Bradley Wiggins calls for safer cycling laws and compulsory helmets

[Wobblers]

i agree, so you believe that a person who wears a helmet cannot agree with this point. if they wear a helmet they are ignorant and put everyone at risk?

I don't believe anyone's said that helmet wearers are ignorant.

I've no doubt that some, perhaps many, have looked at the evidence and decided to wear one. Fair enough. It's entirely their decision, and no one has the right to make it for them.

The last paragraph applies equally to those who don't wear helmets, too.

Nor is anyone saying that an individual wearing a helmet puts everyone at risk or promotes obesity. It is the promotion of helmets as an essential safety device that do that. It gives the impression that cycling is a hazardous activity when in fact it is not. That impression acts as a disincentive which makes people less inclined to cycle.

Compulsion is certainly harmful - in both Australia and New Zealand, the number of cyclists fell further than the number of injuries. In other words, the risks to those remaining cyclists increased. Compulsion most definately acts as a disincentive. For instance, I do a lot of utility cycling. But if I have to carry a helmet around the shops with me, I won't be able to carry as much from the supermarket. The end result is I won't use the bike for that. You'll find that most of the anti-helmet people arguing here are actually anti-compulsion rather than anti-helmet.

 

[benb]

I'm still waiting for clarification on this post

Yes, because you never leave questions unanswered.

 

[david k]

Nothing contradictory here. I'll spell it out for you, again, as the past seventy six pages seem to have somehow missed your attention.

why do you feel the need to make it personal?

I choose to wear a helmet. And again, the key word is 'choose'. Claud chooses not to wear a helmet. Neither does DZ. Of all the many subjects I've discussed with them over the years, I'm pretty sure helmet wearing has never been one. And why would it be? I respect their choice on the matter, they respect mine. We just don't need to talk about it.

Thats good why do you and others feel the need to brow beat me? why do you not allow me my choice without calling me ignorant or claim that i contribute to the lowering of the average age of death as i contribute to obesity?

Helmets are of benefit only in certain circumstances. For avoidance of doubt, if it doesn't involve some kind of impact with your head, it's of no use whatsoever. I've been in accidents where wearing a helmet was almost certainly of great benefit, where it was possibly of benefit, and where it did absolutely nothing either way.

I didnt even say anything about this, certainly never said they are always of benefit, not sure why your even raising it?

You seem to have confused helmet wearing with lifestyle choices, particularly those of diet and exercise. Eating too much and not getting enough exercise makes you fat. Wearing a helmet has no impact on calorific consumption or expenditure. I suppose you could try eating one, but polystyrene doesn't taste nice I imagine. I really don't intend to test this hypothesis, feel free to do so if you're inclined.

i dont need to, i didnt raise the issue, it was put to me. I said that i didnt believe it affected the decision of an individual to wear or not wear one. Something you appear to agree with me.

Now, here's the tricky bit. What myself, and Claud, and others, have repeatedly pointed out is that if people perceive cycling to involve lots of complication, potential danger, expense (etc), they may well be discouraged.

and i agree with your logic, i just think it affect my choice of whether to wear one or not

Helmet compulsion has been shown to encourage this perception. There is substantial evidence for this. It may have been linked to several thousand times (metaphorically) already in this thread.

im happy to accept this is the case, however i still dont see why this affects my choice of whether to wear a helmet or not

The actual complication, potential danger, expense of cycling is an entirely different matter. You do not need hi-viz.

never said you did

You do not need a helmet. You do not need segregated lanes. You need a bicycle. The less issues- perceived or real- that people have with actually getting on a bike, the better.

again, please point out where i have said otherwise?

you appear to have made many assumptions as to my views. I have not said anywhere on this thread anything about what you or others should do.

I have challenged the reasoning behind the choice, ie, just because perception of wearing a helmet is that it makes cycling dangerous and therefore leads to obesity etc. etc. that does not mean i should not or should wear a helmet.
If it means i shouldnt wear a helmet then it is not freedom of choice and therefore the argument is hypocritical

i also deny that i dont have the right to make a decision on wearing a helmet if i have not read all the evidence and data

these things have been put to me and these are the things i am challenging

 

[ufkacbln]

[QUOTE 1985043, member: 45"]Rob Brydon? Do you rate him?[/quote]

He has a life size carving on a portrait bench on the Afan Valley Cycle Route!

 

[david k]

1. Balderdash.
2. Piffle.
3. Not if they do equivalent exercise. It does if they don't.
4. I think that's been scientifically proven. Repeatedly.
5. Bunk.
6. Twaddle.

(a) Utterly irrelevant. As I stated previously.
(b) See 3.
And as should have been obvious, I'm perfectly capable of making my own judgements.

I think your replies are perfectly reasonable and i support your decision to make your own judgements. Id like others to allow my to do the same

 

[benb]

do you really think wearing cycle helmets has that level of effect? obesity is a massive problem in the UK we keep hearing and we have no compulsion.

We have a large number of people who don't take enough exercise.
Anything which disincentivises cycling (and other exercise, obviously, but we're talking about cycling here) is bad, because it will reduce the number of people cycling and/or discourage new cyclists.

Helmet compulsion (and even promotion) emphatically does discourage cycling.

We need to make cycling as easy and safe (both objectively and subjectively) as possible. Helmet compulsion doesn't help this goal.

 

[david k]

Never did say this.... I have and till maintained that it is a choice that should be informed. That is the evidence should be read, weighed up and the decision made to suit your personal circumstances.

So the choice should be informed, so what do you make of somebody who wishes to wear a helmet without reading all the evidence and weighed it up? you consider them ignorant i presume?

What I have said is that someone who is ignorant of the evidence should not give advice and information that is demonstrably stupid, wrong and dangerous.

Do you consider sharing of ones own opinion and making this clear as 'giving advice' or sharing their opinion?

 

[ufkacbln]

i also deny that i dont have the right to make a decision on wearing a helmet if i have not read all the evidence and data

these things have been put to me and these are the things i am challenging

No-one has said that you cannot make the choice, in fact the opposite is true.

What is being said is that from a position of ignorance you cannot reasonably give advice on the matter to others, or discuss the pros and cons.

You expect everyone to blindly wear a helmet just because you say so.......

From the erroneous and poor advice you have given previously on full face helmets, that is an indefensible position

 

[david k]

I don't believe anyone's said that helmet wearers are ignorant.

I've no doubt that some, perhaps many, have looked at the evidence and decided to wear one. Fair enough. It's entirely their decision, and no one has the right to make it for them.

The last paragraph applies equally to those who don't wear helmets, too. i have never suggested anything different on this thread

Nor is anyone saying that an individual wearing a helmet puts everyone at risk or promotes obesity. It is the promotion of helmets as an essential safety device that do that. It gives the impression that cycling is a hazardous activity when in fact it is not. That impression acts as a disincentive which makes people less inclined to cycle.im afraid they are, they say this is a reason not to wear helmets, or against compulsion, either way choosing to wear a helmet or being told to wear one will have the same affect in leading people to think its dangerous and therefore not take it up, leading to obesity and people then die younger. that is the claim, so if you choose to believe it you you are a hypocrite if you wear a helmet

Compulsion is certainly harmful - in both Australia and New Zealand, the number of cyclists fell further than the number of injuries. In other words, the risks to those remaining cyclists increased. Compulsion most definately acts as a disincentive. For instance, I do a lot of utility cycling. But if I have to carry a helmet around the shops with me, I won't be able to carry as much from the supermarket. The end result is I won't use the bike for that. You'll find that most of the anti-helmet people arguing here are actually anti-compulsion rather than anti-helmet.

i have never mentioned compulsion on here, i have only challenged the reasons against people who choose to wear helmets


it has been said that somebody who chooses to ride a bike should make an informed choice to wear or not wear a helmet. they should not be allowed to make that decision for their selves apparently

 

[ufkacbln]

So the choice should be informed, so what do you make of somebody who wishes to wear a helmet without reading all the evidence and weighed it up? you consider them ignorant i presume?

