yet another boring helmet thread

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.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 48215
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby Mick F » 15 Jan 2011, 9:21am

hubgearfreak wrote: real group Z folks wouldn't even be reading this :wink:
I'm in Group Z2.

I'm someone who tries to read every post on here. Part of the job.
Mick F. Cornwall

snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby snibgo » 15 Jan 2011, 10:11am

Wandering around Cambridge the other day, I was pleased to see many cyclists, none with helmet, none with hi-viz. Last time I cycled there, I felt foolish in both helmet and hi-vis.

I wonder whether the culture of not wearing special gear helps create the high modal share or is a consequence of it, and what compulsion would do to the modal share.

User avatar
hubgearfreak
Posts: 8210
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby hubgearfreak » 15 Jan 2011, 11:19am

Cunobelin wrote:Should we use a cyclepath where provided simply to avoid arguing with a slimy solicitor?


it's not my view, it may not even by thridcrank's view. it's just how i remember thirdcrank commenting on his reason for wearing a helmet. hopefully he'll be along soon to confirm or refute my memory. perhaps when he does, he'll comment on your quite right extension of that train of thought?

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 17913
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby Vorpal » 15 Jan 2011, 11:25am

If we carry on, we'll run out of letters. :D

What group am I?

I wear a helmet, but am dead-set against compulsion. I've read all the arguments on both sides and understand the design principles of helmets. I've decided that the benefits outweigh the negatives. However, it is by no means clear-cut on either side, and I strongly believe that everyone should be allowed to make this decision for him/herself.

As for cycle paths, I think the same applies. Each person should be able to make a risk assessment according to how and what they ride, where they are going, who is with them, the quality of the facilities available, and their personal enjoyment; and decide for him/herself how to make the journey.

One of things I like about cycling is the freedom it gives me.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
hubgearfreak
Posts: 8210
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby hubgearfreak » 15 Jan 2011, 11:34am

Vorpal wrote:I wear a helmet


you wear one because you think itll do some good. group B.

i guess that there's another group. those who don't, but have been instructed by their employer or holiday/race organiser that they must for the event

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby meic » 15 Jan 2011, 11:37am

I boycott any event that needs me to wear a helmet, I am basically a cowardly person who doesnt want to get involved in any crashes.
Yma o Hyd

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 17913
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby Vorpal » 15 Jan 2011, 11:57am

hubgearfreak wrote:
Vorpal wrote:I wear a helmet


you wear one because you think itll do some good. group B.

i guess that there's another group. those who don't, but have been instructed by their employer or holiday/race organiser that they must for the event


I wouldn't put myself in group A because I don't *know* that it makes sense to wear one. I *think* that the benefits outweigh the negatives. I don't think there is compelling evidence on either side of the argument. I could fit into the group required to a wear a helmet by their employer or holiday/race organiser, but I also wear one when not required to.

What tips the balance for me, is that if anything should ever happen to me on the road, the last thing my family should have to deal with is something stupid and pointless like whether I was wearing the 'proper equipment'.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
yakdiver
Posts: 1197
Joined: 12 Jul 2007, 2:54pm
Location: North Baddesley Hampshire

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby yakdiver » 15 Jan 2011, 2:21pm

If you carry a first aid kit around with you sooner or later you will need it Image
Alias Numbnuts

User avatar
hubgearfreak
Posts: 8210
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby hubgearfreak » 15 Jan 2011, 3:02pm

Vorpal wrote:I wear a helmet - I've decided that the benefits outweigh the negatives.


hubgearfreak wrote:you wear one because you think itll do some good. group B.


Vorpal wrote:I *think* that the benefits outweigh the negatives.


that's still group B

thirdcrank
Posts: 28687
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby thirdcrank » 15 Jan 2011, 4:24pm

I've just had a look at this thread (for the first time) because I have been invited to do so. At the broad level, I have evolved into a Z (or should that be Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz? :wink: ) Along the way, I have expressed a view succinctly summarised here (although I don't remember the expression 'slimy solicitor,' it's near enough.)
hubgearfreak wrote:... thirdcrank is in this group, but to save his family having to argue with a slimy solicitor saying that it's his own fault he died when the driver wasn't looking. ...

As a footnote, I can only add that I have become aware that by wearing a helmet - and so appearing to endorse them - that I may unwittingly have undermined the arguments of those who are against them. As I have posted before, I have generally been pretty sharp with the people who have given me a patronising pat on the head for having the obvious good sense to wear one. Generally something on the lines of "Do you really think I'm so stupid to believe that a bit of polystyrene would save me if a car hit me?" I hope this goes at least a little way to make amends.

