more helmet lies

Rich

Just had the misfortune, after the traditional Boxing Day ride, to read an
article in the freebie advertising magazine masquerading as a newspaper "Use
your head: buy a helmet". So I did a search for the author of the nonsense
quoted in it ("a helmet is essential and provides vital protection") and
found that the advice comes from the DfT! Gosh.

Take a look yourself and see if you can find a single fact in it:

http://www.gnn.gov.uk/content/detai...eleaseID=139785

I'll be writing to my freebie newspaper pointing out that the article is
complete cobblers and inviting the DfT to sue me if anything I have said is
incorrect.

--
cheers

Richard Burton

iarocu@hotmail.com

Rich wrote:

> Take a look yourself and see if you can find a single fact in it:

I think the author may have a point as far as boarding and
rollerblading are concerned. Both these activities are on the whole
lower speed than cycling and may be within the design parameters of
helmets. Both are possibly more likely to result on backward falls
where arms are less likely to cushion the fall.
Also a quick GOOGLE on skateboarding helmets showed most are a more
substantial design the typical cycling helmets and give more protection
to the sides and back of the head. They are styled more like open face
mnotorbike helmets.
Iain

James Hodson

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 16:41:43 GMT, "Rich"
<burtthebike@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>Just had the misfortune, after the traditional Boxing Day ride, to read an
>article in the freebie advertising magazine masquerading as a newspaper "Use
>your head: buy a helmet". So I did a search for the author of the nonsense
>quoted in it ("a helmet is essential and provides vital protection") and
>found that the advice comes from the DfT! Gosh.

An anagram of "The Daily Mail" (catch the criminals, not the speeders)
is A DAYTIME HILL.

One of "Daily Mail" is I LAY MA LID - wherever I lay ma lid, that's my
home.

Hmmm
James - I'm off to read the Mail on Sunday :-)

Sue White

"iarocu@hotmail.com" <iarocu@hotmail.com> whizzed past me shouting
>Rich wrote:
>
>> Take a look yourself and see if you can find a single fact in it:
>
>I think the author may have a point as far as boarding and
>rollerblading are concerned. Both these activities are on the whole
>lower speed than cycling and may be within the design parameters of
>helmets. Both are possibly more likely to result on backward falls
>where arms are less likely to cushion the fall.

Only beginners fall backwards off rollerblades, and we land on our
backsides. It's not a good idea, you can break your tailbone, but I
don't see how a helmet would prevent that.
Rollerblade protection is for knees, elbows and wrists - the bits you do
injure and can protect.

BTW I saw two parents and three kids in a park yesterday. The kids had
scooters and were wearing bike helmets! They were only being allowed to
scoot down a gently-sloping path with nothing to hit but the grass
either side.
When I was a kid it was nearly impossible to crash a scooter, you just
stepped off it and let the unloaded scooter bounce off whatever was in
the way. Then you grabbed the scooter and ran away as fast as you
could.

--
Sue ];(

What goes down must come up again - Confucius' Law of Mountain Biking

graham

"Sue White" <Sue@blackhole.invalid> wrote in message
news:tfwSMeDlA0zBFwjQ@mashtub.demon.co.uk...
> "iarocu@hotmail.com" <iarocu@hotmail.com> whizzed past me shouting
>>Rich wrote:
>
> Only beginners fall backwards off rollerblades, and we land on our
> backsides.

A couple of years ago in this city, a young woman did just that but did not
land on her arse. She hit her helmetless head on the concrete and died!

Graham

David Martin

graham wrote:
> "Sue White" <Sue@blackhole.invalid> wrote in message
> news:tfwSMeDlA0zBFwjQ@mashtub.demon.co.uk...
>
>>"iarocu@hotmail.com" <iarocu@hotmail.com> whizzed past me shouting
>>
>>>Rich wrote:
>>
>>Only beginners fall backwards off rollerblades, and we land on our
>>backsides.
> A couple of years ago in this city, a young woman did just that but did not
> land on her arse. She hit her helmetless head on the concrete and died!

Well, rachel got rollerblades for christmas and has been trying them out
at the park. Not as often as she'd like becasue both I and my wife have
been suffering from colds so are more dead than alive.

So far so good, the frozen layer of snow made any going quite hard so
she could get a reasonable sense of balance and how they behave. And we
haven't ended up in casualty yet!

...d

LSMike

Sue White wrote:
> Only beginners fall backwards off rollerblades, and we land on our
> backsides. It's not a good idea, you can break your tailbone, but I
> don't see how a helmet would prevent that.
> Rollerblade protection is for knees, elbows and wrists - the bits you
do
> injure and can protect.

No, sorry, that's not true at all. No matter how good and how
experienced a skater you are, you're going to fall. It's when, not if.
You can reduce your chances of falling by skating more carefully, but
skate too carefully and you'll either no longer progress, or your
skills will even start to regress.

Falling backwards tends to happen more to beginners since it's usually
a result of not bending knees and ankles enough, but it's not exclusive
to beginners. I'd say head impacts are more common with skating than
with cycling, but I've no evidence to show that.
Cheers,
Mike.

http://www.londonskaters.com/

Zog The Undeniable

Rich wrote:

> Just had the misfortune, after the traditional Boxing Day ride, to read an
> article in the freebie advertising magazine masquerading as a newspaper "Use
> your head: buy a helmet". So I did a search for the author of the nonsense
> quoted in it ("a helmet is essential and provides vital protection") and
> found that the advice comes from the DfT! Gosh.
>
> Take a look yourself and see if you can find a single fact in it:
>
> http://www.gnn.gov.uk/content/detai...eleaseID=139785
>
> I'll be writing to my freebie newspaper pointing out that the article is
> complete cobblers and inviting the DfT to sue me if anything I have said is
> incorrect.
>
From the site: "Every biker, boarder or rollerblader has accidents so
however good your child is at these sports, a helmet is essential and
provides vital protection."

