Would any cycle helmet have helped here?

[Justinslow]

Not at all

It was the simple case of someone making the absurd claim (in spite of the evidence otherwise) that cycle helmets offer facial protection

Then we had an infantile tantrum and name calling, and further unfounded claims tat cycle helmets reduce facial injuries

It is simply challenging dangerous and unevidenced claims that are misleading

You see entitled fully to a different view, but you are not entitled to make unfounded, in evidenced clams about the effectiveness of helmets that fly in tha face of the evidence

What I do find ironic is that the only one who is calling people who don' t agree with them infantile names was yourself!

Please provide evidence for you claims that helmets protect the face and let's put the discussion on an evidenced footing instead of tantrums

I think you're confusing me with somebody else pal.

 

[mjr]

I don't think I did, did I? And where have I called anybody "infantile" names?

Well, you did suggest we non-wearers were "just lazy" (which was a bit naughty IMO but I didn't point it out at the time), but I think @Cunobelin may be confusing you with someone else.

 

[ufkacbln]

As for the absurdity of drivers wearing flameproof overalls ands helmets because Lewis Hamilton does is of course absurd and ludicrous ... That is the point

All we need to do now is explain why the average cyclist on a tour or shopping trip should wear a helmet because professional racing cyclist do




The point is that both arguments are absurd and farcical, yet the latter is frequently used to justify arguing for the wearing of helmets

 

[Justinslow]

Well, you did suggest non-wearers were "just lazy" (which was a bit naughty IMO but I didn't point it out at the time), but I think @Cunobelin may be confusing you with someone else.

Ok, by "lazy" I mean - just not wearing one because they never have, and not really thinking about it to any great extent, maybe short journeys "why should I bother" type attitude, they are clearly not "lazy" in the true sense of the word as they would be on the bus right?

 

[ufkacbln]

Mea culpa

You are right..on the bus and not concentrating, so my apologies


Let the post stand as my error and I will post a corrected version later this evening

 

[Justinslow]

As for the absurdity of drivers wearing flameproof overalls ands helmets because Lewis Hamilton does is of course absurd and ludicrous ... That is the point

All we need to do now is explain why the average cyclist on a tour or shopping trip should wear a helmet because professional racing cyclist do




The point is that both arguments are absurd and farcical, yet the latter is frequently used to justify arguing for the wearing of helmets

Like I said this thread is muddled,
what I actually said was - I was surprised that the amount of non wearers out weighs the wearers given we have all the pro racers on TV and in the media wearing helmets blah blah blah, and people are often like sheep - following one another. I certainly did not say "we should all wear a helmet because Froome does", try reading the threads.

I don't believe the vast majority of people are making an informed choice to not wear a helmet based on evidence for or against. I just think they can't be arsed (obviously some don't wear one because they don't think it will help them in an accident such as all the "antis" on here.

 

[Lemond]

As for the absurdity of drivers wearing flameproof overalls ands helmets because Lewis Hamilton does is of course absurd and ludicrous ... That is the point

All we need to do now is explain why the average cyclist on a tour or shopping trip should wear a helmet because professional racing cyclist do

The point is that both arguments are absurd and farcical, yet the latter is frequently used to justify arguing for the wearing of helmets

It's a bit rich of you to (wrongly) attack Justinslow about dodgy helmet safety claims and then make a statement like that, isn't it?

Where's your evidence?

 

[Justinslow]

Mea culpa

You are right..on the bus and not concentrating, so my apologies


Let the post stand as my error and I will post a corrected version later this evening

Not a problem, I also have enough trouble keeping up with multiple alerts and reading posts while I'm writing a new one, easy to lose track!

 

[ufkacbln]

1. See apology above

2. Evidence of what... I presume that you mean evidence that some posters feel professional cyclists helmet use justifies their use in normal cycling
Please feel free to read this thread or run a search

 

[benb]

Ok, by "lazy" I mean - just not wearing one because they never have, and not really thinking about it to any great extent, maybe short journeys "why should I bother" type attitude, they are clearly not "lazy" in the true sense of the word as they would be on the bus right?

Boot on other foot, I would say. People who wear helmets are the ones who have never really thought about the issue.

That's certainly the case for me.
I used to wear one, because "Well, they must offer some protection, right? It stands to reason"
Then I actually looked at the evidence and found that there is no statistically significant protective effect detectable in the data. That, combined with the already low risk of getting a head injury in the first place (not to mention that there are plenty of other activities with at least as much likelihood of getting a head injury that we don't bother with helmets for), and that I found cycling much more pleasurable without a helmet, led me to the position that the negligible protection they offer is not worth the effort.

 

[Lemond]

1. See apology above

2. Evidence of what... I presume that you mean evidence that some posters feel professional cyclists helmet use justifies their use in normal cycling
Please feel free to read this thread or run a search

Hmmm. So probably not all that "frequently" after all, eh?

 

[ufkacbln]

Hmmm. So probably not all that "frequently" after all, eh?

Feel free to disprove

 

[Lemond]

Feel free to disprove

Typical. You demand others provide evidence to support their claims, yet won't do the same yourself. That really doesn't seem fair.

 

[ufkacbln]

Typical. You demand others provide evidence to support their claims, yet won't do the same yourself. That really doesn't seem fair.

There is a difference of scale and importance

Stating that helmets offer facial protection is on s completely different scale

As above, I am on a bus at the moment with interrmittent signal

I amquite happy to run a search when I get home later this evening to prove the point

You could simply search Geraint

A orime example of how in a helmets thread the professionals are used to justify helmets for the average cyclist

Again, I can ink when I get home later

 

[Lemond]

There is a difference of scale and importance

Stating that helmets offer facial protection is on s completely different scale

As above, I am on a us at the moment withintermittent signal

What's claimed is irrelevant. It's the principle that counts. Don't ask of others what you're not prepared to do yourself.