Perthshire Challenge - Sunday 17th June

David Hansen wrote:
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 16:22:02 +0100 someone who may be "Rob Burke"
wrote this:-


My Rotary club is organising a charity walk/cycling challenge from Perth on
Sunday 17th June. It's for teams of three, walking 13 miles and cycling 17
miles. It should be an enjoyable day out, and if you think you might like to
do it, see www.perthshire.co.uk/challenge


Having read this bit, "Cycle helmets must be worn for the cycling
section of the Perthshire Challenge", I have a two word answer to
your rotary club. The second word is off and you may decide for
yourself what the first word is.

And what is more, it is a 'thon

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"To communicate with Mars, converse with spirits, To report the
behaviour of the sea monster, Describe the horoscope,
haruspicate or scry, Observe disease in signatures." (T.S.Eliot)

In article ,
e says...
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:18:35 +0100, "vernon"
wrote:

The insistance on helmets might be that of an insurane company covering the
event.

Highly unlikely.


I note that while they insist on helmet use for the cycling section,
walking boots are a mere recommendation for the mountain section. I'd
have thought the priorities should be reversed.

If I'm out hill walking in dry weather then I'd rather do it in
walking shoes. Boots are fine if you don't have strong ankles
and the terrain is rough but someone that walks a lot should
have no problem with good shoes and if there is a good path even
sandals.
--
Cheers
the.Mark

Oops. As a walker and non-cyclist myself I didn't realise that part might be
controversial!

The advice about footwear is intended to be helpful to people who might not
be familiar with the terrain. I've walked in that area fairly often myself
and most people I see wear boots. If you are used to walking in sandals or
running then it's no different to most Scottish moorland. And I suppose a
twisted or broken ankle is unlikely to be life threatening :-)

Is the requirement for cycling helmets unusual for organised events of this
sort, or is David's view a minority one? I know we took advice from
organisers of other similar events. Our club's liability is covered by a
general insurance from the national organisation (www.rotary-ribi.org) but I
suspect it requires us to act responsibly and take advice, rather than
imposing specific rules. If someone really would like to take part but is
put off by the helmet restriction please send me an email and I'll challenge
it.

"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 16:22:02 +0100 someone who may be "Rob Burke"
wrote this:-

My Rotary club is organising a charity walk/cycling challenge from Perth
on
Sunday 17th June. It's for teams of three, walking 13 miles and cycling 17
miles. It should be an enjoyable day out, and if you think you might like
to
do it, see www.perthshire.co.uk/challenge

Having read this bit, "Cycle helmets must be worn for the cycling
section of the Perthshire Challenge", I have a two word answer to
your rotary club. The second word is off and you may decide for
yourself what the first word is.




--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Indeed. If you are a keen cyclist, then 17 miles isn't much of a challenge.
But the walking part might be!

The event is for teams of three, so we thought it might be a good
opportunity for a day out with friends or family who might find it more of
an a achievement.

"Simon Brooke" wrote in message
...
in message , Rob Burke
') wrote:

My Rotary club is organising a charity walk/cycling challenge from Perth
on Sunday 17th June. It's for teams of three, walking 13 miles and
cycling 17 miles. It should be an enjoyable day out, and if you think you
might like to do it, see www.perthshire.co.uk/challenge

On the 16th/17th June I'm organising a cycling challenge across southern
Scotland. Mine's only 250 miles, or 400Km - so I don't think we're in
competition!

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; making jokes about dyslexia isn't big, it isn't clever and
;; it isn't furry.

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 22:50:48 +0100, "Rob Burke"
wrote:

Oops. As a walker and non-cyclist myself I didn't realise that part might be
controversial!

The advice about footwear is intended to be helpful to people who might not
be familiar with the terrain. I've walked in that area fairly often myself
and most people I see wear boots. If you are used to walking in sandals or
running then it's no different to most Scottish moorland. And I suppose a
twisted or broken ankle is unlikely to be life threatening :-)

Neither is a spill from a bicycle.


Is the requirement for cycling helmets unusual for organised events of this
sort,

Yes - and if it is not, it should be very unusual - or rather, it
should be absent.

or is David's view a minority one?

No.

