Cycle Helmets : Bradley Wiggins Speaks Out

On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 20:42:57 +0100, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:


I've explained this before. Cyclists are by definition immature and a
bit thick. They ride push bikes.

QED.


And proud of it. And loving it.
It is a privilege to be immatured by Dave.


--
Life is a venereal disease with 100% mortality.

On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 20:28:27 +0100, Judith wrote:

On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:03:20 +0100, "Alan Holmes"

wrote:


"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 03/08/2012 20:45, Ian Smith wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 18:41:58 +0100,
wrote:

What a shame RoSPA, the BMA & the NHS differ in their opinion.

RoSPA are fruitcases (the're definition of 'accident' includes
muggings - if you're mugged RoSPA think you've had an accident)

Established for 90 years, Royal warrant, internationally respected.

You lose.

The BMA are a trade union whose sole purpose is to protect teh
ionterests of its members.

Not so. They are a well respected professional association.

Where have you found what you think is teh NHS endorsing cycle
helmets?

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/fitness/pages/cycling.aspx

Wearing a cycling helmet can help prevent a head injury if you fall
from your bike.

I cycled for many years with a group, and some did fall of their bikes,
but never did anyone suffer a head injury, and it has been shown that
helmets do sometimes cause a fatal injury!


I look forward to your quotes from the research papers.

http://www.bhsi.org/playgrou.htm



--
Life is a venereal disease with 100% mortality.

On Aug 8, 9:01*am, Dave - Cyclists VOR
wrote:
On 07/08/2012 20:14, Alan Holmes wrote:









"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 03/08/2012 22:17, Squashme wrote:
On Aug 3, 10:09 pm, "Alan Holmes" wrote:
"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in
...

On 02/08/2012 18:16, Cassandra wrote:
On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 09:31:47 +0100, "John Benn"
wrote:

"The Todal" wrote in message
...
Eh oop.

Britain's most famous and successful cyclist now incurs the
wrath of Britain's cycling community by demanding laws to
make cycle helmets compulsory.

Presumably he can expect poisonous tweets during his day of
triumph....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19090898

It's about time a high-profile cyclist spoke out about
cyclists sharing some of the responsibility for their own
safety.

Sharing with whom precisely ?

Yes, thats right - motorists who can't drive properly

Evidence to support that bollox?

No. *Didn't think so.

All you need to do is to look at the way a lot of motorists drive,
you will notice that some are totally unable to drive properly

In fact I do wonder if you can drive properly.

It doesn't matter whether he drives properly. He pays Road Tax, so
he can drive as he wishes, apparently. It's yer acktuel Darwinism in
action.

Since I passed a driving test, it's clear that I have been trained to
drive correctly.Did you pass a cycling test? *Tufty club doesn't count.

On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:14:36 +0100, "Alan Holmes"
wrote:

I passed a driving test, but hundreds, if not thousands, of drivers appear
not to have passed the test, so many only signal at the moment they turn the
steering wheel to turn down another road!

Yes, I have also seen that fairly frequently and it is annoying and
can be dangerous, but it is very much a small minority of car drivers
who behave in such a way.

OTOH I honestly cannot remember the last time I saw a cyclist indicate
a change of direction *at all* - and the consequence of their failure
to indicate is exacerbated by the fact than you dare not make any
assumptions about a cyclist's intentions based upon their road
positioning or speed. I have seen cyclists suddenly and unexpectedly
turn across 3 lanes of traffic in order to turn right, for example.

--
Cynic

On Wednesday, August 8, 2012 12:40:35 PM UTC+1, Cynic wrote:

OTOH I honestly cannot remember the last time I saw a cyclist indicate
a change of direction *at all*

You've never seen me cycling then. Perhaps you don't see any cyclists, you're Mr Smidsy.

wrote
On Wednesday, August 8, 2012 12:40:35 PM UTC+1, Cynic wrote:

OTOH I honestly cannot remember the last time I saw a cyclist indicate
a change of direction *at all*

You've never seen me cycling then. Perhaps you don't see any cyclists,
you're Mr Smidsy.

He only ever sees the ones that don't have lights at night.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 09:47:10 +0000 (UTC), Peter Keller
wrote:

snip

it has been shown that
helmets do sometimes cause a fatal injury!


I look forward to your quotes from the research papers.

http://www.bhsi.org/playgrou.htm



Sorry - I missed out the word relevant.

Still - we must assume that you couldn't actually find anything relevant- so
you threw that in just for a laugh.

Ho, ho, ho

Silly old sod.

On Aug 8, 11:37*pm, Judith wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 09:47:10 +0000 (UTC), Peter Keller
wrote:

snip

it has been shown that
helmets do sometimes cause a fatal injury!

I look forward to your quotes from the research papers.

http://www.bhsi.org/playgrou.htm


Wearing a cycle helmet does annoy Australian magpies, for some reason.
The danger arises if you devote too much time to fending off the
magpie, and don't look where you are going.

http://www.csiro.au/news/newsletters...tm/magpies.htm
http://preview.tinyurl.com/bouuz3t

But not if you wear an afro wig on top of the helmet.

On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 23:37:39 +0100, Judith wrote:

Silly old sod.

Is that the best you can do you vorephilic poop****? For you I am really
working towards the accolade of being ridiculous and
obnoxious you puerile pervert.



--
Life is a venereal disease with 100% mortality.

"Judith" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 20:18:09 +0100, "Alan Holmes"

wrote:


"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 04/08/2012 00:13, Phil W Lee wrote:
(Cynic) considered Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:06:29 GMT
the perfect time to write:

On Thu, 2 Aug 2012 22:53:36 +0100, "Zapp Brannigan"
wrote:

I don't think that can be right. If you were to slam into the side
of
a
Vauxhall Vectra for some reason, a well-constructed helmet will give
very
significant benefits. If you are sent flying through the air,
landing
will be markedly less harmful with a helmet. There is ample good
evidence
for this, supported by every reputable medical & road safety body.

Whether those benefits outweigh the inconvenience of wearing it every
day
'just in case' is a personal choice as you rightly say.

Quite so.

The amount of increased risk taken by not wearing a helmet is likely
to be very small compared with the risk taken by using a bicycle on
the road at all.

Therefore if a person was *really* concerned about the level of risk
incurred by failing to wear a helmet, they would have taken a bus or
car instead of riding a bicycle in the first place.

Which is of course exactly the message that foam hat promotion sends.
With the result that many thousands of people miss out on the
unquestioned benefits of cycling.

People are simply not interested in cycling.

A few!

"Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

I have worked in several universities

Yes of course - most establishments have bogs to clean.

Unfortunately I never got up to that level, my titles were mostly Chief
Technician!