BMA hasn't changed its helmet policy



M

Mark McNeill

Guest
http://tinyurl.com/37a5a7


BMA in cycle helmet dispute

Jun 27 2007

by Madeleine Brindley, Western Mail


THE British Medical Association has resisted attempts to revise its
controversial policy on cycling helmets.

The organisation voted two years ago to campaign for the wearing of
cycle helmets to be made compulsory for all adults and children.

But some doctors claim there is no evidence to support such a policy and
that compelling people to wear =3Funcool=3F helmets could reduce the number
of people who cycle regularly.

Research carried out in Australia has suggested that just 30 more
teenagers wore helmets after they became compulsory, but more than 600
gave up cycling.

Dr Peter Ward, from Gateshead, who led the challenge to BMA policy,
said, =3FCycling without a helmet is healthy and it is safest when more
people are cycling and helmet use is at its lowest =3F Holland and Denmark
have the safest cycling in the world but helmet wearing rates are less
than 1%.=3F

The BMA voted in favour of compulsory helmet use in 2005 as a means of
reducing head injuries among cyclists.

Dr David Sinclair, from Fife, who proposed the original motion, said,
=3FHow many deaths, how many brain-damaged children and how many
casualties do you want before you are convinced about the need for cycle
helmets?=3F


--
Mark, UK
"Without the aid of prejudice and custom, I should not be able to find
my way across the room."
 
Mark McNeill wrote:
> http://tinyurl.com/37a5a7
>
>
> BMA in cycle helmet dispute
>
> Jun 27 2007
>
> by Madeleine Brindley, Western Mail
>
>
> THE British Medical Association has resisted attempts to revise its
> controversial policy on cycling helmets.
>
> The organisation voted two years ago to campaign for the wearing of
> cycle helmets to be made compulsory for all adults and children.
>
> But some doctors claim there is no evidence to support such a policy and
> that compelling people to wear =3Funcool=3F helmets could reduce the number
> of people who cycle regularly.
>
> Research carried out in Australia has suggested that just 30 more
> teenagers wore helmets after they became compulsory, but more than 600
> gave up cycling.


Is that 30 for the whole population?
Did they ask every single cycling teenager, Given that
there is roughly 2 million teenagers in the country[1].


I find that a bit of a strange statistic.


[1] taken as approx 10% of the current population of
21million.
 
On 27 Jun, 19:44, Martin Dann <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mark McNeill wrote:
> >http://tinyurl.com/37a5a7

>
> > BMA in cycle helmet dispute

>
> > Jun 27 2007

>
> > by Madeleine Brindley, Western Mail

>
> > THE British Medical Association has resisted attempts to revise its
> > controversial policy on cycling helmets.

>
> > The organisation voted two years ago to campaign for the wearing of
> > cycle helmets to be made compulsory for all adults and children.

>
> > But some doctors claim there is no evidence to support such a policy and
> > that compelling people to wear =3Funcool=3F helmets could reduce the number
> > of people who cycle regularly.

>
> > Research carried out in Australia has suggested that just 30 more
> > teenagers wore helmets after they became compulsory, but more than 600
> > gave up cycling.

>
> Is that 30 for the whole population?
> Did they ask every single cycling teenager, Given that
> there is roughly 2 million teenagers in the country[1].
>
> I find that a bit of a strange statistic.
>
> [1] taken as approx 10% of the current population of
> 21million.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Some let facts get in the way of common sense.

And facts can be used to say whatever you want, if you can't then your
not a statistician ;-)
 
Dr David Sinclair from Fife is a pompous ass and he can kiss mine.
"Mark McNeill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> http://tinyurl.com/37a5a7
>
>
> BMA in cycle helmet dispute
>
> Jun 27 2007
>
> by Madeleine Brindley, Western Mail
>
>
> THE British Medical Association has resisted attempts to revise its
> controversial policy on cycling helmets.
>
> The organisation voted two years ago to campaign for the wearing of
> cycle helmets to be made compulsory for all adults and children.
>
> But some doctors claim there is no evidence to support such a policy and
> that compelling people to wear =3Funcool=3F helmets could reduce the
> number
> of people who cycle regularly.
>
> Research carried out in Australia has suggested that just 30 more
> teenagers wore helmets after they became compulsory, but more than 600
> gave up cycling.
>
> Dr Peter Ward, from Gateshead, who led the challenge to BMA policy,
> said, =3FCycling without a helmet is healthy and it is safest when more
> people are cycling and helmet use is at its lowest =3F Holland and Denmark
> have the safest cycling in the world but helmet wearing rates are less
> than 1%.=3F
>
> The BMA voted in favour of compulsory helmet use in 2005 as a means of
> reducing head injuries among cyclists.
>
> Dr David Sinclair, from Fife, who proposed the original motion, said,
> =3FHow many deaths, how many brain-damaged children and how many
> casualties do you want before you are convinced about the need for cycle
> helmets?=3F
>
>
> --
> Mark, UK
> "Without the aid of prejudice and custom, I should not be able to find
> my way across the room."
 