See www.cyclehelmets.org

Rob Burke wrote on 25/03/2007 22:50 +0100:

Is the requirement for cycling helmets unusual for organised events of this
sort, or is David's view a minority one?

It is not a minority view among cyclists but it is a minority view among
well meaning but misguided non-cyclists who think they are doing it in
our best interests.

There is no good evidence that helmets do any good and some good
evidence that they may do more harm. Which is why the cycling
organisations such as the CTC and the National Cycling Strategy (when it
was in existence) were very clear that helmets should be a matter for
personal choice.

Have a peruse of http://www.cyclehelmets.org for more information on the
subject.

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 21:52:48 +0100, the.Mark
wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:18:35 +0100, "vernon"
wrote:

The insistance on helmets might be that of an insurane company covering the
event.

Highly unlikely.


I note that while they insist on helmet use for the cycling section,
walking boots are a mere recommendation for the mountain section. I'd
have thought the priorities should be reversed.

If I'm out hill walking in dry weather then I'd rather do it in
walking shoes. Boots are fine if you don't have strong ankles
and the terrain is rough but someone that walks a lot should
have no problem with good shoes and if there is a good path even
sandals.

I have no problem walking in sandals.

My question is this...

Is an ankle injury more likely when not wearing boots walking in
mountain terrain than a head injury when not wearing a helmet cycling
on the road?

Tom Crispin wrote on 25/03/2007 23:22 +0100:

My question is this...

Is an ankle injury more likely when not wearing boots walking in
mountain terrain than a head injury when not wearing a helmet cycling
on the road?

Of course if you injured your ankle you probably fell while doing so and
should be wearing a walking helmet to protect yourself from head
injuries. If just one life...(cont. p93)

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

in message , Rob Burke
') wrote:

Oops. As a walker and non-cyclist myself I didn't realise that part might
be controversial!

The advice about footwear is intended to be helpful to people who might
not be familiar with the terrain. I've walked in that area fairly often
myself and most people I see wear boots. If you are used to walking in
sandals or running then it's no different to most Scottish moorland. And
I suppose a twisted or broken ankle is unlikely to be life threatening
:-)

Is the requirement for cycling helmets unusual for organised events of
this sort, or is David's view a minority one? I know we took advice from
organisers of other similar events. Our club's liability is covered by a
general insurance from the national organisation (www.rotary-ribi.org)
but I suspect it requires us to act responsibly and take advice, rather
than imposing specific rules. If someone really would like to take part
but is put off by the helmet restriction please send me an email and I'll
challenge it.

Use of helmets is now required when racing, under UCI rules. Even this is
controversial - there has been no measured change in the rate of serious
accidents to racers since the rule was introduced (but that's partly
because no-one has studied the data). Use of helmets is not normally
required for audax or reliability rides in Britain.

As a lay person you probably assume that cycling helmets increase rider
safety. There's no uncontroversial evidence of this. In no country in
which compulsory cycling helmet laws have been introduced has the number
of cyclists killed or seriously injured per billion cyclist kilometers
gone down. No-one is really sure why, but it certainly seems that helmets
aggravate at least as many serious injuries as they ameliorate.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and there was nothing left for us to do
but pick up the pieces.

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 22:50:48 +0100 someone who may be "Rob Burke"
wrote this:-

Oops. As a walker and non-cyclist myself I didn't realise that part might be
controversial!

I think it is revealing that in the bit which you do know something
about you have only recommended particular footwear, but in the bit
which you know little or nothing about you have made an item of
clothing compulsory.

Had you bothered to ask those who know something about cycling they
would probably have said to recommend people wear cycling gloves
(and appropriate footwear perhaps) and say nothing about cycle
helmets.

You go on to say, "It is your responsibility to ensure your own
safety." but that is at odds with your earlier patronising
insistence that people must wear cycle helmets. If people are to be
responsible for their own safety then why cannot they decide whether
to wear a cycle helmet or not?

Cycling helmets are less useful than walking helmets, but I note
that you have not insisted on walking helmets.

And I suppose a
twisted or broken ankle is unlikely to be life threatening :-)

So is falling off a bike, even in Perthshire.

Note also that wearing helmets increases the frequency at which
people fall off bikes, due to risk compensation.





--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54