Your bizarre and unfounded assumption.

Do you consider sharing of ones own opinion and making this clear as 'giving advice' or sharing their opinion?

If you do this properly then no. Make your level of knowledge unequivocally clear and the recipient can make a fair judgement of your opinion.

Can I suggest:


"I have not read any of the evidence, nor do I wish to do so, yet despite this my opinion is that you should all wear helmets and I am going to support your decision to do so whether you want to or not"

 

[david k]

No-one has said that you cannot make the choice, in fact the opposite is true.

oh thats good, it hasn't come through from your posts as it has seemed like you have been brow beating me into not being in a position to decide for myself. If that was the wrong perception and you do agree i can make the choice for myself without having to read all the data then fine

What is being aid is that form a position of ignorance you cannot reasonable give advice on the matter to others, or discuss the pros and cons.

Give advice without knowing the facts is not a good decision. I stand by peoples right to offer their opinion though

You expect everyone to blindly wear a helmet just because you say so.......

at no stage what so ever throughout this thread have i said that you should wear a helmet, or anyone else for that matter. i have challenged your belief that i cannot wear one without reading all the data or evidence and that by wearing a helmet i contribute to obesity and therefore lower age of death

From the erroneous and poor advice you have given previously on full face helmets, that is an indefensible position

Another desperate statement from a different thread over a year ago, this is a new topic and a new thread with different posters and different views, we are all a year older.
I have stated time and again that i represent my own opinions, yet you falsely claim i am offering advice, this is obvious trolling as it means you can then counter the statements. So if you can manage to get your head round these are my opinions you cannot make any claims to the contrary.

So back on topic, can I or anybody else:

1) Wear a helmet without having to read evidence? Yes or No
2) Offer opinion without false claims it is advice? Yes or No
3) Wear a helmet without being made to feel that they are contributing to obesity?

 

[david k]

Your bizarre and unfounded assumption.

so what is your answer?

If you do this properly then no. Make your level of knowledge unequivocally clear and the recipient can make a fair judgement of your opinion.

made this point numerous times now yet you keep questioning it? it really is odd how you fail/refuse to understand?

Can I suggest:

"I have not read any of the evidence, nor do I wish to do so, yet despite this my opinion is that you should all wear helmets and I am going to support your decision to do so whether you want to or not"

again using quotes from old threads made over a year ago.

however it is proof of opinion

 

[david k]

We have a large number of people who don't take enough exercise.
Anything which disincentivises cycling (and other exercise, obviously, but we're talking about cycling here) is bad, because it will reduce the number of people cycling and/or discourage new cyclists.

Helmet compulsion (and even promotion) emphatically does discourage cycling.

We need to make cycling as easy and safe (both objectively and subjectively) as possible. Helmet compulsion doesn't help this goal.

once again i understand the logic but why does this mean i cannot wear a helmet? as this is the point im making i presume you are responding to this? not sure why you refer to compulsion in a reply to me on this thread as i havnt discussed it.

my issues is with being told i shouldnt wear a helmet because people will get fat. if thats not the point you and others are making why does everyone feel the need to make the point over and again, i havnt said i dont agree with the logic just that it doesnt affect my choice to wear one as i have my own opinions and should be allowed them.

 

[david k]

i also said that many wear helmets already and so this affect must be happening now
if the perception is drawn from somebody wearing a helmet the person looking on doesnt know whether this is due to compulsion or not, so not sure what difference it would make to the point raised
we already have major issues with obesity, i do not accept that it because some people wear helmets

 

[david k]

i think it was summed up in this post, 1528