Helmets.....

[mcshroom]

Both CTC and Sustrans had to commit considerable resources that would have been better used promoting proper safety schemes for that as well.

 

[Boris Bajic]

Really? What about North Ireland (which is part of the UK, with MPs sitting in the Westminster Parliament in case you've forgotten). In February 2011, the Assembly voted in favour of a mandatory helmet law. The proposal was only dropped at Committee after concerted action by a number of organisations.

Thank you. No, I hadn't forgotten that Northern Ireland is a part of the UK. Northern Ireland does have MPs in Westminster (and rightly so while it remains a part of the UK), but the decisions taken in the Assembly do not impact on Westminster.

Northern Ireland has some unusual laws, including its very own and antedeluvian rules on abortion. These local eccentricities do not cross the Irish Sea.

I'm afraid I do not take the current NI Assembly or any of its forbears very seriously. Few in Great Britain do. It's a sop to tickle the belly of political groupings whose dissatisfaction might cause people to wish harm on others. There is history in this matter.

For all that it matters to anyone outside the province, the NI Assembly can vote to make television illegal. It may be able to affect laws and customs within NI, but it can whistle Dixie as far as having any effect across the UK is concerned.

I may be a curmudgeonly and inflexible old git, but when I say that I find the prospect of a change in UK law highly unlikely and the counter is that there was nearly a vote in its favour in the NI Assembly, I find that you have rather proved my point.

I continue to find the prospect of mandatory helmet use for cyclists in the UK highly unlikely.

Now... Where do Bracknell Borough Council stand on eel farming in Portugal?

 

[lordloveaduck]

[QUOTE 1964764, member: 45"]I've never cleaned the inside of my helmet...[/quote]

I'm sure your Local Bike Shop would be happy to do it for you.
With the economy being the way it is, every little helps

 

[Strathlubnaig]

to hell with making helmets compulsory, just get the damn roads fixed, that'll cut accidents right down.....

 

[PpPete]

okay here's a question then, and it's a genuine question to see what peoples thoughts are. You can get a helmet in a sale for £20, which isn't exactly loads of money. So why would you not wear one? Is it a case of thinking that they are useless? Or is it because people simply don't like the look of them? Don't shoot me down with sarcasm, i'm genuinly interested in peoples thoughts.

In my case:
Certainly nothing to do with looking cool or uncool - I like stupid enough in lycra for a bit of polysterene on my bonce to make no difference at all.
I own a helmet which fits me pretty well and is not uncomfortable.... pretty well ventilated too (it wasn't cheap) , but wearing it I sweat buckets into a small strip of padding, which gets pretty 'orrible after a while.
I still sweat when I wear a cotton cap, but with a cap I have lot more cloth to soak it up and to evaporate it.... so overall a lot more comfortable.
Even so - I would wear my helmet if there were unequivocal evidence that it made me safer.
I've not found such evidence yet.

And frankly when I compared the various testing standards....( I write technical standards in another industry ) ... let's just say I was unimpressed by all of them, and EN1078 is amongst the weakest.

If a manufacturer could come up with a helmet that was no less comfortable or ventilated that my existing helmet - and was prepared to test for, and make public the data from, 30 mph impacts, then I might just buy one and wear it.

 

[green1]

okay here's a question then, and it's a genuine question to see what peoples thoughts are. You can get a helmet in a sale for £20, which isn't exactly loads of money. So why would you not wear one? Is it a case of thinking that they are useless? Or is it because people simply don't like the look of them? Don't shoot me down with sarcasm, i'm genuinly interested in peoples thoughts.

Increased weight, get much hotter with it on, but the main thing for me is the huge increase in wind noise.

 

[Boris Bajic]

okay here's a question then, and it's a genuine question to see what peoples thoughts are. You can get a helmet in a sale for £20, which isn't exactly loads of money. So why would you not wear one? Is it a case of thinking that they are useless? Or is it because people simply don't like the look of them? Don't shoot me down with sarcasm, i'm genuinly interested in peoples thoughts.

No sarcasm, no shooting. A perfectly fair question.

I am ambivalent about helmet use. Sometimes I wear one, usually I do not. Reasons (if you can call them that) as follows:

1. I rode for many years when nobody wore a helmet on the road. I am not used to wearing one and I view them (poor analogy coming) as my parents viewed seatbelts in cars in the Jimmy Saville safety campaign days.

2. I have fallen or been hit quite a lot. In my younger days I was casual about safety and pain and I have never been a master of bike control. I have yet to hit my bonce in any way that has made me think I ought to wear a helmet.

3. I have a knee that jerks easily. WHenever colleagues used to implore me to wear a helmet, my resolve not to do so simply hardened. I am thick like that.

4. I like to ride in a casquette. It seems the most comfortable thing in warm weather and keeps the sun out of my eyes. In winter I wear a beanie or similar. Neither fits well with a helmet and both are more comfortable.

