Travel insurance firm refusing to cover skiers not wearing helmets for the first time

Sorry, a little off-topic but travel insurers recognise the effectiveness of
safety helmets for skiing.

"John Benn" wrote in message
...
Sorry, a little off-topic but travel insurers recognise the effectiveness
of safety helmets for skiing.

Link is here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...mets-time.html

A major travel insurance firm is refusing to cover skiers not wearing a
helmet on the slopes this winter.

Essential Travel claims to be the first British firm to adopt such a policy
as part of their safety campaign, launched after the death of Liam Neeson's
wife, actress Natasha Richardson who died after an apparent minor fall on
the slopes in 2009.

It is thought that other insurers may now follow suit, adopting similar
policies.

On 06/11/2012 12:43, John Benn wrote:
Sorry, a little off-topic but travel insurers recognise the
effectiveness of safety helmets for skiing.


I hope DavidR doesn't go skiing. He will be telling them they have a
'faulty policy', but not why.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "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."

"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 06/11/2012 12:43, John Benn wrote:
Sorry, a little off-topic but travel insurers recognise the
effectiveness of safety helmets for skiing.


I hope DavidR doesn't go skiing. He will be telling them they have a
'faulty policy', but not why.

What about risk compensation, rotational injuries? Don't the insurance
companies know about those things. They need to examine the impartial facts
at the bicycle helmet re-hash foundation website.

"John Benn" wrote

What about risk compensation, rotational injuries? Don't the insurance
companies know about those things. They need to examine the impartial
facts at the bicycle helmet re-hash foundation website.

Even better, how about some numbers to show that helmeted skiers have a
lower claims history. They're an insurance company where only the bottom
line should matter. The rest is for passing the time arguing on newsgroups.

On Nov 7, 1:14*pm, "DavidR" wrote:
"John Benn" wrote



What about risk compensation, rotational injuries? *Don't the insurance
companies know about those things. They need to examine the impartial
facts at the bicycle helmet re-hash foundation website.

Even better, how about some numbers to show that helmeted skiers have a
lower claims history. They're an insurance company where only the bottom
line should matter. The rest is for passing the time arguing on newsgroups.

So do you think motorcycle helmets should be compulsory? Presumably
skiers reach speeds comparable to motorcycles at times. (As can
cyclists of course.)

Does your view on whether helmets are necessary or not perhaps come
down to whether you approve of the mode of transport in question? Is
it reasonable or responsible to potentially put people at risk of
serious head injuries by giving out dangerous advice that helmets are
unnecessary just so that you can conduct a moral crusade in favour of
cycling etc? Surely there are better ways to do it than that, if you
must do it at all.

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:07:33 -0000, "John Benn" wrote:


"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 06/11/2012 12:43, John Benn wrote:
Sorry, a little off-topic but travel insurers recognise the
effectiveness of safety helmets for skiing.


I hope DavidR doesn't go skiing. He will be telling them they have a
'faulty policy', but not why.

What about risk compensation, rotational injuries? Don't the insurance
companies know about those things. They need to examine the impartial facts
at the bicycle helmet re-hash foundation website.

BHRF Charlatans.
When it was first established, its stated objective was to deliver the
message that helmets are not beneficial to cyclists - and that that
would be the message unless the evidence forced a dramatically
different conclusion.

And they have the cheek to try and appear impartial.

The fact that Porky Chapman is one of their editors is a clue to the type of
organisation they are.

"Judith" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 10:07:33 -0000, "John Benn"
wrote:


"Dave - Cyclists VOR" wrote in message
...
On 06/11/2012 12:43, John Benn wrote:
Sorry, a little off-topic but travel insurers recognise the
effectiveness of safety helmets for skiing.


I hope DavidR doesn't go skiing. He will be telling them they have a
'faulty policy', but not why.

What about risk compensation, rotational injuries? Don't the insurance
companies know about those things. They need to examine the impartial
facts
at the bicycle helmet re-hash foundation website.

BHRF Charlatans.
When it was first established, its stated objective was to deliver the
message that helmets are not beneficial to cyclists - and that that
would be the message unless the evidence forced a dramatically
different conclusion.

And they have the cheek to try and appear impartial.

The fact that Porky Chapman is one of their editors is a clue to the type
of
organisation they are.

And fish-fetish Keller.

On 07/11/2012 13:14, DavidR wrote:

"John Benn" wrote

What about risk compensation, rotational injuries? Don't the insurance
companies know about those things. They need to examine the impartial
facts at the bicycle helmet re-hash foundation website.

Even better, how about some numbers to show that helmeted skiers have a
lower claims history. They're an insurance company where only the bottom
line should matter. The rest is for passing the time arguing on newsgroups.

Claim history is one thing.

It is the value of awards which is the crucial factor.

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:06:44 +0000, John Benn wrote:



And fish-fetish Keller.

Thank you very much kind sir for your grreat accolade!
I am now working towards the even greater honour of smarmy lagerlout
git, bloody woofter sod, and pillock.



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