UK and Europe · Public discussion

Early Day Motion

Started by Just Zis Guy · · Last activity · 24 posts · 1,389 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
4 March 2004
Last activity
8 March 2004
Original author
Just Zis Guy
Posts
24
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,389
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 24
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    EDM 764       CYCLE HELMETS    03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane That this House notes the substantial
    disparity between claims made for the efficacy of pedal cycle helmets and their measured effect in
    real populations; notes that the Transport Research Laboratory has reported the promotion of pedal
    cycle helmetsmay lead to increased injury rates; notes that cyclist injury rates remain unchanged
    following passage of mandatory helmet legislation in several countries; and calls on the Department
    of Transport to initiate a programme of research designed to esta blish why increases in helmet
    wearing rates are not associated with reductions in head injury rates, and why the countries with
    the lowest helmet wearing rates are those with the lowest cyclist injury rates

    --
    Guy
    ===
    May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
    chapmancentral.demon.co.ukchapmancentral.demon.co.uk

    88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

  2. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    I'm impressed. All taken from your letter I presume?

  3. On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:39:41 +0000 someone who may be "Just zis Guy,
    you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

    Quoted message said:

    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    Excellent. No doubt not many will sign it, but it is a start.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

  4. On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 19:39:41 +0000,

    Just zis Guy said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    EDM 764       CYCLE HELMETS    03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane That this House notes the substantial
    disparity between claims made for the efficacy of pedal cycle helmets and their measured effect in
    real populations; notes that the Transport Research Laboratory has


    <snip>

    Excellent work. I realize that there is little to no hope of this motion passing but is the best way
    to bring it to the attention of MPs?

    Is a very short letter (No longer than the EDM itself) the best bet - that way the MP might actually
    read it - or is a longer letter explaining why we need answers to these questions?

    Tim.

    --
    God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.

    tjw.hn.orgtjw.hn.org locofungus.btinternet.co.uklocofungus.btinternet.co.uk

  5. "Just zis Guy, you know?" < wrote in message >

    Quoted message said:

    EDM 764 CYCLE HELMETS 03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane That this House notes the substantial disparity
    between claims made for the efficacy of pedal cycle helmets and their measured effect in real
    populations; notes that the Transport Research Laboratory has reported the promotion of pedal
    cycle helmetsmay lead to increased injury rates; notes that cyclist injury rates remain unchanged
    following passage of mandatory helmet legislation in several countries; and calls on the
    Department of Transport to initiate a programme of research designed to esta blish why increases
    in helmet wearing rates are not associated with reductions in head injury rates, and why the
    countries with the lowest helmet wearing rates are those with the lowest cyclist injury rates


    Brilliant. I have been harassing my M.P. (Betty Williams, Labour) and I very pleased that she should
    get this message from another direction. Sometimes things need to be repeated before people can hear
    them. Mike Sales

  6. Just zis Guy said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    I assume another letter to my MP would do no harm;-) At last I can ask him to support something.

    I assume you had something to do with this Guy, in which case nice one!

    --chris

  7. Just zis Guy, you know? posted ...

    Quoted message said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    EDM 764 CYCLE HELMETS 03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane That this House notes the substantial disparity
    between claims made for the efficacy of pedal cycle helmets and their measured effect in real
    populations; etc etc

    Nice one .. 😉

    Out of interest, how many letters / communications did it take for your mp to respond positively and
    for her to table the motion ? I appear to be having a 'brick wall' syndrome with mine .. though on a
    different subject .. 😉

    --
    Paul

    (8(|) Homer rocks .. 😉

  8. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    :"]news:[email hidden]:

    Quoted message said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    So you're right, she definitely hasn't swallowed the BeHIT line! Shame she didn't add at the bottom
    "and investigate why the government are funding an organisation which makes claims counter to the
    available evidence".

