Chazndave Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Cyclists CAN be just as much in the wrong as drivers at times! There are irresponsible drivers just as much as irresponsible riders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Yes, there are idiots on and in all forms of transport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Where have you got your facts/stats about this please? I studied psychology as part of a foundation degree and we were taught that even a very small impact could have a catastrophic effect on the brain. Surely it is good sense to protect yourself in any way possible? Your comments suggest you see wearing a helmet is a waste of time? No offence but the highway code has changed significantly in the last few years or so - would it not be useful to see updated information on road rules? . I spoke to someone fairly recently (who had been driving a long time) who didnt even know what a toucan crossing was It is no wonder there are so many accidents/incidents when people dont bother spending any time to update themselves with the highway code. It is freely available online - and i am not suggesting people do this every month but just once in a while. For anyone who is interested, there is a lot about cycle helmets here, http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1139.html which includes links to lots of supporting information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Cyclists CAN be just as much in the wrong as drivers at times! There are irresponsible drivers just as much as irresponsible riders. Nobody has claimed otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 I've just looked at the government figures for road deaths, between 2000 and 2013, which shows totals, and the split between pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, car occupants and "others" (horse riders, maybe?). Overall road deaths have nearly halved in this period, with most categories reducing by a lot, except for cyclists which have stayed pretty much the same, only a small reduction. Sobering reading. (Although it doesn't take into account the number of people doing each activity. It may be that there are a lot more cyclists now than in 2000. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/359016/indicator-table.csv/preview See point 11 http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/ctc-cycling-statistics#How many people cycle and how often? Unfortunately cycle miles haven't increased significantly (although they are increasing). Interestingly though, further down, see "Risk per billion miles: is it going up or down?" ---------- Post added 28-04-2015 at 13:24 ---------- For anyone who is interested, there is a lot about cycle helmets here, http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1139.html which includes links to lots of supporting information. I particularly like this bit in that report, regarding the change in Australia to make cycle helmets compulsory. The main effect of the law was to discourage cycling rather than to encourage cyclists to wear helmets. Although cycle use fell on average by about 30%, head injuries fell by only 13%, so the risk of head injury per cyclist would appear to have increased. Furthermore, the proportional reduction in head injuries for cyclists was very similar to that for unhelmeted pedestrians over the same period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Where have you got your facts/stats about this please? Like I said No evidence that helmets help much with impacts. There just isn't any actual evidence. I'm not claiming there's evidence that helmets don't help, just that there's no evidence they do. I studied psychology as part of a foundation degree and we were taught that even a very small impact could have a catastrophic effect on the brain. Surely it is good sense to protect yourself in any way possible? Yes, as your smiley indicates, you are confused I've not claimed that it's not the case that "even a very small impact could have a catastrophic effect on the brain". Just pointed out there's no evidence that a helmet prevents such small impacts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
small_hall Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) Cycle paths tend to attract the slower cyclists - the faster, fitter and more experienced cyclists tend to use the road as it is quicker and there are less interruptions to flow. I know that is a generalization, but I think that it tends to be borne out in many cases. Edit. I don't know what went wrong with the "quote" system. The first bit and including the quote box was all Cyclone's post. This is true for me - i much prefer to be on a cycle path. I am not that fast and would never ever consider cycling down penistone road as i would be a hazard to everyone else on the road I also cycle on the path quite a bit- mostly when i feel intimidated by a large number of cars. I do however get off & walk along with my bike (really) when there are a good few pedestrians on the pavement. I also get off when i am crossing (bar toucans ). When i am on the road - I was taught to keep the primary position (as i had lessons with pedal ready when i first bought my bike) . Its hard to keep your nerve sometimes though as i have had a few close shaves from overtaking cars. The above prob makes me sound like a numpty . I like to cycle for pleasure really. Edited April 28, 2015 by small_hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 See point 11 http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/ctc-cycling-statistics#How many people cycle and how often? Unfortunately cycle miles haven't increased significantly (although they are increasing). Interestingly though, further down, see "Risk per billion miles: is it going up or down?" ---------- Post added 28-04-2015 at 13:24 ---------- I particularly like this bit in that report, regarding the change in Australia to make cycle helmets compulsory. I'm reminded of the WW1 statistic that when they required everyone to wear a helmet, head injuries quadrulped. They couldnt understand that until they realised that the increase in head injuries matched almost exactly the decrease in fatalities from cranial gunshot wounds... I just wonder if there is something similar going on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Your comments suggest you see wearing a helmet is a waste of time? My main point is that the knee-jerk claim that any cyclist without a helmet is reckless/stupid is utter rubbish. Given there's no evidence showing that helmets are usefull, some evidence showing that they encourage car drivers to drive closer and overwhelming evidence to show that where compulsory helmet laws are enacted, injuries rise (probably due to the lowered number of cyclists on the roads post helmet law introduction): only a fool would continue to criticize cyclists for not wearing them. ---------- Post added 28-04-2015 at 13:35 ---------- I'm reminded of the WW1 statistic that when they required everyone to wear a helmet, head injuries quadrulped. They couldnt understand that until they realised that the increase in head injuries matched almost exactly the decrease in fatalities from cranial gunshot wounds... I just wonder if there is something similar going on here. It's a good bit of lateral thinking. However, I think it's unlikely as cranial gunshot wounds have never figured highly in the cycling injury stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
small_hall Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) Like I said There just isn't any actual evidence. I'm not claiming there's evidence that helmets don't help, just that there's no evidence they do. Yes, as your smiley indicates, you are confused I've not claimed that it's not the case that "even a very small impact could have a catastrophic effect on the brain". Just pointed out there's no evidence that a helmet prevents such small impacts. Taken from your previous post :- So the only lack of intelligence around cyclists not wearing helmets, is from irrate and judgemental motorists knee-jerk comments implying that it's somehow stupid or irresponsible to venture out without one. In bold - because it is stupid to venture out without a helmet. You dont know what is going to happen whilst out on your bike? Someone could start pelting you with hard rocks? You could fall & hit your head on the concrete? ETA - You dont need to be travelling at speed to suffer an injury. Edited April 28, 2015 by small_hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts