Is there a stigma to only wear a cap?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

rustyroger

Active Member
Safety helmets are compulsory for Tour de France riders, I don't know if they are generally required in any particular countries. (If anyone does know please let us know).
I remember the fuss kicked up by the motorcycle fraternity when helmet law came in, and the same when seat belt law for cars was introduced. Strangely I don't think the death rate for motorcyclists went down dramatically, but the brain damage rates dropped markedly. However the death rate for car accidents dropped by a third.
Many years ago I watched a tv programme all about road safety, if memory serves it was a Man Alive production called "The greatest epidemic of our time" I remember a psychologist saying at the time that the safer people feel, the more risks they will take. Is it possible that helmet wearing cyclists will take risks that non wearers would steer clear from?.
On occasion I have driven a 1959 Cadillac from Kent to Northampton to car shows. I was very aware it had no seat belts, ponderous road manners and brakes that were certainly not up to modern standards. Also the interior might have been designed to maximise injury in a collision, plus it wasn't my car. As you might imagine I drove in a very risk averse manner, concentrating all my attention on what was going on ahead and around me, and trying to anticipate any potential hazards. I like to think I try to drive within my and my cars limitations, but certainly I would have got a bit more of a move on in my modern airbag and abs equipped Peugeot.
Some say it should be the individuals choice whether to helmet up, buckle up etc. My answer to that is if you do suffer avoidable injury it is the the NHS paid for by us, the taxpayers, who will pick up the bill.

Roger.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
Safety helmets are compulsory for Tour de France riders, I don't know if they are generally required in any particular countries. (If anyone does know please let us know).
I remember the fuss kicked up by the motorcycle fraternity when helmet law came in, and the same when seat belt law for cars was introduced. Strangely I don't think the death rate for motorcyclists went down dramatically, but the brain damage rates dropped markedly. However the death rate for car accidents dropped by a third.
Many years ago I watched a tv programme all about road safety, if memory serves it was a Man Alive production called "The greatest epidemic of our time" I remember a psychologist saying at the time that the safer people feel, the more risks they will take. Is it possible that helmet wearing cyclists will take risks that non wearers would steer clear from?.
On occasion I have driven a 1959 Cadillac from Kent to Northampton to car shows. I was very aware it had no seat belts, ponderous road manners and brakes that were certainly not up to modern standards. Also the interior might have been designed to maximise injury in a collision, plus it wasn't my car. As you might imagine I drove in a very risk averse manner, concentrating all my attention on what was going on ahead and around me, and trying to anticipate any potential hazards. I like to think I try to drive within my and my cars limitations, but certainly I would have got a bit more of a move on in my modern airbag and abs equipped Peugeot.
Some say it should be the individuals choice whether to helmet up, buckle up etc. My answer to that is if you do suffer avoidable injury it is the the NHS paid for by us, the taxpayers, who will pick up the bill.

Roger.
I've had more damage done to the head alone whilst not cycling. Circumstances beyond my control, who should pick up the bill.

And if one group of people(20%) of the population are at risk, will you be wanting them to foot the bill as well?
 

rustyroger

Active Member
I've had more damage done to the head alone whilst not cycling. Circumstances beyond my control, who should pick up the bill.

And if one group of people(20%) of the population are at risk, will you be wanting them to foot the bill as well?
"Circumstances beyond my control" That's what universal healthcare is all about. Has it ever been beyond your control to wear a seat belt or wear a helmet?.
Care to clarify the second part?. Are you referring to a specific 20% of the population? if so what extra risk are they incurring?.

Roger.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
"Circumstances beyond my control" That's what universal healthcare is all about. Has it ever been beyond your control to wear a seat belt or wear a helmet?.
Care to clarify the second part?. Are you referring to a specific 20% of the population? if so what extra risk are they incurring?.

Roger.
Don't drive, and very little use of cars(Two and a half years since I was last in one.). Helmets are not compulsory, seatbelts are.

The 20% is a minority, affected by a condition which can lead to head injuries.
 

rustyroger

Active Member
I'm intrigued. One in five of us have a condition that can lead to head injuries? Please tell me more about it?.

