P
Peter Clinch
Guest
_ wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2007 20:50:24 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>> You've missed the point that cycle helmets need to be (a) as light
>> and well vented as possible to be comfortable, and (b) as
>> protective as possible.
>
> I don't think they need to be b) at all, seeing as cycling is well and
> truly safe without them.
Utility cycling, I'd agree it's safe enough without them, and for many
(but not necessarily all) recreational subforms.
However, in that case IMHO it makes more sense not to wear one, than one
that doesn't do anything, given the minor but finite discomfort, minor
but finite cost, and minor but finite faff of looking after it when
you're off the bike, and especially the implicit message of "hey look
everyone, cycling is so dangerous you need a crash helmet!
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 [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
> On Thu, 17 May 2007 20:50:24 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote:
>
>> You've missed the point that cycle helmets need to be (a) as light
>> and well vented as possible to be comfortable, and (b) as
>> protective as possible.
>
> I don't think they need to be b) at all, seeing as cycling is well and
> truly safe without them.
Utility cycling, I'd agree it's safe enough without them, and for many
(but not necessarily all) recreational subforms.
However, in that case IMHO it makes more sense not to wear one, than one
that doesn't do anything, given the minor but finite discomfort, minor
but finite cost, and minor but finite faff of looking after it when
you're off the bike, and especially the implicit message of "hey look
everyone, cycling is so dangerous you need a crash helmet!
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 [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/