Cycling to the gym is a "stroke of genius"

Paul Boyd

Tom Crispin said the following on 10/06/2008 22:04:

> Imagine my surprise when told that children were no longer allowed to
> wash up. Apparantly it's a health a safety matter. The precious
> dears may get a fork prong under their fingernail or something!

FFS!!

> Anyway - helmet use is nothing to do with insurers.

Frankly, I'm amazed!

> The liklihood of
> a low speed fall directly onto a flat surface or kerb is greater with
> children cycling in convoy, pairs or groups as collisions between
> cyclists are more likely.

This is the other point that seems to have escaped burtthebike's notice,
but I didn't feel inclined to point it out ;-) It's exactly the sort of
reason why MTB'ers nearly always wear helmets.

> I set a good example by not wearing one:
> the feeling of the wind in the hair is something they can aspire to...

I know. Hair blowing in the wind, but you're too proud to run after it ;-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Peter Clinch

Tom Crispin wrote:

> Anyway - helmet use is nothing to do with insurers. The liklihood of
> a low speed fall directly onto a flat surface or kerb is greater with
> children cycling in convoy, pairs or groups as collisions between
> cyclists are more likely.

Well, /yes/, but OTOH the chance of a low (or even medium) speed fall
directly onto a flat surface is greater if kids are running playing tag
in the playground rather than playing marbles or sitting having a
blether, so is it worthwhile to wear special protective clothing while
running playing tag? I've never seen it happen, so apparently not.

"More likely" doesn't indicate the actual degree of risk, which is still
low.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch

Paul Boyd wrote:

> This is the other point that seems to have escaped burtthebike's notice,
> but I didn't feel inclined to point it out ;-) It's exactly the sort of
> reason why MTB'ers nearly always wear helmets.

MTBers are typically trying to do difficult things on awkward terrain.
Riding in a group on a road or track is not actually that hard. If I go
MTBing it's entirely likely I'll fall off. If I go out on a group road
ride it's entirely likely that I won't.

"More likely" is not a very good measure, if it's still not very likely.

Actually used to go "mountain biking" in the woods on our Raleigh racers
when I was a kid. We didn't use helmets, they hadn't been invented.
The bikes were crap for the job. I don't recall anyone getting a head
injury.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Tom Crispin

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:14:17 +0100, Peter Clinch
<p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:

>Paul Boyd wrote:
>
>> This is the other point that seems to have escaped burtthebike's notice,
>> but I didn't feel inclined to point it out ;-) It's exactly the sort of
>> reason why MTB'ers nearly always wear helmets.
>
>MTBers are typically trying to do difficult things on awkward terrain.
>Riding in a group on a road or track is not actually that hard. If I go
>MTBing it's entirely likely I'll fall off. If I go out on a group road
>ride it's entirely likely that I won't.
>
>"More likely" is not a very good measure, if it's still not very likely.

Yes it is. I had a group of 10 eight year olds out today on a 25 Km
bike ride. I reckon there were six collisions - all trivial, and not
involving anyone falling off their bike. However many times you say
to children to pay attention to what's ahead and not to chat, excitied
boys and girls are still going to want to be sharing their experiences
with their friends and see what their friends behind them are doing,
and you can be sure that that will be the moment the leading
instructor had decided to stop... Bang!

Tom Crispin

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:10:17 +0100, Peter Clinch
<p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:

>Tom Crispin wrote:
>
>> Anyway - helmet use is nothing to do with insurers. The liklihood of
>> a low speed fall directly onto a flat surface or kerb is greater with
>> children cycling in convoy, pairs or groups as collisions between
>> cyclists are more likely.
>
>Well, /yes/, but OTOH the chance of a low (or even medium) speed fall
>directly onto a flat surface is greater if kids are running playing tag
>in the playground rather than playing marbles or sitting having a
>blether, so is it worthwhile to wear special protective clothing while
>running playing tag? I've never seen it happen, so apparently not.
>
>"More likely" doesn't indicate the actual degree of risk, which is still
>low.

The risk of suffering a serious head injury while washing up is lower
still. But that's banned!

Brian G

Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:10:17 +0100, Peter Clinch
> <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> Tom Crispin wrote:
>>
>>> Anyway - helmet use is nothing to do with insurers. The liklihood of
>>> a low speed fall directly onto a flat surface or kerb is greater with
>>> children cycling in convoy, pairs or groups as collisions between
>>> cyclists are more likely.
>> Well, /yes/, but OTOH the chance of a low (or even medium) speed fall
>> directly onto a flat surface is greater if kids are running playing tag
>> in the playground rather than playing marbles or sitting having a
>> blether, so is it worthwhile to wear special protective clothing while
>> running playing tag? I've never seen it happen, so apparently not.
>>
>> "More likely" doesn't indicate the actual degree of risk, which is still
>> low.
>
> The risk of suffering a serious head injury while washing up is lower
> still. But that's banned!


Well clearly the supporters of washing up have not been sufficiently
vigilant to anticipate and prevent this ban. A lesson for us all!