Well, the first statement about accidents is true enough, but no-one has
ever made a helmet for my knees, calves (chainring bite - nice!) or
stomach. Unless you're unlucky enough to slide into a kerbstone or be
hit by a motor vehicle, head injuries are pretty damn rare when falling
from a bike. The geometry of falling from a 4' high bike saddle just
isn't conducive to hitting your head.

Bob the Builder

At the end of the day it's down to the individual. However, to add my 2p's
worth to the debate I believe anyone not wearing an helmet is playing with
fire - eventually, maybe not tomorrow, next week or even next year, but
eventually the house is going to burn down. I am a motorbike rider and I
know of people who survived some crashes that destroyed their helmet. Much
better it being a smashed helmet than a smashed skull. Despite my novice
experience on racing bikes (excuse my repetition on the weight loss and
climbing threads) I always wear a helmet. Everyone in my chain gang does
and they regularly quote guys who have got smashed cycle helmets and save
them for reminder of how 40mph downhill and the concrete pavement do not
make good bed fellows.

Regards, Bob


"Rich" <burtthebike@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bRBzd.11148$0W6.9454@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Just had the misfortune, after the traditional Boxing Day ride, to read an
> article in the freebie advertising magazine masquerading as a newspaper
> "Use your head: buy a helmet". So I did a search for the author of the
> nonsense quoted in it ("a helmet is essential and provides vital
> protection") and found that the advice comes from the DfT! Gosh.
>
> Take a look yourself and see if you can find a single fact in it:
>
> http://www.gnn.gov.uk/content/detai...eleaseID=139785
>
> I'll be writing to my freebie newspaper pointing out that the article is
> complete cobblers and inviting the DfT to sue me if anything I have said
> is incorrect.
>
> --
> cheers
>
> Richard Burton
>

Tony Raven

Bob the Builder wrote:
> At the end of the day it's down to the individual. However, to add my 2p's
> worth to the debate I believe anyone not wearing an helmet is playing with
> fire - eventually, maybe not tomorrow, next week or even next year, but
> eventually the house is going to burn down. I am a motorbike rider and I
> know of people who survived some crashes that destroyed their helmet. Much
> better it being a smashed helmet than a smashed skull. Despite my novice
> experience on racing bikes (excuse my repetition on the weight loss and
> climbing threads) I always wear a helmet. Everyone in my chain gang does
> and they regularly quote guys who have got smashed cycle helmets and save
> them for reminder of how 40mph downhill and the concrete pavement do not
> make good bed fellows.
>
> Regards, Bob
>

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answers given before.

Tony

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 23:31:15 -0000, "Bob the Builder" <bob@bobson.com>
wrote in message <33bka4F3shff0U1@individual.net>:

>At the end of the day it's down to the individual. However, to add my 2p's
>worth to the debate I believe anyone not wearing an helmet is playing with
>fire

Go away and read the numerous past threads on this subject. Look out
in particular for the fallacy of comparison with motorcycle helmets,
the studies showing motorcycle helmets do not actually improve
motorcyclist safety, the facts about broken helmets and so on.

Presumably the guys in your chain gang also all wear team replica kit
- anyone who does not do so is playing with fire...

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales

Tony W

"Bob the Builder" <bob@bobson.com> wrote in message
news:33bka4F3shff0U1@individual.net...
> At the end of the day it's down to the individual. However, to add my
2p's
> worth to the debate I believe anyone not wearing an helmet is playing with
> fire

So you are wrong then. Simple.

T

Tony B

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

> the studies showing motorcycle helmets do not actually improve
> motorcyclist safety, the facts about broken helmets and so on.

er, "bicycle helmets" shurely??? M/C helmets do actually improve
motorcyclist safety. Although again, I'm against compulsion even for
m/c, or car seatbelts for that matter. In fact, compulsion generally.

Which is not to say I don;t think some things that are compulsory are
not good practice, er... bugger, where did that thread go???

bfn,

Tony B

BARRY

--


---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Are you still wasting your time with spam?...
There is a solution!"

Protected by GIANT Company's Spam Inspector
The most powerful anti-spam software available.
http://mail.spaminspector.com


"Tony W" <tonyremove@chapmore.co.uk> wrote in message
news:33ctv3F3uosfdU1@individual.net...
>
> "Bob the Builder" <bob@bobson.com> wrote in message
> news:33bka4F3shff0U1@individual.net...
>> At the end of the day it's down to the individual. However, to add my
> 2p's
>> worth to the debate I believe anyone not wearing an helmet is playing
>> with
>> fire
>
> So you are wrong then. Simple.
>
> T

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was wearing a motorcycle helmet when I came off my bike and nutted a large
rock.
I was badly bruised around my head...........but without any doubt the
helmet saved my life.

My experience.......my conclusion...
I would never ride a motorbike without one .........my cycling is almost all
off road and I'm just about to buy a helmet
Its my head ...and Ive only got the one !

Barry
>
>