UK and Europe · Public discussion

Helmets: request from CTC

Started by Just Zis Guy · · Last activity · 19 posts · 1,025 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
24 March 2004
Last activity
26 March 2004
Original author
Just Zis Guy
Posts
19
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,025
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 1–19 of 19
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Folks, my mate Roger at Cotterell House has asked me to draw to your
    attention the following new page on the CTC website:

    <url:http://www.ctc.org.uk/working/HELMETS.aspx>

    I'll post a reply with the full text.

    It was also mentioned by some mystery individual that the
    following BBC story (consequent on several of us mailing the
    BBC about the Coulthard one earlier this week, well done
    those who piled in) is now online
    <url:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3563671.stm>. It
    is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved, which is not
    supportable form evidence; they Beeb seem sensitive to the
    fact that this is not a black-and-white issue, but the piece
    is less balanced than I woudl like - i.e. does not say
    helmets are made of meringue covered in eggshell ;-) Some
    pertinent feedback may be in order.

    Again I'll post a reply with full text.

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

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

  2. Text of BBC story:

    <url:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3563671.stm>

    Cycle helmet ban faces opposition
    =================================

    [Cyclists don't want to be told to wear helmets]

    Cycling groups have hit out at attempts to make helmet
    wearing compulsory - claiming it could reduce cycle use and
    the health benefits of the activity.

    They claim making it illegal for under 16s to cycle without
    a helmet is likely to exacerbate the problem of obesity.

    Eric Martlew MP hopes his Protective Headgear for Young
    Cyclists Bill will receive government backing.

    The British Medical Association says it is in favour of
    cycle helmets but is against compulsion for health reasons.

    Car dependency
    ==============
    The row over cycle helmets erupted after Labour MP Mr
    Martlew promoted his bill at a press launch in Westminster
    with the backing of Formula 1 ace David Coulthard.

    [We are opposed to mandatory helmet wearing, which apart
    from connotations of the nanny state, is quite unenforceable
    Philip Darnton National Cycling Strategy Board]

    The McLaren driver, a keen cyclist who has a company selling
    cycle helmets, insisted he would not get on his bike without
    wearing one.

    Mr Martlew says he would like to see the use of helmets
    become as common as wearing a hat for horse-riding.

    But his plans have angered a number of cycling groups,
    including CTC, the national cyclists' organisation, which
    says making helmet use compulsory would discourage people
    from taking to their bikes.

    Roger Geffen, CTC's campaigns and policy manager, said:
    "If passed, this Bill would almost certainly undermine the
    efforts of government, local authorities, health
    professionals and others to achieve a trebling of cycle
    use by 2010.

    "By reducing cycle use and exacerbating the trends towards
    car-dependent sedentary lifestyles, this Bill would almost
    certainly shorten thousands more lives than it could ever
    hope to save."

    Obesity
    =======
    The organisation questions claims by supporters of the bill
    that head injuries account for more than 50% of all child
    cycling injuries.

    [Cycle helmets make a significant contribution to safety,
    particularly in low speed impacts Dr Vivienne Nathanson BMA]

    Mr Geffen says CTC analysis of Department of Health data
    suggests that of child cyclists admitted to hospital in
    England in 2002/3, 37.6% had head injuries.

    This compared with an equivalent figure of 43.7% for
    child pedestrians. Of all children's admissions to
    hospital in that year
    34.2% had head injuries.

    CTC argues that 15% of children aged between six and 15 were
    obese in 2001, numbers which are expected to rise to one
    fifth of boys and a third of girls by 2020.

    'Unenforceable'
    ===============
    While obesity shortens life expectancy by about nine years,
    cycling increases life expectancy by about two years, the
    group claims.

    Philip Darnton, acting chair of the National Cycling
    Strategy Board, said the group was not anti-helmet wearing.

    "We are opposed to mandatory helmet wearing, which apart
    from connotations of the nanny state, is quite
    unenforceable," he said.

