pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby RH20 » 21 Jul 2020, 7:32am

Getting back to masks today, If we are supposed to wear masks to help prevent other people getting COVID-19, why are some of these considerate people taking their mask from their face and then throwing it down on the pavement? There seems to be an increase in the number of masks and gloves littering pavements.
Here’s another thought. Why do we have to wear masks now? Surely the horse has bolted. Could it have anything to do with the awarding of multimillion pound contracts to provide PPE?
Does anyone know of any reasonable excuses that can be used for not wearing a mask. Reasonable as in the small print that we the plebs don’t know about

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3950
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby pjclinch » 21 Jul 2020, 8:03am

RH20 wrote:Getting back to masks today, If we are supposed to wear masks to help prevent other people getting COVID-19, why are some of these considerate people taking their mask from their face and then throwing it down on the pavement? There seems to be an increase in the number of masks and gloves littering pavements.


The problem there is these people are massive bell-ends.

RH20 wrote:Here’s another thought. Why do we have to wear masks now? Surely the horse has bolted. Could it have anything to do with the awarding of multimillion pound contracts to provide PPE?


The horse has not bolted. Wrong metaphor entirely. The virus is still very much present and will be infecting people until such time as either everyone's had it (and either lived to tell the tale or not) or there's a successful vaccine (it may be that having had it doesn't actually provide a long term immunity, we're not actually sure of that yet, along with a lot else, and a vaccine isn't necessarily a "silver bullet" either).

Cynical as I am about the crooks in charge at Westminster, active containment measures seem to be helping where they're taken and things are not going so well where they're not.

RH20 wrote:Does anyone know of any reasonable excuses that can be used for not wearing a mask. Reasonable as in the small print that we the plebs don’t know about


If you want a reasonable one then that would involve a medical exemption. I wouldn't put running a clear risk of needlessly endangering others as reasonable. How would you feel if e.g. a surgeon operating on you felt they could do without one, because it's more comfortable for them?

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

Oldjohnw
Posts: 4671
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Oldjohnw » 21 Jul 2020, 8:56am

I received this from Asthma UK:

https://www.asthma.org.uk/4a4a8010/cont ... aphic4.jpg

I don't visit shops (if I did I'd wear a mask) but yesterday i was cycling in Scotland and visited a cafe so I wore my mask.

I noticed that wearing masks appeared to be no big deal north of the border. Whatever we think of Sturgeon's politics generally she appears to have provided clear leadership during this health crisis, unlike the confusion we have emanating from Downing Street.
John

Jdsk
Posts: 1292
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Masks today, helmets tomorrow?

Postby Jdsk » 21 Jul 2020, 9:04am

RH20 wrote:Does anyone know of any reasonable excuses that can be used for not wearing a mask. Reasonable as in the small print that we the plebs don’t know about

There's a long list of examples in the governmental guidance:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own

Is this for you? Perhaps we could start by you saying the real reason that you don't to wear one?

Jonathan