Helmets in the press.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
Good point DM. Utility, touring and recreational cycling are almost never covered in mainstream cycle mags, but they will be by far the largest denominator of new cyclists in years to come. Not everyone wants to be a racing cyclist. Perhaps there's a niche for a more leisure orientated cyclist magazine?
Perhaps it could cost £41 a year for 6 issues, come with free third-party liability cover thrown in, cover all kinds of cycling from utility to gnarly downhill mountain biking, regularly show a wide range of cyclists of all shapes, sizes and attires, and have a larger circulation than all of the road cycling specialist magazines. Perhaps it could attract a wide range of advertisers attracted by an affuent ABC1 readership?

Perhaps it already exists?
http://myadbase.com/meddia_packs/CTC.MediaPack.f.pdf
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
is there anything to show whether head injuries have increased for pro's since they started wearing them?
IIRC, in Pro racing/TDF cycling deaths increased after helmets were mandated. The stats were part of a helmet debate here ... back in the distant past ....
 
I asked this question a while ago and never got an answer. There's a partial answer here:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_professional_cyclists_who_died_during_a_race

where there are rather more listed after helmets were mandated than before - but you'd need to make sure the data was robust and then normalise it for the amount of racing to be sure.

This survey of 2008 Olympic teams: http://m.ajs.sagepub.com/content/37/11/2165.abstract?sid=b12bf6ad-10c3-4f92-a9e5-0f95165564d9%5C (only abstract available for free to the public) doesn't list cycling in the most risky or least risky sports during competition.

Too many confounding factors?

For instance, if you have a flat section and there is more action in the peleton, then that would increase the chance of a wheel clip and the whole peleton coming down. increasingthe number of accidents. A mountain section and the peleton is more spread out and less likelihood of a wheel being clipped and a mass pileup less likely..... then take a downhill section and the speed increases and again an accident becomes more likely (and more severe?

So you cannot even compare two tours - you would have to compare the same leg each year, and even then if there is an early breakaway then the peleton could become spread out and a mass pileup less likely, again confounding the comparison
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
If you assume (or can evidence) that the typical tour in 2014 is reasonably similar in its mix of terrain and its racing style to the typical tour in 1980 then the details of the individual stages don't matter.
 

deptfordmarmoset

Full time tea drinker
Location
Armonmy Way
2889100 said:
Are there any other factors? Do any of the doping agents increase or decrease risk taking as a side effect?
I'd hope at the very least that they increase the risk of getting caught.

As @srw suggests, I'd have thought that a similar mix of terrain over the season would even things out unless there has been a significant change in elevation profiles between the pre- and post- helmet periods.
 

Venod

Eh up
Location
Yorkshire
Evans sent me a email about Rapha sale clothing ( still too expensive for me but nice) the refreshing thing about it was of all the pictures of people on bikes not one had a helmet on, the page in the link in the email seems to have changed so here is a link to their site, some helmets but not all, hats off to them.

http://www.rapha.cc/shop/clearance?locale=UK
 
Last edited:

byegad

Legendary Member
Location
NE England
http://www.harlowstar.co.uk/News/Ha...ety-advice-by-Essex-Police-20140123113241.htm

"Sgt Graham Freeman, who is running the operation, said: “The vast majority of people we stopped were very receptive and those who were fully complying with the law were most impressed that Essex Police was tackling the problem.

“The majority of those who had no lights or reflective clothing assured us that they would have some as quickly as possible. Only one or two people had to be reminded that there would be a £50 fine if they failed to comply and were stopped and warned for a second time.

“About 50 per cent had no lights and were given verbal warnings. About 50 per cent had no reflective clothing and 75 per cent had no cycle helmet"


So Essex police have decided that you can be pulled for not wearing reflective gear or helmets.

They'd get a very dusty answer if they stopped me for either of those. While I routinely wear bright colours I don't think anything I wear has reflectivity beyond an odd bit of piping. As to wearing a helmet on a recumbent trike where my head is all of 2'6" off the ground. Harrump!
 

Cycleops

Legendary Member
Location
Accra, Ghana
Evans sent me a email about Rapha sale clothing ( still too expensive for me but nice) the refreshing thing about it was of all the pictures of people on bikes not one had a helmet on, the page in the link in the email seems to have changed so here is a link to their site, some helmets but not all, hats off to them.

http://www.rapha.cc/shop/clearance?locale=UK

I am sure due to them wanting to promote their own headgear or not to clash with their product than intentionally not showing helmets for any reason of principle.
 
Last edited:

buggi

Bird Saviour
Location
Solihull
we have a forum at work called Yammer. Its a bit like Facebook. Someone put a question on there, after attending a safety conference where helmets were promoted with a very emotional video, asking why cyclists don't wear helmets, to which i supplied a balanced answer (as the rep of the cycle group) and expressed my displeasure that the people who organised the conference should have consulted the cycle group. Not surprisingly a month long helmet debate ensued with the pro helmet lobby. It was interesting to note that most of those who supported helmets never rode a bike in their life. The cyclists gave a very balanced view to them, providing statistic after statistic, telling them all about risk compensation theories, what standard they were tested to, whats happened in countries who have enforced it by law, how research has even suggested that in car collisions it can actually make things worse etc etc. Despite the fact that none of them could provide any evidence whatsoever that they have been proven to make a difference, and that they "didn't want to force their opinion on anyone so why were cyclists so defensive?" they still wanted helmet wearing enforced by law! Someone even wrote to a recognised national cycle organization on the back of the debate who basically confirmed what we were was saying, that it must remain the choice of the cyclist, probably good for kids if they fall and bump as they are only a metre in height but in car collisions evidence to suggest they cause rotational injury etc etc. Of course, he didn't have the balls to put the answer on yammer but i saw the email. And so did the people who organised the conference. Needless to say those people will now be contacting me before any more safety conferences. And we will be tackling driver behaviour rather than whether the cyclist is wearing a helmet!
interestingly it had the opposite effect on me than the helmet lobby hoped. I already wear a helmet, never really thought much of it, just went out and got one. After a month researching helmets to provide the balanced view (I'm the cycle safety rep so had to debate from the neutral position) i actually found nothing to convince me of their effectiveness. To make it worse, i only found evidence to suggest they make things worse and I'm now seriously wondering why i bother. Probably because it covers up my bad hairdo in the morning.
 

Venod

Eh up
Location
Yorkshire
I am sure due to them wanting to promote their own headgear or not to clash with their product than intentionally not showing helmets for any reason of principle.

Yes your probably right but they must think showing bike riders without helmets is not going to harm their sales.
 

steveindenmark

Legendary Member
I wonder where the Essex Police get their information to support the fact that it is safer to wear helmets, especially as the European Cycling Union doesnt advocate them.

I have a few helmets and wear one occasionally, so I am not against them. Personally, I think a skiing helmet would give more protection than a cycling helmet.

But I still think it is all about personal choice until someone decides otherwise.

Steve
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom