Don't forget your helmet

[flecc]

What is the problem that you personally have with wearing a helmet?

Mine is that for me they are inconvenient and unnecessary, the latter proven over more than 70 years. Since I'm no longer cycling the latter is now indisputable.
.

 

[montwo]

You can ignore the evidence all you like.

It's blindingly obvious that strapping some polystyrene to your head will give you some protection in some situations. But well done for pointing it out.
What you're completely ignoring - as does everyone else who trots out the obvious helmet points - is the effect that compulsory helmet laws have on cycling numbers.
Are you ignoring that? Or denying it? Or just not bothered?

 

[flecc]

not wearing illegal which has worked so well with motorcycle helmets & seatbelts.

It works with those since there's almost no downside. The indisputably proven downside of cycle helmet wearing compulsion is that it cuts cycling to almost non-existent. A number of countries have tried compulsion but most have rescinded that law or changed it to only applying to children. Only three countries remain with a total ban on riding helmetless, Australia, New Zealand and Argentinia, with cycling negligible in all three.

I've explained at length in here why Britain has such a low level of cycling compared to most of our continental neighbours. In a nutshell it's because through circumstances peculiar to us that we developed a sport biased style of cycling which is almost universal and so offputting for the bulk of the population that they are never going to cycle. Cycle helmets are a key component in that. I can re-explain for you if you wish, but I fear your mind is so closed that I'd be wasting my time.

I would however make vaccination against COVID-19 compulsory because anyone now who suffers serious illness or death is almost certain to be unvaccinated.

I've no objection to this since like with seatbelt and m/c helmets there is no severe downside as there is with cycling.

If I could pass a law that would effectively prevent fat parents from fattening up their fat children by overfeeding them I would. It's a form of child abuse that generally goes unremarked.

Likewise, no objection and I would strongly favour such a measure if it could be made to work.
.

 

[vfr400]

I would however make vaccination against COVID-19 compulsory because anyone now who suffers serious illness or death is almost certain to be unvaccinated.

You know that 460 have died in the UK soon after having the vaccine (not from covid) and approx 1/4 million suffered injurious reactions?

 

[soundwave]

Lavishly funded Moderna hits safety problems in bold bid to revolutionize medicine

Lavishly funded Moderna hits safety problems in bold bid to revolutionize medicine

Moderna Therapeutics, the most highly valued private company in biotech, has run into troubling safety problems with its most ambitious therapy, STAT found.

www.statnews.com

Woman who lost fiancé to AstraZeneca jab may never qualify for £120k DWP payout
Writer and filmmaker Zion Spit, 48, from Alston, Cumbria, fell ill on May 13, eight days after he received the AstraZeneca vaccine

Woman who lost fiancé to AstraZeneca jab may never qualify for £120k DWP payout

Writer and filmmaker Zion, 48, from Alston, Cumbria, fell ill on May 13, eight days after he received the AstraZeneca vaccine

www.mirror.co.uk

The Vaccine Damage Payments Scheme (VDPS) provides a one-off tax free payment,
currently £120,000, to those people who are severely disabled as a result of vaccination
against a specified disease, within the meaning of the Act.
It is not compensation. It is a payment to help ease the financial burden for those individuals
where, on very rare occasions, vaccination has caused severe disablement.

Covid vaccine damage - a Freedom of Information request to Department for Work and Pensions

What is the total number of people in the United Kingdom who have applied for vaccine damage compensation related to any of the Covid-19 vaccines available? Please include Refused, Pending and Completed cases Yours faithfully, Chris Richings

www.whatdotheyknow.com

 

[nigelbb]

You know that 460 have died in the UK soon after having the vaccine (not from covid) and approx 1/4 million suffered injurious reactions?

Over 43 million adults have been vaccinated including an overwhelming majority of those in their 80s, 90s & 100+. It's unsurprising that a small number have died soon after receiving the vaccine. Around 1700 people die from all causes every day while 600K are receiving a vaccination. What does "injurious reactions" even mean? Sore arm? Feeling a bit 'flu-ey? Vaccination isn't just for your benefit but for the benefit of society including those who for various reasons cannot be vaccinated.

Does being an antivaxxer go hand in hand with cycle helmet scepticism?

 

[vidtek]

@nigelbb -- I see you have not replied to my post https://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/threads/dont-forget-your-helmet.41324/post-619113
This was in response to your request for links and evidence. They are provided in the post in the above link. Are you ready now to accept the proposition that mandating the use of helmets does more harm than good? Eagerly awaiting your response......but I won't hold my breath......most evangelical proponents of ideas do not easily accept facts to the contrary of their belief systems.

 

[nigelbb]

@nigelbb -- I see you have not replied to my post https://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/threads/dont-forget-your-helmet.41324/post-619113
This was in response to your request for links and evidence. They are provided in the post in the above link. Are you ready now to accept the proposition that mandating the use of helmets does more harm than good? Eagerly awaiting your response......but I won't hold my breath......most evangelical proponents of ideas do not easily accept facts to the contrary of their belief systems.

I asked for a link to evidence that proves cycle helmets do not reduce head injuries. You are pulling that politician's trick of avoiding an uncomfortable answer by answering another question that was not asked in the first place.

You still haven't answered as to why wearing a helmet is so awful for you personally that you prefer to risk head injury. The skull & brain within is remarkably fragile & easily damaged. Any added protection is better than none.

 

[flecc]

I asked for a link to evidence that proves cycle helmets do not reduce head injuries. You are pulling that politician's trick of avoiding an uncomfortable answer by answering another question that was not asked in the first place.

You are the one guilty of that Nigel, in claiming that helmet compulsion has no downside and then avoiding the overwhelming evidence that it does have a very serious downside.

Introduce compulsion here and just watch the rate of cycling go into steep decline. For starters there's the 11,500 London hire bikes, heavily used by commuters coming in by rail from far away and then cycling the last mile or three to their workplace. Do you really think they'll buy a helmet, carry it from home, sit on the train for one to three hours clutching it just for a short use afterwards? Of course they won't, they'll just revert to what they did before the hire bikes existed. And the 60 t0 70% of cyclists who don't wear now will be those most commonly not bothering to cycle any more, as happened everywhere else compulsion was introduced.

That's why most of the countries who introduced compulsion have either rescinded or later severely restricted it, mostly for children only, though in odd cases for urban use only.

That's why our governments of both persuasions have steadfastly resisted all attempts at helmet law in Britain, even point blank refusing debating time for a measure to have children protected by a helmet law, knowing it was the thin edge of a wedge.

If you want to kill cycling Nigel, get compulsion introduced. The car drivers, indeed all motor vehicle drivers will love you for it since they all hate cyclists either silently or occasionally noisily, because bicycles hold them up and get in their way. And of course in killing cycling you'll do wonders for obesity and public ill health.
.

 

[montwo]

I asked for a link to evidence that proves cycle helmets do not reduce head injuries. You are pulling that politician's trick of avoiding an uncomfortable answer by answering another question that was not asked in the first place.

You still haven't answered as to why wearing a helmet is so awful for you personally that you prefer to risk head injury. The skull & brain within is remarkably fragile & easily damaged. Any added protection is better than none.

Nobody is disputing that at an individual level a helmet can provide protection.
Do you wear a helmet all day, or just when cycling?

 

[vfr400]

Over 43 million adults have been vaccinated including an overwhelming majority of those in their 80s, 90s & 100+. It's unsurprising that a small number have died soon after receiving the vaccine. Around 1700 people die from all causes every day while 600K are receiving a vaccination. What does "injurious reactions" even mean? Sore arm? Feeling a bit 'flu-ey? Vaccination isn't just for your benefit but for the benefit of society including those who for various reasons cannot be vaccinated.

Does being an antivaxxer go hand in hand with cycle helmet scepticism?

Most of those that died were young and fit.
Did you know that the WHO has advised not to vaccinate people under 16 years old, as the risk of the vaccine is higher than the risk from the virus? Check out what they say on their website.

"The COVID-19 vaccines are safe for most people 18 years and older"

COVID-19 Vaccines Advice

www.who.int

Note the use of the word "most!!!!

"Therefore, at this time, WHO does not recommend vaccination of children below 16 years of age, even if they belong to a high-risk group. "

The Pfizer BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine: What you need to know

This article provides a summary of the interim recommendations for the use of the Pfizer BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccine against COVID-19 issued by WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE).

www.who.int

I've never seen anybody from WHO wearing a helmet, so an idiot could make the connection that antivaxers don't wear helmets or vice vesra.

