On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:14:01 -0700 (PDT), Nick L Plate
wrote:

On 18 Apr, 20:53, wrote:
There have recently been some less than honest posts (again) by Guy
Chapman – this time concerning the British Medical Association (BMA)
policy of Promoting Safe Cycling.

In order to provide some balance to his and the BHRF’s biased views
here are some excerpts from the BMA policy paper.

Full details can be found at:http://www.bma.org.uk/health_promoti.../promotingsafe...


Nothing, useless, no investigation, no review, no conclusion, zippo.


"No conclusion"?


Reading skills not what they should be?


Conclusion

Best evidence supports the use of cycle helmets. They have been shown
to reduce the risk of head injury and its severity should it occur.
This does not apply to fatal accidents but in such instances the force
of impact is considered to be so significant that most protection
would fail. As has been illustrated by the case studies, the
consequences of traumatic brain injury are significant not only to the
individual involved, but to their families and to society as a whole.
BMA members, in particular accident and emergency staff see at first
hand the devastating impacts cycling injuries can have. Therefore, as
a part of a range of measures to improve cycling safety, the BMA calls
for cycle helmet wearing to be made compulsory. The Association
recognises that voluntary helmet wearing should increase before the
law is enacted.

--

"Primary position" the middle of a traffic lane. To take the "primary position" : to ride a bike in the middle of the lane in order to obstruct other road vehicles from overtaking.

A term invented by and used by psycholists and not recognised in the Highway Code.