On 28 Jun 2007 09:08:45 GMT someone who may be Roos Eisma
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>>Anybody know where this bod is a quack in Fife? It might be time for
>>some lobbying.

>
>This may be the one:
>http://medicine.st-andrews.ac.uk/staffProfile.aspx?sunID=dms10


Looks like it from the CV.

St Andrews is a little way away from me. Perhaps those based in the
Dundee area might like to lobby...


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
in message <[email protected]>, David Hansen
('[email protected]') wrote:

> On 28 Jun 2007 09:08:45 GMT someone who may be Roos Eisma
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>>>Anybody know where this bod is a quack in Fife? It might be time for
>>>some lobbying.

>>
>>This may be the one:
>>http://medicine.st-andrews.ac.uk/staffProfile.aspx?sunID=dms10

>
> Looks like it from the CV.
>
> St Andrews is a little way away from me. Perhaps those based in the
> Dundee area might like to lobby...


Or at least engage in constructive dialogue. In my experience you don't
change people's minds by being confrontational - you're more likely to
harden attitudes.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
 

> >>Anybody know where this bod is a quack in Fife? It might be time for
> >>some lobbying.

>


he is clearly a dedicated and ambitious committee man, and he won the
vote.I doubt that trying to get him to see reason would have any
effect.He is of the s'obvious innit sort.

And I wonder whether you would ever catch him at work or on a bike.He
probably found a lot of friends at the BMA conference.

I look forward to the next conference recommending compulsory helmets
and fluorescent jackets for pedestrians and car occupants and on the
spot fines for failure to wear hip protectors over 65.Shouldn't eating
kebabs be illegal, they look dodgey to me and that seems to be enough
for the BMA reps.If just one life was saved....Is it still legal to
walk on a mountain or climb a cliff?How about riding a motorbike,
there's no need for that is there.Well, I don't do it so clearly I
would support anyone with a bee in his bonnet about it.

It is a bit hard to think of another campaign that seeks to reduce
the liability of people who have injured or killed someone else by
their voluntary actions and to punish victims for choosing to take an
extremely small (or absent) risk.

I shall be on a 100miler at the weekend with other doctors and not all
will have helmets and nobody in previous years has commented..

TerryJ

TerryJ
 
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:40:46 +0100 someone who may be Simon Brooke
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>> St Andrews is a little way away from me. Perhaps those based in the
>> Dundee area might like to lobby...

>
>Or at least engage in constructive dialogue. In my experience you don't
>change people's minds by being confrontational - you're more likely to
>harden attitudes.


Who said anything about being confrontational? It certainly wasn't
me.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
On 28 Jun, 12:35, David Hansen <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 11:40:46 +0100 someone who may be Simon Brooke
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
> >> St Andrews is a little way away from me. Perhaps those based in the
> >> Dundee area might like to lobby...

>


Loch leven medical centre, Kinross

I would not think it would be a worthwhile or pleasant
experience.Rather like arguing with a jehova's witness.

TerryJ
 
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 05:56:47 -0700 someone who may be TerryJ
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>I would not think it would be a worthwhile or pleasant
>experience.Rather like arguing with a jehova's witness.


Almost certainly not pleasant. Worthwhile is, perhaps, a different
matter.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
TerryJ wrote:
>
> Loch leven medical centre, Kinross
>
> I would not think it would be a worthwhile or pleasant
> experience.Rather like arguing with a jehova's witness.


He mentioned in his speech that he had been subject to abusive emails
and a 'campaign' against him by cyclists.

Of course, that may be no more than people bluntly telling him he's wrong.

If anyone does want to contact him, a better approach might be a
series of questions designed to elicit where his failure of
understanding is.

There's no point getting him into a state where he argues his position
more strongly because those who oppose him are being offensive.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
 

> I shall be on a 100miler at the weekend with other doctors and not all
> will have helmets and nobody in previous years has commented..
>
> TerryJ



How did the sponsorship raising go?

--

Nigel
 
TerryJ <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> >>Anybody know where this bod is a quack in Fife? It might be time for
>> >>some lobbying.

>>

>
> he is clearly a dedicated and ambitious committee man, and he won the
> vote.I doubt that trying to get him to see reason would have any
> effect.He is of the s'obvious innit sort.
>
> And I wonder whether you would ever catch him at work or on a bike.He
> probably found a lot of friends at the BMA conference.
>


I wrote to Dr Sinclair and got a friendly and painstaking reply. I
am working through the references. Please don't send him aggressively
worded protests - it may be difficult to change his mind but he's
a reasonable person, a working GP and his whole family cycle.

-adrian