--
Brian G
www.wetwo.co.uk

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:04:13 +0100, Tom Crispin
<kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> said in
<bgqt44hl8qrju0ke22a7virhho9v85irkg@4ax.com>:

>Imagine my surprise when told that children were no longer allowed to
>wash up. Apparantly it's a health a safety matter. The precious
>dears may get a fork prong under their fingernail or something!

You might want to email John Adams with that one, he will be amused.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Tom Crispin

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 19:24:11 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<uce@ftc.gov> wrote:

>On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:04:13 +0100, Tom Crispin
><kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> said in
><bgqt44hl8qrju0ke22a7virhho9v85irkg@4ax.com>:
>
>>Imagine my surprise when told that children were no longer allowed to
>>wash up. Apparantly it's a health a safety matter. The precious
>>dears may get a fork prong under their fingernail or something!
>
>You might want to email John Adams with that one, he will be amused.

I was thinking of writing to my MP. The centre is jointly owned by
Lewisham and Greenwich Education Authorities. I don't know if the
health and safety inspector was from Lewisham, Greenwich or Gwynedd
councils.

I think the washing up ban has more to do with bacteria being left on
the plates than the children hurting themselves, and the need for the
children to be given proper instruction as to how to wash up, and
visiting teachers not being bothered to give that instruction.

Tony B

Tom Crispin wrote:

> Here's the full set.

I was thinking of mentioning how odd it seems that all your riders have
h£lmuts but none wear gloves or mitts.. but then I realised where that
could end up, so decided not to bother :-0

T

Ian Smith

On Wed, 11 Jun, Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
> Paul Boyd wrote:
>
> > This is the other point that seems to have escaped burtthebike's
> > notice, but I didn't feel inclined to point it out ;-) It's
> > exactly the sort of reason why MTB'ers nearly always wear helmets.
>
> MTBers are typically trying to do difficult things on awkward terrain.
> Riding in a group on a road or track is not actually that hard. If I go
> MTBing it's entirely likely I'll fall off. If I go out on a group road
> ride it's entirely likely that I won't.

Yes, but you've had slightly more experience than Tom's six-year-olds
(or however old they are - eight?). I would disagree that riding a
bike in convoy "is not actually that hard" for a young beginner - I've
had way more near misses riding in a 'group' of two with my (5 year
old) daughter than in all the other group riding I've ever done.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Peter Clinch

Tom Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:14:17 +0100, Peter Clinch

>> "More likely" is not a very good measure, if it's still not very likely.
>
> Yes it is. I had a group of 10 eight year olds out today on a 25 Km
> bike ride. I reckon there were six collisions - all trivial, and not
> involving anyone falling off their bike. However many times you say
> to children to pay attention to what's ahead and not to chat, excitied
> boys and girls are still going to want to be sharing their experiences
> with their friends and see what their friends behind them are doing,
> and you can be sure that that will be the moment the leading
> instructor had decided to stop... Bang!

Yet... none of them fell off and banged their heads. Case in point,
IIRC it was you that posted a link to video of the "school run" inna
Cloggie stylee. On my visits to NL I've seen schoolkids riding in very
dense crowds on the fietspads, though compared to your kids there will
be differences... there are more of them, numerous other bike users are
being overtaken or overtaking, several of them will have one of their
pals sat on the rear carrier to "help" with balance, many will be riding
one handed, some will be riding no handed, many of the machines will
have hilarious out of tune brakes, there will be no adult supervision
and probably a few of them will be nattering on mobile 'phones. Yet
there isn't much (if any) need perceived for helmets.

"More likely" is still true, but it's not taken as likely "enough" to
assume special armour will be needed. And you look at the head injury
rates there and you see it isn't generally needed.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch

Ian Smith wrote:

> Yes, but you've had slightly more experience than Tom's six-year-olds
> (or however old they are - eight?). I would disagree that riding a
> bike in convoy "is not actually that hard" for a young beginner - I've
> had way more near misses riding in a 'group' of two with my (5 year
> old) daughter than in all the other group riding I've ever done.

Yet Dutch kids learn to deal with convoy conditions on fietspads without
helmets.

Did your near misses with your daughter make you feel you needed a lid?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Neil Williams

Tony B wrote:

> I was thinking of mentioning how odd it seems that all your riders have
> h�lmuts but none wear gloves or mitts.. but then I realised where that
> could end up, so decided not to bother :-0

I went flying off my bike (admittedly at lowish speed, while making a
sharp turn) on a wet gravel path on Friday. Once again, my head
didn't end up anywhere near the floor, and the damage was limited to
some nasty gravel burns and cuts in my hands, wrists and arms.

Mandatory glove and wrist protector law, anyone

Neil

Neil Williams

Tom Crispin wrote:

> I think the washing up ban has more to do with bacteria being left on
> the plates than the children hurting themselves, and the need for the
> children to be given proper instruction as to how to wash up, and
> visiting teachers not being bothered to give that instruction.

And possibly of the fact that a lot more people have dishwashers these
days. I don't at the moment, but it's only because my current kitchen
doesn't really have room for one. I'm planning on moving in the next
6 months, and when I do I definitely will be having one.

As a Scout leader I have definitely experienced this having resulted
in the quality of washing up done by kids to have declined, which
results in the leaders ending up having to re-do bits of it anyway.

Neil