OTT and Helmets

[Si]

Unfortunately a body of people are pushing to have that freedom of choice removed.

Are you referring to the Maoist clique on this & others fora who treat with open derision those who choose to wear one?

Please desist from petty name calling towards other forum members whose only crime is that you might think that they disagree with you. It is such snipes that cause helmet threads to descend into playground squabbles and why we have had to create a separate section of the forum for them.

And, as others have said....derision is generally not targeted at people just for wearing them, but rather at either those who insist that helmets saved their lives despite no supporting evidence, those who want to force everyone to wear one despite not being able to put forward a water tight, reasoned argument for this, or those who decide that they can't actually substantiate their own views and so seek recourse in insulting others instead (live by the sword, die by the sword). However, if your intent is to convince others of your point of view then insulting others is the last thing that you want to do as getting someone's back up is hardly conducive to them seeing things from your point of view is it? If, on the other hand, your only aim is to have a good old flame of other forum members then it's time to find yourself a new forum.

[bovlomov]

The subject of cycle helmets is unique, as it is the only thing on which Mao did not hold an opinion. A battle that he knew could never be won, perhaps.

[horizon]

I personally remember going into the Maoist bookshop in Acre Lane (centre of the current slavery allegations) back in the late seventies. And a weird place it was. I was a bit of a leftie then (as now, I suppose ) but it left a very strange impression on me: all this squeaky clean devotion to one man (the shop was very unlike other left-wing bookshops) didn't seem what the revolution was supposed to be about.

[cagsley]

Re- damage. Wheel nut on other bike went through casing and into the polystyrene.
Craig

[TonyR]

The subject of cycle helmets is unique, as it is the only thing on which Mao did not hold an opinion. A battle that he knew could never be won, perhaps.

I disagree. Having been in China in 1980-81 I can assure you that everyone on bicycles without exception was wearing a Mao suit but not a helmet. It is quite clear therefore that there were instructions for what to wear on a bicycle and they did not include a helmet and neither did the state machine produce helmets for you to wear. He was therefore undoubtedly an anti-helmet zealot not even allowing a free choice on the matter.

[[XAP]Bob]

Re- damage. Wheel nut on other bike went through casing and into the polystyrene.
Craig

No fracturing, but minimal compression by the sounds of it (just enough to let the nut sit in place)

Likely result without helmet (assuming behaviour unmodified) a nasty cut.
Unlikely (but possible) the nut could have been a good point pressure source to cause a skull fracture - given the (assumed) lack of compression around the impact point on the helmet I suggest that this is highly unlikely for most places on the skull (eg. temples excepted)

The question of risk compensation asks whether you might not have ended up OTT into another cyclist's wheel without a helmet, but even if you did the description *so far* suggests that your injury would have been limited to soft tissue damage.
I'd suggest that the helmet has indeed protected you well, just not from any major injury.

[bovlomov]

I disagree. Having been in China in 1980-81 I can assure you that everyone on bicycles without exception was wearing a Mao suit but not a helmet. It is quite clear therefore that there were instructions for what to wear on a bicycle and they did not include a helmet and neither did the state machine produce helmets for you to wear. He was therefore undoubtedly an anti-helmet zealot not even allowing a free choice on the matter.

I think Mao may have been a fence-sitter on this matter. The following was written by him, ostensibly about the Chungking Negotiations, but it is clear that he can only have been thinking about the cycle helmet debate.
"In this world, things are complicated and are decided by many factors. We should look at problems from different aspects, not just one."

On the other hand, when he wrote
"Many things may become baggage, may become encumbrances, if we cling to them blindly and uncritically"
he was probably wondering what helmet wearers do with their helmets during meetings.

[TonyR]

I think Mao may have been a fence-sitter on this matter. The following was written by him, ostensibly about the Chungking Negotiations, but it is clear that he can only have been thinking about the cycle helmet debate.
"In this world, things are complicated and are decided by many factors. We should look at problems from different aspects, not just one."

On the other hand, when he wrote
"Many things may become baggage, may become encumbrances, if we cling to them blindly and uncritically"
he was probably wondering what helmet wearers do with their helmets during meetings.

You forgot his other quote: "A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step - putting on your helmet"

[irc]

He also said

Firstly, do not fear hardship, and secondly, do not fear death.”

Obviously referring to the effort of cycling on the one hand and warning against the helmet zealot's fear mongering on the other.