sshhhhh!

Tom Crispin's reply included:

Quoted message said:

As a pediatric nurse, with 11 years experience, I have
seen first hand how devestating a brain injury can
effect a family.

Having children is one consequence of "having an accident while not wearing
a helmet" I'd not seen mentioned in the studies.

Becky

Arellcat said:

Having children is one consequence of "having an accident while not wearing
a helmet" I'd not seen mentioned in the studies.

That's down to the unreliability of the helmet, innit?
After all, if you weren't wearing one in the first place,
it hardly qualifies as an accident.

--
not me guv

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

Quoted message said:

Response to Jim Price:

Quoted message said:

Given that some of the other places are US states, you would
have thought that even a leftpondian might have been sensitive to that,
but then he might be thinking of lawsuits.

I wrote to the guy, and he wrote back: yes, he fears liability issues if
ride organisers don't tell participants to wear a helmet. He also
believes that helmets are intrinsically A Good Thing; but in this
context he was not inclined to argue the point, and neither was I.

This is foolish.

Courts have held that there is no validity to any claim of liability from
not wearing a foam hat while cycling.

How frightened some cyclists have become of this activity - they even fear
that others will find them to blame should the vanishingly small chance of a
mishap come to pass. If it were not for the helmet promoters chasing mammon
we would all be healthier, both physically and spiritually.