5. As mentioned by another poster, I dislike carrying a helmet or having to lock it to something. I rode first in the days when all you needed was a bicycle.

So... Why do I wear one at all?

1. I am superstitious. Sometimes I just get spooked and wearing one makes me feel better. It doesn't have to be logical.

2. One of my kids is far happier when I wear one. So is my wife. I love them both and occasionally acquiesce.

3. (And don't shoot me down for this) When I'm in the hills, helmet straps keep the left headphone of my iPod in place. I only use the left, for safety reasons....

I am one of many on these forums who are strongly against compulsion but find the realistic prospect of it coming highly unlikely.

 

[Davidc]

David, regarding independent research, see this discussion here about a review that has already been carried out...
http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/br...ng-laws-and-compulsory-helmets.107549/page-12

Sorry jonesy, but I don't call that original research, it's a review of literature. The hospital data is known to suffer from confirmation bias, and the criticisms in the bikebiz article linked to in that post cover much of what's wrong with the report.

The report says that helmets have no value except in accidents which don't involve another vehicle. OK, that's a start, but we need more detail on when they are effective.

I want to see original research, not a review of literature, covering as wide a range of circumstances as possible. If that can show a benefit I'll be interested. If it can show a large enough benefit to outweigh the disbenefits I'll be more interested still.

As I've said, I'm not anti helmet, I'm anti compulsion, and I can see no justification for even contemplating compulsion on the presently available evidence.

FWIW I agree with Boris above on his points 1,2 and 4, though seatbelts have been shown in original research to work.

 

[jonesy]

Yes, that's why I said it was a 'review'! But I think you've missed a rather important outcome of this, which is that, despite the criticisms of CTC and others, the conclusions were clearly not considered by DfT to justify going any further with compulsion; and the fact that they haven't commissioned further research to see if they can find more benefits rather suggests that they don't really think they'd expect to make the argument for compulsion any more convincing.

 

[Davidc]

I agree. Neither do I think there would be a case for compulsion after any research but we can't be sure until it happens. On past form the only body likely to commission it would be the German government, and as far as I know helmets aren't on the radar there.

A rational case for helmet compulsion would be difficult, because of the known reduction in cycling that results from it. A rational case for helmet wearing might be possible but we need much better evidence than we have now.

One of my concerns over compulsion is more that government doesn't always follow a rational course. Vested interests, tit for tat arrangements, returns of favours, peculiar deals, concessions to lobbyists and so on can trump sense. If the pro compulsion lobby can get popular support from the public, perhaps with some help from the tabloids, that could strongly influence government.

If we're to retain choice vigilance is needed

 

[Red Light]

They're compelled to wear them by the UCI. The only fly in the ointment is that there has been no sustained, significant and substantive reduction in KSIs amongst pro cyclists since helmets were made compulsory. There has been a marginal reduction but that could be explained by other developments.

I posted some plots about a year back that showed a 3 fold increase in the cyclist annual death rate in professional competition since the time helmets started to become mainstream and then compulsory. I don't know whether the two are linked but there has certainly been no reduction in deaths in competition.

 

[Red Light]

There have been no credible attempts to impose mandatory helmet use in the UK in my cycling life. A debate or an EDM in the house can be as significant as the fart of a young sparrow.

Jersey now has a mandatory helmet law for children. There was a Bill in Northern Ireland that the CTC did a good job of getting killed. It would very likely have come in in the Road Safety Act if the CTC had not put in the effort to lobby a number of members of the HoL who then got the draft clauses removed.

Perhaps you are not aware of what has actually been going on. Its much more than just a few EDMs and debates. What you have to remember is that most MPs and Members of the HoL have no real interest in this and make the assumption that most people do that helmets prevent injuries and therefore making them compulsory will be a good thing. And they are not interested enough in the subject to inform themselves with all the other things they have to do. So it would be very easy for it to be slipped through as part of another Bill, especially one where the whips are having trouble drumming up enough support and need to buy a few MPs votes with a clause or two on their favourite hobby horse.

 

[MontyVeda]

i just wish we could go back to the days before helmet debates and helmets in much the same way I'd rather watch Emmerdale Farm than Emmerdale... it's all about shouting at each other these days.

 

[lordloveaduck]

Handbags at dawn.

 

[Red Light]

Thank you. No, I hadn't forgotten that Northern Ireland is a part of the UK. Northern Ireland does have MPs in Westminster (and rightly so while it remains a part of the UK), but the decisions taken in the Assembly do not impact on Westminster.

So what you mean is you think there is no reasonable prospect of a helmet law being introduced in your particular part of the UK but you really don't mind if other parts get one? I enjoy cycling in Northern Ireland. Its part of the country I live in. I don't want to be forced to wear a helmet by law in the country where I live and cycle. You seem happy with an I'm alright Jack attitude.