Roger.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Safety helmets are compulsory for Tour de France riders, I don't know if they are generally required in any particular countries. (If anyone does know please let us know).
I remember the fuss kicked up by the motorcycle fraternity when helmet law came in, and the same when seat belt law for cars was introduced. Strangely I don't think the death rate for motorcyclists went down dramatically, but the brain damage rates dropped markedly. However the death rate for car accidents dropped by a third.
Many years ago I watched a tv programme all about road safety, if memory serves it was a Man Alive production called "The greatest epidemic of our time" I remember a psychologist saying at the time that the safer people feel, the more risks they will take. Is it possible that helmet wearing cyclists will take risks that non wearers would steer clear from?.
On occasion I have driven a 1959 Cadillac from Kent to Northampton to car shows. I was very aware it had no seat belts, ponderous road manners and brakes that were certainly not up to modern standards. Also the interior might have been designed to maximise injury in a collision, plus it wasn't my car. As you might imagine I drove in a very risk averse manner, concentrating all my attention on what was going on ahead and around me, and trying to anticipate any potential hazards. I like to think I try to drive within my and my cars limitations, but certainly I would have got a bit more of a move on in my modern airbag and abs equipped Peugeot.
Some say it should be the individuals choice whether to helmet up, buckle up etc. My answer to that is if you do suffer avoidable injury it is the the NHS paid for by us, the taxpayers, who will pick up the bill.

Roger.
The difference is very simple.

Motorcycle helmets and seat belts have been demonstrably proven time and time and again to save lives and reduce the severity of injuries.

Cycle helmets have not. Not a single cycle helmet manufacturer makes a claim that wearing of their product is liable to save life or reduce the severity of injury - why do you think that might be? Indeed, there is increasing evidence that they actually increase the incidence of certain high risk types rotational and torsional injury because no one headbutts the ground in a perfect 2 dimensional plane of motion.

Next time you have a heart attack because you jogged up the stairs instead of taking the lift I expect you'll put your money where your mouth is and be paying the NHS for your treatment. Ditto next time you have a car accident, or simply trip over because you weren't paying attention.
 

faster

Über Member
Not a single cycle helmet manufacturer makes a claim that wearing of their product is liable to save life or reduce the severity of injury - why do you think that might be?

Because there is nothing to gain from doing so and there is a risk, however small, that making such claims would open them up to potential litigation.

Have you got a link or source for the evidence about helmets increasing the risk of certain types of injury? I'm interested in this kind of stuff!
 
... and be paying the NHS for your treatment. Ditto next time you have a car accident, ...

tangent warning...

Redditch A&E gave my dad a bill for £100 when he went if following a car collision! I presume (never asked him) if it got added to his insurance claim (he was at fault so would be his own (comp) insurance).
 
I think there is a separate law for RTAs - precisely because everyone *should* have 3rd party insurance to cover them.

(I was sent a bill for about £25, but in light of a 9-week stretch post-accident they decided to waive it :smile: A friendly copper delivered it to my hospital bed, while checking up on me.)
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52896427

This image and story do even less for helmets than the Twix "A Break From The Norm" adverts.
More of this please, Mr Journalist sir!

The story itself is no laughing matter, but still, it's nice to find a silver lining in the way it was reported. :smile:

(that page did shock me briefly - he is a dead-ringer for a rider I know well near me! )
 

rogerzilla

Legendary Member
The Twix Norm advert had to have a pith helmet digitally edited in because the original one used a cycle helmet and there were complaints that kids were refusing to wear them after seeing a stereotypical dork in one! I remember seeing the cycle helmet version but can't find it on the usual video sites.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Because there is nothing to gain from doing so and there is a risk, however small, that making such claims would open them up to potential litigation.
Then why are some motorcycle helmet manufacturers not afraid to make such claims?

Have you got a link or source for the evidence about helmets increasing the risk of certain types of injury? I'm interested in this kind of stuff!
Google it like everyone else has to when researching a topic to make up their own mind, instead of gullibly accepting prevailing "wisdom". Then ask yourself what MIPS is supposed to be for if cycle helmets were so safe.
 
Top Bottom