    "It would dramatically reduce the number of cyclists and be
    the worst possible step to take when we are also concerned
    about the desperate health problems arising from obesity."

    Aerobic exercise
    ================
    Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the
    BMA, said it was "very much in favour of encouraging people
    to wear cycle helmets".

    But the association was opposed to compulsory use at the
    moment because of fears it could "undermine" the aerobic and
    cardiac benefits" of cycling, she said.

    "There is no doubt in our minds that cycle helmets make a
    significant contribution to safety, particularly in low
    speed impacts," she told BBC News Online.

    But the BMA argues that compulsion could mean people
    abandoning cycling and exercise in general because of the
    cost of new equipment and other issues.

    'Funky' designs
    ===============
    Dr Nathanson said advertising and education was needed to
    "make people understand" why they should wear helmets.

    She urged designers to make helmets "look fun and funky" to
    encourage children to wear them, while including clear
    instructions on how to wear them properly.

    The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (Rospa)
    says it advocates the use of cycle helmets, but would only
    support compulsion if enough people were already wearing
    them to make the law enforceable.

    Spokesman Roger Vincent said: "We need to persuade people of
    the benefits of wearing a helmet, with designs that are more
    attractive for children to wear."

    The bill is backed by Dr Andrew Curran, a leading child
    neurologist at Alder Hey Hospital in Liverpool, who
    says wearing a cycle helmet reduces the risk of brain
    injury by 80%.

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

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

  3. Content of CTC page

    ctc.org.ukHELMETS.aspx

    Helmet Campaign Update

    DON'T TURN YOUNG CYCLISTS INTO YOUNG OFFENDERS! On April
    23rd, Parliament will consider a proposed new law that
    would make it an offence for anyone aged under-16 to cycle
    unless wearing a helmet. The Private Member's Bill,
    proposed by Eric Martlew MP, would apply virtually
    anywhere outside one's private garden and could
    criminalise parents and guardians, teachers and youth
    activity providers, 16-year-old friends and classmates,
    cycle shop staff and many others.

    A coalition of the UK's main cycling organisations -
    representing cycle users, cycle manufacturers and traders,
    practical projects and cycle sport - is united in believing
    that the Bill would be enormously damaging to the future of
    cycling. It is also opposed by the National Cycling Strategy
    Board, the Government's official advisors on cycling policy.
    And, at a time of acute concern over Britain's obesity
    epidemic, the British Medical Association and the Royal
    College of General Practitioners are opposed to helmet-
    compulsion too.

    All evidence suggests that cycling declines where helmets
    are promoted, all the more so where they are made
    compulsory. This would have major social costs, not only to
    the health service, but also in terms of congestion,
    pollution, danger and a poorer quality of life. Follow this
    link >> to view a leaflet outlining 7 reasons to oppose a
    child helmet law. This has been mailed to all MPs.

    Cycling is healthy Cycling regularly gives you a level of
    fitness equivalent to being 10 years younger and a life
    expectancy 2 years above the average. The Government and
    British Medical Association both state that the health
    benefits of cycling far outweigh any risks involved, thanks
    to these extra life years.

    Cycling gets safer the more people do it Evidence from
    Britain and elsewhere shows that cyclists really do benefit
    from "safety in numbers". The more people who cycle, the
    safer it becomes.

    Imposing helmet-wearing stops people cycling International
    evidence also shows that making cyclists wear helmets leads
    to reduced cycle use - particularly among teenagers -
    thereby undermining efforts to maximise all of its health
    and other benefits. The British Medical Association and
    Royal College of General Practitioners are opposed to helmet
    compulsion for this very reason.

    The safety case for imposing helmet-wearing is far from
    clear Cycling accounts for a tiny proportion of children's
    head injuries - the vast majority result from trips and
    falls. Cycle helmets can only be designed to withstand
    impacts equivalent to falling from a stationary riding
    position, and not for collisions with moving traffic. The
    Government says it knows of no case where cycle safety has
    improved due to increased helmet-wearing. We need to find
    out why helmet laws appear not to deliver the safety
    benefits one might expect
    - particularly given the evidence that cycle use would
    decrease as a result. The loss of "safety in numbers"
    benefits is just one of several possible explanations.

