BRAKE have weighed in inna road "safety" stylee with this load of the
most complete bollocks imaginable:
"Nearly two thirds (63%) of the public would support a law
making it compulsory to wear cycle helmets, according to a
national survey. The survey results coincide with the second
reading of a parliamentary bill making it compulsory for
children to wear cycle helmets which takes place today.
Brake, the national road safety charity, strongly supports
the bill which will make it an offence for anyone under 16
to ride a bike on a road, pavement or recreation ground
without wearing a helmet.
Wearing a cycle helmet is strongly supported by health
practitioners and medical evidence. According to research by
the Royal College of Nursing and Royal College of
Paediatrics and Child Health, 50 children's lives could be
saved each year if the law was changed to make wearing cycle
helmets compulsory. The number of upper head injuries could
be reduced by 85%, brain injuries reduced by 88% and facial
injuries by 65%.
As well as Brake and the Bicycle Helmet Initiative Trust
(BHIT), national health bodies supporting the bill include:
a.. Royal College of Surgeons b.. Royal College of
Paediatrics and Child Health c.. Royal College of Nursing
d.. Society of British Neurological Surgeons
The British Dental Association and Faculty of Dental
Practices also support the bill as a result of the serious
facial injuries caused by cycling crashes.
Despite the overwhelming importance of wearing a cycle
helmet, The National Cycling Strategy and the national
cycling organisation, CTC, oppose making helmets compulsory
as they argue that requiring people to wear cycle helmets
will deter them from cycling. They claim that the health
benefits of cycling are greater than the casualty faced.
Mary Williams OBE, chief executive of Brake, says: "We must
challenge the idea that cycle helmets are a deterrent to
bicycle use. They are a responsible, practical and easily
implementable way of protecting children's lives.
If children are taught from an early age that wearing a
helmet is the law and recognise it protects them against
death or serious injury, then arguments against helmet use
will disappear. As these children grow up they will become
adults who have no problem wearing a helmet.
Brake is disappointed that some cycling lobby groups are
against this life-saving measure. Try telling the parents of
children who have been killed or brain-injured through being
knocked off their bike that helmets aren't a vital
protective measure.
If we are prepared to protect professional cyclists by
requiring them to wear helmets in races such as the Tour de
France then surely we owe it to ourselves to protect our
most precious possession - our children."
Professor Tim Coats, professor of emergency medicine at
Leicester Royal Infirmary, says: "Head or face injury is one
of the commonest reasons for a child to be brought to the
Accident and Emergency Department. Injury is the biggest
cause of death in children. Compulsory use of cycle helmets
would significantly reduce the number of children who are
killed or severely injured each year."
Brake also strongly supports cycle lanes and driver
education to protect cyclists.
Other survey results include:
a.. 63% said they support a law making cycle helmets
compulsory; b.. 85% said the government should support
campaigns to encourage people to wear cycle helmets;
c.. 84% said that cycle helmets save lives; d.. 45%
said the reason people do not wear cycle helmets is
because they are 'not cool'.
To arrange an interview with Mary Williams contact Brake's
campaign officer, Simon Collister, on 01484 559909 or out of
hours 07971 612857.
The survey was conducted by the website Myvoice.co.uk.
It surveyed the views of 9256 members of the public via
its website.
--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at
Washington University