Edwards
Posts: 5981
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 10:09pm
Location: Birmingham

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby Edwards » 15 Jan 2011, 4:34pm

thirdcrank wrote: "Do you really think I'm so stupid to believe that a bit of polystyrene would save me if a car hit me?"


Finally a decent statement in a helmet thread.


What about if your wife/husband/partner/mother /father and anybody else I forgot, tells you to and you do not want to upset/annoy them.
Keith Edwards
I do not care about spelling and grammar

thirdcrank
Posts: 28687
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby thirdcrank » 15 Jan 2011, 4:48pm

The second barrel was on the lines "I wear it so the victim blamers will have one less thing to crow about."

Steady rider
Posts: 2188
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby Steady rider » 15 Jan 2011, 6:39pm

have you included the group who don't care

have you a group for those past cyclist who have stopped because of helmet laws?

have you a group for those who sometimes wear helmets

What are you trying to find out?
Last edited by Steady rider on 15 Jan 2011, 6:58pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
hubgearfreak
Posts: 8210
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 4:14pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby hubgearfreak » 15 Jan 2011, 6:42pm

Steady rider wrote:What are you trying to find out?


i was simply proposing a truce, a cease firing of endlessly repetitive statements. :)

Steady rider
Posts: 2188
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: yet another boring helmet thread

Postby Steady rider » 15 Jan 2011, 6:53pm

i was simply proposing a truce, a cease firing of endlessly repetitive statements


Helmet promoters across the world are pushing for helmet laws, people are offered less compensation if not wearing one, people are being discouraged from cycling and misled by various pro helmet reports.

Those with an interest in selling helmets or promoting them don't want discussion or debate.

I would suggest more debate to oppose and expose both helmet promotion and laws.

ps the debate may run for 50 years,


Cycling involves many issues, convenience, enjoyment, health, sport, safety, cost and the environment. Cycling is more than just about safety and in balancing all the issues people can make decisions about if to wear a helmet based on their circumstances.

There are now a number of articles, studies and statistics that indicate helmet legislation have not proved to be in the interest of the health and safety of their populations. It seems that there is no clear evidence of a benefit related to mandatory helmet use. If anything, the studies appear to indicate a number of negative effects, some examples are listed below.

A

In 1985, Sage et al[i], ‘Fatal injuries to bicycle riders in Auckland’, detailed that out of 20 bicycle riders fatally injured in Auckland, New Zealand, between 1974 and 1984, 16 died (80%) of injury to multiple organ systems. They stated, “This study indicates that compulsory wearing of suitable safety helmets by cyclists is unlikely to lead to a great reduction in fatal injuries, despite their enthusiastic advocacy."

B

Erke and Elvik (Norwegian researchers) 2007 stated: "There is evidence of increased accident risk per cycling-km for cyclists wearing a helmet. In Australia and New Zealand, the increase is estimated to be around 14 per cent."
Erke A, Elvik R, Making Vision Zero real: Preventing Pedestrian Accidents And Making Them Less Severe, Oslo June 2007. page 28 http://www.toi.no/getfile.php/Publikasj ... 7-nett.pdf

C
Robinson 1996 reported on the helmet laws in Australia. In New South Wales survey data on the number of children cycling counted 6072 in 1991 dropping to 3414 in 1993, down by 44%. The equivalent number of injuries for pre law level of number of cyclists increased from 1310 (384 head + 926 other injuries) in 1991 to 2083 (488 head + 1595 other injuries) in 1993. The increased injury rate was 59%, from 1310 to 2083. For NSW the helmet laws reduced children’s safety.
Robinson DL; Head injuries and bicycle helmet laws; Accid Anal Prev, 28, 4: p 463-475, 1996 http://www.cycle-helmets.com/robinson-head-injuries.pdf

D
The UK's National Children's Bureau (NCB) provided a detailed review of cycling and helmets in 2005, stating that the case for helmets is far from sound and the benefits of helmets need further investigation before even a policy supporting promotion can be unequivocally supported. Gill T, Cycling and Children and Young People, A review, National Children's Bureau, 2005. http://www.cycle-helmets.com/cyclingreport_timgill.pdf

E
In 2008 Curnow, concluded “Compulsion to wear a bicycle helmet is detrimental to public health in Australia but, to maintain the status quo, authorities have obfuscated evidence that shows this.” Curnow WJ, Bicycle helmets and public health in Australia, Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 2008 Apr. 19 (1):10-15.

F
Canadian data shows the average length of stay in hospital for cyclist head injury has increased by 60% between 1994/1995-2003/2004, from 4.3 days to 6.9 days and serious head injuries are reported to have increased since 2001.
Head Injuries in Canada, A Decade of Change, Canadian Institute of Health Information, August 2006