    Laws must be reasonable and enforceable The published Bill,
    if passed, would make it an offence to let under-16 year
    olds cycle unless they are helmeted. 93.5% of child cyclists
    currently do not wear helmets when riding on minor built-up
    roads. This would criminalise not only their parents and
    guardians, but also their teachers and youth group workers,
    their 16-year old friends and class mates, cycle shop owners
    and many others.

    The cycling organisations supporting this campaign are not
    "anti-helmet". But current evidence provides at least as
    much support for those who are sceptical of helmets as for
    those who swear by them. We therefore remain entirely
    neutral on the pros and cons of helmet-wearing per se, and
    believe that public policy should do likewise. There is
    clear evidence that helmet laws deter cycle use -
    particularly among teenagers - and that this would seriously
    erode cycling's health and other benefits. Such a law would
    almost certainly cause more harm than the problem it seeks
    to address. It is more important to encourage people to
    cycle, especially at school age, than to insist that they
    wear a helmet when doing so. The last thing we should be
    doing is legislating children and young teenagers into car-
    dependent sedentary lifestyles.

    For further information please visit:

    www.cyclehelmets.org - website of an international coalition
    of cycle helmet experts

    ctc.org.ukCTC12ppleafleta w
    .pdf 7 reasons to oppose a child helmet law - a booklet
    published by CCN, CTC & LCC

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

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

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

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    The McLaren driver, a keen cyclist who has a company
    selling cycle helmets,

    Ahh!

    --
    Cheerful Peddling John Mallard

  5. On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, Just zis Guy, you know?
    <[email hidden]> wrote: (quoting something or
    other)

    Quoted message said:

    Dr Nathanson said advertising and education was needed to
    "make people understand" why they should wear helmets.

    She urged designers to make helmets "look fun and funky"

    Oh that's alright. I thought the pro-compulsion zealots were
    claiming some safety benefit, but it turns out that it's to
    make the youth of the country look fun and funky. Silly me.

    regards, Ian SMith
    --
    |\ /| no .sig
    |o o|
    |/ \|

  6. you know? said:

    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved

    It is quoting a claim. A claim is not, necessarily, a fact.

  7. "John Mallard" <not_me@all> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


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

    [...]

    Quoted message said:

    The McLaren driver, a keen cyclist who has a company
    selling cycle helmets,

    Ahh!

    Interestingly the helmets look just like F1 helmets, and
    they have cobbled together excuses about facial injury and
    being able to hear (thats why the face opening goes round,
    and up at the sides ... like a F1 helmet).

    He has been promoting these helmets around the world.

    Now, I wonder why the BHIT bike ride goes from Silverstone
    to Nevers?

  8. In "]news:[email hidden],
    Gonzalez <[email hidden]> typed:

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:15:13 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you

    know? said:

    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved

    It is quoting a claim. A claim is not, necessarily, a
    fact.

    Interestingly the person claiming it did the biggest survey
    of child brain injuries ever undertaken according to
    icnorthwales. Can't find it on PubMed yet. Anyone have
    access to Medline?

    A

  9. Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved

    It is quoting a claim. A claim is not, necessarily, a
    fact.

    It is quoting a claim that has no basis in fact and, after
    the retraction of this figure by the authors of the study
    from which it is taken, no basis in fiction either.

  10. Quoted message said:

    <url:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3563671.stm>

    Cycle helmet ban faces opposition

    <big snippity>

    "The Government says it knows of no case where cycle safety
    has improved due to increased helmet-wearing."

    Where'd that bit come from then?

  11. Quoted message said:

    Interestingly the person claiming it did the biggest
    survey of child brain injuries ever undertaken according
    to icnorthwales. Can't find it on PubMed yet. Anyone have
    access to Medline?