 

[StuartsProjects]

For starters there's the 11,500 London hire bikes, heavily used by commuters coming in by rail from far away and then cycling the last mile or three to their workplace. Do you really think they'll buy a helmet, carry it from home, sit on the train for one to three hours clutching it just for a short use afterwards? Of course they won't, they'll just revert to what they did before the hire bikes existed.

+1

I seem to recall that where helmet wearing is compulsory, cycle rental schemes dont work.

 

[StuartsProjects]

I asked for a link to evidence that proves cycle helmets do not reduce head injuries.

I dont think you need a link.

When compulsory helmet wearing is introduced, the use of cycles reduces (significantly in some places) so it would seem inevitable that head injuries would reduce.

If you also made the wearing of HiVis clothing and tabards with license numbers on them compulsory, you could reduce head injuries even further.

 

[flecc]

+1

I seem to recall that where helmet wearing is compulsory, cycle rental schemes dont work.

Indeed, they can't work where helmet wearing is compulsory.
.

 

[Amoto65]

Does being an antivaxxer go hand in hand with cycle helmet scepticism?

Probably along with the earth being flat and being ruled by 12 foot lizards, Welcome to David Icke world.

 

[flecc]

Probably along with the earth being flat and being ruled by 12 foot lizards, Welcome to David Icke world.

When the argument is lost, resort to insults.
.

 

[nigelbb]

You are the one guilty of that Nigel, in claiming that helmet compulsion has no downside and then avoiding the overwhelming evidence that it does have a very serious downside.

I was considering helmet wearing from the personal point of view. What downside is there if you are compelled to wear a helmet? None that I can see beyond the initial expense. They are not uncomfortable & don't obstruct vision. They protect you from serious injury. What's not to like?

A small number motorcyclists back in the sixties used to bang on about their right to suffer brain damage. We don't hear people bemoaning that loss of freedom nowadays. Perhaps because it it never made any sense. Likewise for seat belt refuseniks.

 

[nigelbb]

+1

I seem to recall that where helmet wearing is compulsory, cycle rental schemes dont work.

Why? What about all these thousands of regular commuters arriving at train stations? Do they just take a rental bike on impulse or is cycling the last mile or three to their workplace a planned activity that a little forethought can accommodate?

 

[nigelbb]

Most of those that died were young and fit.

Link please

Did you know that the US CDC & European Medicines Agency (EMA) & the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) have all approved COVID-19 vaccination for those over 12 years of age?

There are always going to be those for whom vaccination is not recommended eg those who have show allergy to vaccines. That's why words like "most" are used. Most means 99.999%

Is it just COVID-19 vaccination or is it all vaccinations that you have a problem with?

 

[flecc]

I was considering helmet wearing from the personal point of view. What downside is there if you are compelled to wear a helmet? None that I can see beyond the initial expense. They are not uncomfortable & don't obstruct vision. They protect you from serious injury. What's not to like?

I have already answered both your points and actually do find cycle helmets uncomfortable and very certainly very inconvenient. There are reasons why I leave my bikes for extended periods and don't want to walk around either wearing or carrying a helmet, particularly not in the countryside. And as already explained, I dont need a helmet for my style of cycling. I'd already been cycling for well over 40 years before helmet use spread in the 1990s, and then cycled to complete over 70 years without any injuries, thus demonstrating I didn't need one. I'm not against anyone wearing a helmet, clearly they are essential for many whose cycling is far more risky. But that shouldn't be used as a excuse to enforce them for those who don't wear, especially since it does so much harm to cycling overall.

Our British cycling rate is already far below that of most European countries, driving it much lower is surely the last thing we should be doing.

A small number motorcyclists back in the sixties used to bang on about their right to suffer brain damage. We don't hear people bemoaning that loss of freedom nowadays. Perhaps because it it never made any sense. Likewise for seat belt refuseniks.

I've already agreed with you on this, but it isn't relevant since it does not make sense to enforce cycle helmet wearing. That has been proven every time a country has debated the matter and concluded that it doesn't make sense. Proven again every time a country rescinds such a law having passed it previously, or reduces it's cover to children or restricted circumstances. Proven by the only three countries with universal enforcement having almost non existent cycling as a result.
.