Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

[Boris Bajic]

Particularly if they aren't wearing a helmet at the time....

I find this post as flippant as it is unhelpful.

Cycle helmets are not designed to offer protection from cannon balls. Incoming ballistic weaponry did not fall within the design remit.

The best protection from injury by a cannon ball is not being born near a recruiting office for the Army or Navy in the early 19th Century.

The appropriate data can be found here: www.html.cannonandtheireffectonfleshandboneinthemodernwar1812.com

 

[Inertia]

Uncomfortable, liking a post containing nothing but a link to the DM! It's probably the freedom of choice element that inspired the article, but I've always like Prof Spiegelhalter he talks very good sense.

Dont worry, you haven't stepped into an alternate reality, the main article about the accident is knee jerk as it comes and has 320 comments, the top rated ones make depressing reading. On the other hand the good article on DM has 0 comments.

 

[LCpl Boiled Egg]

Yes, terrible how he ducked the real question - do helmets cause cancer?

Today they might... tomorrow, they could cure cancer. That's how the Mail generally works. A horrible rag that some people confuse with a real newspaper.

 

[martint235]

I find this post as flippant as it is unhelpful.

Cycle helmets are not designed to offer protection from cannon balls. Incoming ballistic weaponry did not fall within the design remit.

The best protection from injury by a cannon ball is not being born near a recruiting office for the Army or Navy in the early 19th Century.

The appropriate data can be found here: www.html.cannonandtheireffectonfleshandboneinthemodernwar1812.com

but could I just mention that banging your head against the road (or any other object) at a speed greater than that which can be achieved from a 1 metre fall is also outside the design specification of a helmet (thereby rendering them fairly meaningless in most traffic accidents)

 

[jonesy]

Dont worry, you haven't stepped into an alternate reality, the main article about the accident is knee jerk as it comes and has 320 comments, the top rated ones make depressing reading. On the other hand the good article on DM has 0 comments.

The comments on the BBC website article are depressing enough :-(

 

[MickL]

For me, I'm glad I wear a helmet after a rather scary incident also seeing how helmet prevented some one from getting her brain splattered across a rock. Helmets are designed I believe for low impact falls, a 1 ton car hitting you at 40mph a helmet wont be of much help or being run over by 18ton lorry. I'm not sure where the thinking that wearing a helmet makes you do risky things comes from, most of cyclist I see certainly don't take risk and I certainly don't. BW comments are just his opinion, I don't think it should be compulsory even though Im in favour of wearing helmets.

 

[MrJamie]

He's just been asked to take a very complex and very sensitive issue and talk about it without prepping and while on a success/booze high. He did say both that he was "too tipsy" to talk about it and that he was "probably the last person" who should be talking about it. It sounded like he was trying to condense a lot of cycling issues into a single statement, while also conveying his opinion. Earlier, I think it was Jake he was talking to and he was talking about how cycling is great because its so accessible and free, all you need is a bike to jump on and go.

You know he's raised the profile of cycling, when a cyclist being killed is a main headline and the DailyRage is getting in on the discussion

 

[Glow worm]

Holy....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...enefits-wearing-helmet.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Blimey. I think I may need to go for a lie down!

 

[albion]

Someone gets killed and so we get told lack of a helmet is the main cause rather than dangerous driving.

Obviously when helmets become law the standard line will become 'the cyclist should not have been on the road'.

 

[green1]

There isn't an approved safety helmet for car drivers/passengers or pedestrians to wear that's perceived to improve safety.

Really? So what about the helmets worn in rallying, touring cars or any other form of motor sport? Try going to do a track day in your car and tell them you won't wear one, you won't get on the track.

 

[GrasB]

It's a bit worrying that you have fallen off your bike often enough to accumulate statistically valid data on the subject!

The statistics are very valid for me... I come off my bike about once every 9k5 miles, most of which are my own fault for pushing to hard in adverse conditions, & with over 150k miles in my cycling log that's a fair number of offs. However I didn't say anything about the numbers being statistically significant

 

[Norm]

Have you ever considered how your son would feel if you were killed in a cycling accident?

Yes, and the discussion has been made easier for the kids to understand since one of my son's teachers was put in a wheelchair by his helmet snagging in an accident which might have left him with nothing worse than a broken collar bone if he hadn't been wearing the helmet.

Fortunately, my family understand risk and understand my reasoning for choosing when to wear, and when not to wear, a lid.

Wiggo can, IMO, screw himself for what he said about helmets and hi viz, especially after abusing and disrespecting the memory of someone who would be no less tragically killed by going under a bus. It might be a futile gesture but I'll be voting for the women's pair to get the SPOTY.

 

[GrasB]

BB's reponse to my question was sensible and well reasoned, and I totally understand his position. These comments are ridiculous. There isn't an approved safety helmet for car drivers/passengers ...

Er really? I've got 4 helmets approved for use in cars. In fact I have to wear helmets which have been approved for use in motor vehicles to do one of my hobbies.

 

[Red Light]

BB's reponse to my question was sensible and well reasoned, and I totally understand his position. These comments are ridiculous. There isn't an approved safety helmet for car drivers/passengers or pedestrians to wear that's perceived to improve safety so, while I can imagine my parents thinking, "If only she hadn't chosen that moment to cross the road" (for example), if I was killed as a pedestrian, I'm not concerned that they'd distress themselves over my lack of personal protective equipment.

There are plenty of helmets you can get for use in a car and a cycling helmet will do just as well for walking. But yes, its a totally ridiculous idea. So ridiculous in fact that the British Medical Journal published and article on how ridiculous it was including how ridiculous cycle helmets as well. http://tinyurl.com/bswp6oj

 

[Danny]

I am always bemused about how exercised some cyclists get when someone like Wiggons dares to speak their mind and say they are in favour of compulsory helmet use.

Reading some of the comments on Twitter - where there is a really lively debate going on - you'd think he was guilty of apostasy of the highest, and I'd be surprised if someone doesn't put a fatwa on him.

Personally I think it is a good thing he has sparked a debate on cycle safety.