Cycle clips

[horizon]

It's like watching UKippers spotting immigrants in this section some days. Yeah we get it you don't want to wear one , no one is making you !
YET !!! MuhahahahHahahaha

Or have I mistaken your meaning?

I found it funny so thought it meant in jest. It also says we shouldn't take ourselves too seriously. Obviously I share your concerns.

[horizon]

I don't know if it the same in other areas but, from my limited experience, helmet wearing is almost universal on Member Group organised rides - only a small minority of rides I have been on have had anyone not wearing one. Helmet wearing is never mentioned but virtually everyone does. It make it hard therefore for any photos from any event linked Cycling UK to not have a lot of helmet wearing.

It must make life a nightmare for any editor looking for spontaneous shots without helmets.

Rick.

I agree. There are lots of people who don't wear helmets but most people I see on the road do. I've seen lots of non-publication pictures of cycle rides (e.g. various club websites) and helmet wearing is 100%. I reckon Cycle Clips reflects reality.

[Mike Sales]

I found it funny so thought it meant in jest. It also says we shouldn't take ourselves too seriously. Obviously I share your concerns.

I have been cycling for some decades now, and it seems to me that we are getting more and more like Australia, which by all accounts can be a pretty unpleasant place to cycle. When I was young no-one thought of wearing a helmet, and when they began to appear on our roads it was a sure sign of a Yankee tourist.
Now I cannot ride with the local clubs and from Australia I hear tell of anti-cycling legislation (quite apart from the helmet law) and aggression from drivers. They have two or three times our casualty rate. So perhaps I can be forgiven for a sense of humour failure when faced with what still sounds to me like jeering.

[rfryer]

Maybe it's just me, but I read the "jeering" as the stereotypical laugh of the comedy villain having just revealed his latest diabolical scheme. Which, if it's any comfort, are always doomed to failure.

I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my XT1039 using hovercraft full of eels.

[Paulatic]

Here's a snap shot of helmet use in London
https://mobile.twitter.com/i/status/731 ... 64/video/1

[Psamathe]

I don't know if it the same in other areas but, from my limited experience, helmet wearing is almost universal on Member Group organised rides - only a small minority of rides I have been on have had anyone not wearing one. Helmet wearing is never mentioned but virtually everyone does. It make it hard therefore for any photos from any event linked Cycling UK to not have a lot of helmet wearing.

It must make life a nightmare for any editor looking for spontaneous shots without helmets.

Rick.

I agree. There are lots of people who don't wear helmets but most people I see on the road do. I've seen lots of non-publication pictures of cycle rides (e.g. various club websites) and helmet wearing is 100%. I reckon Cycle Clips reflects reality.

In my personal experience (so completely anecdotal) there are two types I see on the road, those with lycra who mostly wear helmets (out for a training ride) and those in everyday clothes maybe with a manky old pannier or a carrier bag on the handle bars who are doing the "cycling for transport" and who generally don't wear helmets. And I thought the Cukers were out to encourage both (or maybe a bit more focus on the cycling for transport). So a predominance of images of people wearing helmets will to a degree alienate a significant portion of their potential audience (as in "I'm not that type of cyclist").

Ian

[mjr]

I don't know if it the same in other areas but, from my limited experience, helmet wearing is almost universal on Member Group organised rides - only a small minority of rides I have been on have had anyone not wearing one. Helmet wearing is never mentioned but virtually everyone does. It make it hard therefore for any photos from any event linked Cycling UK to not have a lot of helmet wearing.

I think it's not the same. Looking through the http://www.norfolkCTC.org.uk gallery, many shots had one or two ordinary cyclists and this one actually has a slim majority without helmets:

I agree. There are lots of people who don't wear helmets but most people I see on the road do. I've seen lots of non-publication pictures of cycle rides (e.g. various club websites) and helmet wearing is 100%. I reckon Cycle Clips reflects reality.

It depends where you live and what style of riding you do, but national stats suggest helmeteers are a minority.

Why does helmet use seem so much higher among CUK rides than the general population? Do participants believe in the magic hats, do they think CUK events are much more dangerous than ordinary cycling, is it because CUK and CTC publications give the impression it's an organisation more for helmet users, or something else?

[deliquium]

A local observation - I cycle daily all year round averaging 10,000 miles per annum and in my part of the world - Snowdonia I am a very, very rare helmetless cyclist. I'm the only one amongst a regular CTC fortnightly ride.

It is what it is

[Tonyf33]

I ride in lycra for the most part even when going to the shops/personal business/visiting friends, I'll take a change of clothes when/where needed but is very rare and does depend on time of year/weather.
However I also wear lycra whilst riding fast and hard on my racing bikes, on national limit duals bypasses, trunk roads and wherever else takes my fancy (back country roads are increasingly a PITA for one reason or another).
I never wear a helmet despite regularly hitting 40mph, I've nwver felt the need for one and indeed feel it would make me uncomfortable in more ways than one.

The constant pressure, and that is what it is to conform to something that has no basis in fact, and its portrayal is a massive negative, both in participation and ultinmately toward our freedoms and protection in courts.
It's vile and sickening and the 'charity' have become complicit in all of this despite their feeble words.

[horizon]

The constant pressure, and that is what it is to conform to something that has no basis in fact,

Tonyf33: if it's of any solace you might like to read this article by Oliver Burkeman in the Guardian. AFAICS, there is no difference whatsoever between the phenomenon that he describes and the wearing of helmets - it is pure social hysteria:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle ... -shrinking

[Mike Sales]

The constant pressure, and that is what it is to conform to something that has no basis in fact,

Tonyf33: if it's of any solace you might like to read this article by Oliver Burkeman in the Guardian. AFAICS, there is no difference whatsoever between the phenomenon that he describes and the wearing of helmets - it is pure social hysteria:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle ... -shrinking

Here is an article from the British Medical Journal by Ben Goldacre, Wellcome research fellow in epedemiology and David Spiegelhalter, Winton professor for the public understanding of risk.

http://www.badscience.net/wp-content/uploads/Screenshot-2013-12-13-17.12.05.png

After looking at research which purports to show that helmets are effective, and population level studies which do not show any reduction in cyclist casualty rates they conclude.

In any case, the current uncertainty about any benefits from helmet promotion or wearing is unlikely to be reduced by further research. Equally, we can be certain that helmets will continue to be debated, and at length. The enduring popularity of helmets as a proposed major intervention for increased road safety may lie not in their direct benefits- which seem too modest to capture compared with other strategies- but more with the cultural, psychological and political aspects of popular debate around risk.

I think that nails it. The rest of the article is well worth reading for the cogent way it makes its points.

[deliquium]

In any case, the current uncertainty about any benefits from helmet promotion or wearing is unlikely to be reduced by further research. Equally, we can be certain that helmets will continue to be debated, and at length. The enduring popularity of helmets as a proposed major intervention for increased road safety may lie not in their direct benefits- which seem too modest to capture compared with other strategies- but more with the cultural, psychological and political aspects of popular debate around risk.

I think that nails it.

That's how I choose to align myself

[pjclinch]

Why does helmet use seem so much higher among CUK rides than the general population? Do participants believe in the magic hats, do they think CUK events are much more dangerous than ordinary cycling, is it because CUK and CTC publications give the impression it's an organisation more for helmet users, or something else?

I think the sort of person who typically joins CUK could be characterised as the fairly sensible type, and also often the type that want to be Proper Cyclists and in the UK in 2016 that means All The Proper Gear. In a country where the overwhelming message from the media and public information sources says that helmets are a sensible measure that it's sensible for sensible people to take I don't think it's too surprising they tend to show up in crash helmets.

They'll have bought their lids before they joined CUK. If they're sensible they'll have read The Highway Code, and that tells them they should wear a cycle helmet. Everyone knows you should follow the Highway Code...

And so on. It isn't CUK that is encouraging its members to wear helmets, it's CUK members telling their peers that they wear a helmet because it might save their life etc., and they're saying that because it's the general media message they've been bombarded with for 20 years now (in other words, the meta-debate picked up by Goldacre and Spiegelhalter in their BMJ editorial).

Looking at Cycle through the years I've been a member I'm pretty sure I recall quite a few tirades from irate members that CTC wasn't doing enough to encourage helmets. The March issue took similarly them to task on Hi-Viz (and had a good answer from Cherry Allan about using actual evidence to provide advice).

Pete.

[LollyKat]

It depends where you live and what style of riding you do, but national stats suggest helmeteers are a minority.

I've see this before and don't dispute it, but here in Glasgow they are in the large majority. While that may not be so surprising for those who ride in traffic, I even see it on off-road paths. I once joined a small group on an afternoon ride along the canal, aimed at inexperienced riders and was all off road. Everyone apart from myself had driven to the starting point, yet they all wore helmets, including the organisers.

There was no pressure on me to wear a helmet, and only one of the riders commented on it (and I told him why I didn't). I think these sort of riders just automatically assume that bikes and helmets go together - it's obvious, innit? They see it everywhere and of course the bike shops push them.

Though I suppose a slow potter along an towpath is one time when a helmet might actually be useful - I've seen a few falls by novice cyclists, though no-one hit their head. At the end of the group ride above, one person fell off while dismounting. They didn't hit their head, but sprained their ankle .

[Si]

Though I suppose a slow potter along an towpath is one time when a helmet might actually be useful

buoyancy aid if you go into the water?