    Yep. Got any more information to track it down? Their
    search thingummy is bloody awful, and there's a whole load
    of A. Currans!

    Mark.

  12. In "]news:[email hidden],
    Mark Thompson <[email hidden]> typed:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Interestingly the person claiming it did the biggest
    survey of child brain injuries ever undertaken according
    to icnorthwales. Can't find it on PubMed yet. Anyone have
    access to Medline?

    Yep. Got any more information to track it down? Their
    search thingummy is bloody awful, and there's a whole load
    of A. Currans!

    He's A.L. Curran. As in "et al" which helps when doing a web
    search. I guess a publications database should know the
    difference.

    m_objectid=14080832&method=full&siteid=50142&headline=new-
    law-needed-on-cycle-helmets-name_page.html says he did the
    research and he's at Alder Hey hospital, Liverpool,
    whereas it seems he's at Frenchay Hospital, Bristol. Ah
    well, good for accuracy. His email's easy enough to find.
    Not sure of the etiquette of emailing him to enquire about
    his source, though.

    Ambrose

  13. Quoted post said:

    Originally posted by Gonzalez
    On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:15:13 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"

    Quoted message said:

    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved



    It is quoting a claim. A claim is not, necessarily, a fact.

    Is that a fact?

    Tell us something we don't already know.

    Roger

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

    Quoted message said:

    It was also mentioned by some mystery individual that the
    following BBC story (consequent on several of us mailing
    the BBC about the Coulthard one earlier this week, well
    done those who piled in) is now online
    <url:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3563671.stm>.
    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved, which is
    not supportable form evidence;

    To be fair to the Beeb they are not themsleves claiming
    that, but attribute the claim to Dr. Andrew Curran of Alder
    Hey Hospital. However, they should not give the impression
    that this figure is widely accepted. Dr. Curran appears to
    be an MHL campaigner.

    --
    Dave...

  15. "Mark Thompson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "The Government says it knows of no case where cycle
    safety has improved due to increased helmet-wearing."

    Quoted message said:

    Where'd that bit come from then?

    I know who got it in there, but I don't know the original
    source of the quote - I believe it is actually buried in the
    small print of the egregious RR30.

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

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

  16. Gonzalez <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:15:13 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you

    know? said:

    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved

    It is quoting a claim. A claim is not, necessarily, a
    fact.

    Has anyone asked this Brian himself about the facts?

  17. In "]news:[email hidden],
    Mike Farnes <[email hidden]> typed:

    Quoted message said:

    Gonzalez <[email hidden]> wrote

    Quoted message said:

    On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 19:15:13 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you

    know? said:

    It is still quoting 80% for brian injuries saved

    It is quoting a claim. A claim is not, necessarily,
    a fact.

    Has anyone asked this Brian himself about the facts?

    Presumably he just put the helmet on because someone was
    going to hit him otherwise. In 20% of cases the argument
    about whether he should be wearing the helmet or not was
    already so violent that his capitulation did not stop the
    assault and injury happening.

    A

  18. Just zis Guy, you know? quoth:

    Quoted message said:

    Text of BBC story:

    <massive snip>

    Quoted message said:

    The McLaren driver, a keen cyclist who has a company
    selling cycle helmets

    BUSTED!

    Shame on Jason Queally BTW. Unfortunately hanging for
    traitors was abolished a couple of years ago ;-)

  19. "Zog The Undeniable" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:406325af.0@entanet...

    Quoted message said:

    Just zis Guy, you know? quoth:

    Quoted message said:

    Text of BBC story:

    <massive snip>

    Quoted message said:

    The McLaren driver, a keen cyclist who has a company
    selling cycle helmets

    BUSTED!

    That looks like a formula 1 helmet (hmmm a coincidence if
    thats the safest design eh?), that he promotes around the
    world at F1 races.

    BTW: I may be in France when the BHIT "ride to the race (ie
    between two F1 racetracks)" is supposed to happen. I say
    supposed to, they don't mention it on their site any more

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.