A simple question: Do you wear a helmet?

[smutchin]

well if there was a pedestrian down with a head injury and a cyclist without helmet with head injury next to him I know which I would treat first.

You've just failed your theory exam and will never qualify as a paramedic.

Thankfully.

d.

 

[Licramite]

Lycramite, how long have you been an adult fully fledged paid up cyclist? [BTW got to agree with you ref 2 para, as well as thinking they are gods own bloody gift and legends in their own minds]

about 20years. - still learning.
2 para were a great bunch, just a bit scarry to parachute with.

 

[Licramite]

You've just failed your theory exam and will never qualify as a paramedic.

Thankfully.

I didn,t say which I would treat first - I said I know which I would treat first - the one with the most life threatening condition of course, or if I had to treat both at the same time, the one I could stabalise the quickest.

I did 4 years as a medic , hence my attitude to people who could do something about thier personel safety and choose not to , because basically they don,t beleive it will happen to them.

 

[ianrauk]

well if there was a pedestrian down with a head injury and a cyclist without helmet with head injury next to him I know which I would treat first.

That's quite pathetic really.

 

[green1]

well if there was a pedestrian down with a head injury and a cyclist without helmet with head injury next to him I know which I would treat first.

The one who is most in need of treatment.

 

[Juliet42]

Key fact: cyclists and cycling are not the problem.

Hear! Hear!

 

[smutchin]

I didn,t say which I would treat first

Weasel words.

I did 4 years as a medic , hence my attitude to people who could do something about thier personel safety and choose not to , because basically they don,t beleive it will happen to them.

You appear to be equating "not wearing a helmet" with "doing nothing about personal safety". I'll charitably assume you aren't really that stupid.

(But in case you are, a clue: helmets are at best a secondary safety measure.)

d.

 

[Licramite]

Weasel words.



You appear to be equating "not wearing a helmet" with "doing nothing about personal safety". I'll charitably assume you aren't really that stupid.

(But in case you are, a clue: helmets are at best a secondary safety measure.)

d.

God I don,to want to carry this on - but I got to ask - what do you regard as your primary safety precaution to your personnel safety when out on the bike

and what I stated was my personnel feeling and in no way infers its an opinion held by any other emergency or A&E worker.

 

[snorri]

t I got to ask - what do you regard as your primary safety precaution to your personnel safety when out on the bike.

Come along now, just give it some thought before asking another question. You can work this out for yourself, I
hope.

 

[smutchin]

God I don,to want to carry this on

Me neither.

- but I got to ask - what do you regard as your primary safety precaution to your personnel safety when out on the bike

It's not a matter of opinion. "Primary" and "secondary" are well-defined terms in the context (they can be replaced with "active" and "passive" respectively, if you prefer).

d.

 

[Licramite]

so - ok I,m very thick - you tell me what do you regard as your primary safety device when out on the bike
Smutcha has already said the helmet is a secondary - so your going to be knocked off by some other idiot - what is your primary device/method of avoiding/reducing injury
I would really like to hear this one. - because being very stupid I don,t know.

 

[StuartG]

It's not a matter of opinion. "Primary" and "secondary" are well-defined terms in the context (they can be replaced with "active" and "passive" respectively, if you prefer)

And irrelevant to the discussion.

So you advocate and practice total temperence for all, no sex without a condom, never visiting a country that allows smoking in public buildings etc etc ...

Otherwise you are exposing yourself to unnecessary threat to your health whether passive or active. The point is that we normally accept a small amount of risk and seek to avoid major risk. Drinking in moderation as opposed to getting plastered every night. Hopefully we have a realistic view of risk. The medics are actually quite good in propogating helpful information on drink. The same is not true when it comes to helmeteering. At least on a bicycle

 

[smutchin]

And irrelevant to the discussion.

It's relevant to Licramite's assertion that those who don't wear cycle helmets have no regard for personal safety and are therefore less deserving of medical treatment in the event of injury.

Your ludicrous straw man is not worthy of further discussion.

d.

 

[smutchin]

Note that what I said was "helmets are at best a secondary safety measure". I should have put the emphasis on the "at best" rather than on the "secondary".

 

[Licramite]

Note that what I said was "helmets are at best a secondary safety measure". I should have put the emphasis on the "at best" rather than on the "secondary".

ok
so if a helmet is at best a secondary protection , what do you regard as a better method of protection in event of an accident on your bike than a helmet
after all do don,t have airbags,safety belt in a car on the basis of not having an accident you have them in case you do.

so you clearly know a better method of protection - I would love to know what it is

ps - being made of straw doesn,t help either -