    Graeme

  9. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Just zis Guy said:

    EDM 764       CYCLE HELMETS    03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane

    What a shame she's apparently so antagonistic/unpopular with her colleagues that her name could harm
    her cause.

    Anyone have contact with other cycling MPs (Boris?) who might be sympathetic to its aims?

    --
    Nick Kew

  10. Quoted message said:

    What a shame she's apparently so antagonistic/unpopular with her colleagues that her name could
    harm her cause.

    Anyone have contact with other cycling MPs (Boris?) who might be sympathetic to its aims?

    What a shame his party is apparently so antagonistic/unpopular with the others that it could harm
    his cause :-)

  11. Nick Kew said:


    In article <[email hidden]>, "Just zis Guy, you know?"

    Quoted message said:

    EDM 764       CYCLE HELMETS    03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane

    What a shame she's apparently so antagonistic/unpopular with her colleagues that her name could
    harm her cause.

    Anyone have contact with other cycling MPs (Boris?) who might be sympathetic to its aims?

    It will be interesting if the Griffith effect will have any noticeable effect on support. i'd
    suspect it would. Those who rock the boat in the way she has are rarely popular. but it _may_ sow
    seeds of doubt in others' minds regarding compulsion.

    My own MP is a cyclist, but _never_ signs EDMs :-(

    John B

  12. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by Just Zis Guy
    EDM 764 _ _ _ CYCLE HELMETS _ _03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane That this House notes the substantial disparity between claims made for the efficacy of pedal cycle helmets and their measured effect in
    real populations; notes that the Transport Research Laboratory has reported the promotion of pedal cycle helmets may lead to increased injury rates; notes that cyclist injury rates remain unchanged following passage of mandatory helmet legislation in several countries; and calls on the Department of Transport to initiate a programme of research designed to establish why increases in helmet wearing rates are not associated with reductions in head injury rates, and why the countries with
    the lowest helmet wearing rates are those with the lowest cyclist injury rates

    HOLY GOVERNMENT ACTION BATMAN!

    Fantastic that you actually managed to get some MP's debating something worthwhile 😄 Normally I think of MPs as a bunch of conniving self-serving pillocks who's only real interest lies in keeping their noses in the trough, their faces on the telly and the pay rises coming each month.

    As for the Transport Research Laboratory, we should be lobbying for a Cycling Research Laboratory to ensure that the results are not "massaged" to as not to offend the motor lobbying groups.

  13. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    Anyone know what Peter Bottomley's ammendment to line 1 of 764 is? There is no text posted yet

    edm.ais.co.ukref=764A1

    best wishes james

  14. FYI:

    www.faxyourmp.com does what it says in the URL, and will even identify your mp from your postcode.

    ISTR that MP's pay more attention to faxes and letters than emails.

    Cheers,

    Jay

    james said:

    "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Posted today at
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    edm.ais.co.ukref=764

    Anyone know what Peter Bottomley's ammendment to line 1 of 764 is? There is no text posted yet

    edm.ais.co.ukref=764A1

    best wishes james

  15. In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Nick Kew) said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, "Just zis Guy, you know?"

    Quoted message said:

    EDM 764       CYCLE HELMETS    03.03.04 Griffiths/Jane

    What a shame she's apparently so antagonistic/unpopular with her colleagues that her name could
    harm her cause.

    Yo! She's got some names. Maybe the "everyone hates her" we get from the meeja isn't the
    whole story ...

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone have contact with other cycling MPs (Boris?) who might be sympathetic to its aims?

    (mentioning Boris 'cos his high media profile could be useful)

    --
    Nick Kew

  16. Okay, could folk proof-read & fact-check this letter before I send it to my MP? Ta.

    ======================
    Dear Rt Hon Alistair Darling,

    I was recently preparing to write to you concerning the Private Members Bill proposed (if I recall
    correctly) by the MP for Carlisle, regarding making use of cycling helmets compulsory.

    Events have overtaken me, and as well as asking you to oppose the bill, and so oppose the use of
    compulsion in the matter of wearing cycle helmets, I would ask you to support the Early Day
    Motion on the subject of cycle helmets of earlier this week, number 764, tabled by Jane
    Griffiths,to be precise.

    Further to the material in the EDM, it is of concern to me that the Bicycle Helmet Initiative Trust,
    which is behind the Private Members Bill, is knowingly using discreditted statistics in its
    materials.

    This is made even worse given that they are the recipients of a large sum of government funding.

    There are many arguments to be made against compulsory use of cycle helmets - but an honest debate
    first requires honest facts. They are principally:

    1) the number of injuries sustained by cyclist is small - cycling is safer than walking in this
    regard. (According to the government's own statistics, walking is almost twice as risky as
    cycling, per kilometre, and as far as I know, no-one is proposing compulsory helmets for
    pedestrians.)

    2) The main cause of serious cyclist injury is being hit by a car, and bicycle helmets are not
    designed to help in this sort of matter. (They are designed to help with low impact-speed
    accidents involving the cyclist and the ground)

    3) Compulsory helmet use has been shown in other jurisdictions to substantially lower levels of
    cycle usage, and still not provide lower levels of cycle injury.

    4) The risks to health from inactivity far outweigh the far outweigh the risks to health posed
    by cycling.

    Some of the arguments can be found, courtesy of the National Cycling Strategy, particularly their
    booklet on Cycling and Health.
    nationalcyclingstrategy.org.ukcycling and health.pdf

    Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: gawnsoft.co.srgawnsoft.co.sr Symbian/Epoc wiki: html.dnsalias.nethtml.dnsalias.net
    Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) html.dnsalias.netsmalltalk

  17. "Gawnsoft" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Okay, could folk proof-read & fact-check this letter before I send it to my MP? Ta.

    Quoted message said:

    Further to the material in the EDM, it is of concern to me that the Bicycle Helmet Initiative
    Trust, which is behind the Private Members Bill, is knowingly using discreditted statistics in its
    materials.

    discredited.

    cheers, clive

  18. Gawnsoft said:

    I was recently preparing to write to you concerning the Private Members Bill proposed (if I recall
    correctly) by the MP for Carlisle,

    Be sure, and sound like you are too. The man in question is Eric Martlew MP, and he is indeed member
    for Carlisle (Lab).

    Might be worth tossing in how a reduction in cycling numbers is directly counter to the Government's
    stated targets and aims, and thus what the DfT are meant to be achieving.

    Pete.
    --
    Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
    Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net [email hidden]
    dundee.ac.uk~pjclinch

  19. [email hidden] (james) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Anyone know what Peter Bottomley's ammendment to line 1 of 764 is? There is no text posted yet

    Odds are it will be a wrecking amendment. He's a BHIT supporter. See his amendment to EDM 1168 in
    November 2000: "after 'House', insert 'notes that two-thirds of dead cyclists only have head
    injuries and two-thirds of those deaths would have been avoided by the protection of energy
    absorbing helmets and'."

    --
    Dave...

  20. Gawnsoft said:

    Okay, could folk proof-read & fact-check this letter before I send it to my MP? Ta. Events have
    overtaken me, and as well as asking you to oppose the bill, and so oppose the use of compulsion in
    the matter of wearing cycle helmets, I would ask you to support the Early Day Motion on the
    subject of cycle helmets of earlier this week, number 764, tabled by Jane Griffiths,to be precise.

    In the light of other comments in the thread about the nature of the amendment which is being tabled
    by Peter Bottomly, you might want to drop this bit. If Bottomly were to table a wrecking amendment,
    you may just confuse things by raising the matter.

    It may be wise to either wait and see what the amendment is, and adjust the wording accordingly, or
    drop reference to the EDM.

    NC
    --
    NC - Webmaster for 2mm.org.uk2mm.org.uk Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.