Cycle Helmets, Yes or No?

Forums › Health and fitness › Cycle Helmets, Yes or No?

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 22

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1979897 19-Mar-2018 14:56

As long as we are so busy passing laws to protect people from themselves, when are junk food palaces going to be banned? There is plenty of solid scientific evidence that hamburger heavens clog arteries and cause diabetes. Not if such food is consumed in moderation, of course, but people cannot be counted on to do things in moderation so they must be protected from themselves. Of course alcohol should also be the first to go. Smoking while driving and talking to a passenger must certainly be prohibited, as these are distractions. Jogging can only be permitted after a full medical examination, as this is known to have caused heart attacks in the unfit. Restaurants must carry warnings against consuming large pieces of meat due to the danger of choking. No motorcycles without training wheels and no swimming without a life vest. I could go on and on.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1979902 19-Mar-2018 15:00

Pedalling around vineyards raises another issue - drink cycling. I see in Marlborough on weekends. People cycling (badly) on hired bikes evidently intoxicated.

Mike

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979914 19-Mar-2018 15:15

Rikkitic:

As long as we are so busy passing laws to protect people from themselves, when are junk food palaces going to be banned? There is plenty of solid scientific evidence that hamburger heavens clog arteries and cause diabetes. Not if such food is consumed in moderation, of course, but people cannot be counted on to do things in moderation so they must be protected from themselves. Of course alcohol should also be the first to go. Smoking while driving and talking to a passenger must certainly be prohibited, as these are distractions. Jogging can only be permitted after a full medical examination, as this is known to have caused heart attacks in the unfit. Restaurants must carry warnings against consuming large pieces of meat due to the danger of choking. No motorcycles without training wheels and no swimming without a life vest. I could go on and on.

:-) I was waiting for such a post. In a good way.

There are risks with everything. An olympic athlete might slip at walking pace on a slippery goo on the footpath and paralyse himself. No one is immune. Coin the wrapped un cotton wool phrase.

Its about mitigating more common risks that can and do cause poor outcomes and a cost to society. Helmets on cycles is such a mitigation. A teeny inconvenience. Its like house insurance, not a lot of money, and low low odds, but the possible outcome is terrible. I'd rate a head injury as worse. You only have one head, just as you only have two eyes, protect them.

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1979916 19-Mar-2018 15:16

tdgeek:

So the same should apply to seatbelts in cars when on quiet country lanes?

As has already been pointed out, the comparison to seat belts is invalid. A helmet will only protect a small part of your body, and is unlikely to be of any benefit to a cyclist. A seatbelt protects many parts of your body, and is likely to be save you from injury.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979917 19-Mar-2018 15:16

MikeAqua:

Pedalling around vineyards raises another issue - drink cycling. I see in Marlborough on weekends. People cycling (badly) on hired bikes evidently intoxicated.

Drink Cycling! My daily GZ chuckle sorted for today, good call!

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979923 19-Mar-2018 15:22

frankv:

tdgeek:

So the same should apply to seatbelts in cars when on quiet country lanes?

As has already been pointed out, the comparison to seat belts is invalid. A helmet will only protect a small part of your body, and is unlikely to be of any benefit to a cyclist. A seatbelt protects many parts of your body, and is likely to be save you from injury.

The small part of the body is the head, but if you feel a helmet is of little benefit, well, words escape me. I could whack your head at very low speed with a concrete bar, thats probably a reasonable comparison to falling off a cycle onto a curb or road. Let alone thrown off by a faster moving car. No helmet? man.

In a car, at urban speed limit or quicker, a seatbelt does nothing. It might help your head if you hit a concrete wall at 50k, but so will a helmet on a cycle at cycling speeds. In a quiet country lane, akin to a cycleway, seatbelt has zero value

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1979926 19-Mar-2018 15:31

mattwnz:

IANAL, but most vineyards will be a 'workplace', so the owner will want to make sure everyone on the land is wearing a helmet, as they are likely required to do this under health and safety laws. So even if the law did change and helmets weren't compulsory, it is likely all workplaces would still require them.

I don't think land owners will *want* people to wear helmets; they will feel forced to do so. All of these health and safety laws are for no-brainer compliance; you don't have to think about safety, you just comply and wish/think/believe/don't care that your workplace is safe.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1979927 19-Mar-2018 15:36

tdgeek:

frankv:

tdgeek:

So the same should apply to seatbelts in cars when on quiet country lanes?

As has already been pointed out, the comparison to seat belts is invalid. A helmet will only protect a small part of your body, and is unlikely to be of any benefit to a cyclist. A seatbelt protects many parts of your body, and is likely to be save you from injury.

The small part of the body is the head, but if you feel a helmet is of little benefit, well, words escape me. I could whack your head at very low speed with a concrete bar, thats probably a reasonable comparison to falling off a cycle onto a curb or road. Let alone thrown off by a faster moving car. No helmet? man.

I never said it was of little benefit; I said it was *unlikely* to be of benefit. Once in your life, it will save you some damage.

In a car, at urban speed limit or quicker, a seatbelt does nothing. It might help your head if you hit a concrete wall at 50k, but so will a helmet on a cycle at cycling speeds. In a quiet country lane, akin to a cycleway, seatbelt has zero value

Now it's my turn to be astounded. At urban speeds or quicker, a seat belt is of *huge* benefit. Or was "quicker" a typo?

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979936 19-Mar-2018 16:02

frankv:
tdgeek:

frankv:

tdgeek:

So the same should apply to seatbelts in cars when on quiet country lanes?

As has already been pointed out, the comparison to seat belts is invalid. A helmet will only protect a small part of your body, and is unlikely to be of any benefit to a cyclist. A seatbelt protects many parts of your body, and is likely to be save you from injury.

The small part of the body is the head, but if you feel a helmet is of little benefit, well, words escape me. I could whack your head at very low speed with a concrete bar, thats probably a reasonable comparison to falling off a cycle onto a curb or road. Let alone thrown off by a faster moving car. No helmet? man.

I never said it was of little benefit; I said it was *unlikely* to be of benefit. Once in your life, it will save you some damage.

In a car, at urban speed limit or quicker, a seatbelt does nothing. It might help your head if you hit a concrete wall at 50k, but so will a helmet on a cycle at cycling speeds. In a quiet country lane, akin to a cycleway, seatbelt has zero value

Now it's my turn to be astounded. At urban speeds or quicker, a seat belt is of *huge* benefit. Or was "quicker" a typo?

I was meaning urban at 50k but most travel st 60k I should have been clearer.

I hit a car head on in my only car accident t. 55k. Wet. He also on a green light moved over to turn at last minute. No chance. I out my arm across girlfriends chest to help her and bang. No issue no one was thrown around. Low speed, car crumbling, legs arms all combine to be minor impact for us. Now on the open road at closing speeds that’s a very different problem and seatbelt will clearly help a lot.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1979937 19-Mar-2018 16:03

Rikkitic:

As long as we are so busy passing laws to protect people from themselves, when are junk food palaces going to be banned? There is plenty of solid scientific evidence that hamburger heavens clog arteries and cause diabetes. Not if such food is consumed in moderation, of course, but people cannot be counted on to do things in moderation so they must be protected from themselves. Of course alcohol should also be the first to go. Smoking while driving and talking to a passenger must certainly be prohibited, as these are distractions. Jogging can only be permitted after a full medical examination, as this is known to have caused heart attacks in the unfit. Restaurants must carry warnings against consuming large pieces of meat due to the danger of choking. No motorcycles without training wheels and no swimming without a life vest. I could go on and on.

Talking with my son, even on grass a bike helmet can lessen the impact on the brain. Coming off a bike at a low speed of say 10k and striking an egg sized stone has a likely hood of causing brain damage.

He and I discussed this over the weekend and he believes the "nitwits" promoting the abolishing of the law need to spend some time with patients in rehab units to see what it is really like to have disabilities. I personally don't get the problem, the helmets are lightweight, not expensive, easy to wear and can prevent very serious injury and guess what being disabled is not fun at all, riding bikes safely is.

I believe this whole anti helmet thing is a pile of petulance.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1980001 19-Mar-2018 17:03

MikeB4:

Talking with my son, even on grass a bike helmet can lessen the impact on the brain. Coming off a bike at a low speed of say 10k and striking an egg sized stone has a likely hood of causing brain damage.

He and I discussed this over the weekend and he believes the "nitwits" promoting the abolishing of the law need to spend some time with patients in rehab units to see what it is really like to have disabilities. I personally don't get the problem, the helmets are lightweight, not expensive, easy to wear and can prevent very serious injury and guess what being disabled is not fun at all, riding bikes safely is.

I believe this whole anti helmet thing is a pile of petulance.

Welcome back Mike. Good to see you again.

I learned to ride a bike at an early age. Throughout my childhood and youth, I rode long distances through city and country traffic to school and other places. I never wore a helmet. Neither did anyone else. Most of us survived the experience.

I am not against helmets or other protective devices. I am against coercion and the 'one size fits all' approach of the law. Information and education should be widely available so people can make informed choices, but the choice should be up to the individual, not the government. Exception only for children, of course. Although I and many others made it through our childhoods unscathed, children must be protected.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1980007 19-Mar-2018 17:08

MikeB4:
Rikkitic:

As long as we are so busy passing laws to protect people from themselves, when are junk food palaces going to be banned? There is plenty of solid scientific evidence that hamburger heavens clog arteries and cause diabetes. Not if such food is consumed in moderation, of course, but people cannot be counted on to do things in moderation so they must be protected from themselves. Of course alcohol should also be the first to go. Smoking while driving and talking to a passenger must certainly be prohibited, as these are distractions. Jogging can only be permitted after a full medical examination, as this is known to have caused heart attacks in the unfit. Restaurants must carry warnings against consuming large pieces of meat due to the danger of choking. No motorcycles without training wheels and no swimming without a life vest. I could go on and on.

Talking with my son, even on grass a bike helmet can lessen the impact on the brain. Coming off a bike at a low speed of say 10k and striking an egg sized stone has a likely hood of causing brain damage.

He and I discussed this over the weekend and he believes the "nitwits" promoting the abolishing of the law need to spend some time with patients in rehab units to see what it is really like to have disabilities. I personally don't get the problem, the helmets are lightweight, not expensive, easy to wear and can prevent very serious injury and guess what being disabled is not fun at all, riding bikes safely is.

I believe this whole anti helmet thing is a pile of petulance.

It seems to me that the airbag helmet I referred to solves the problem.

No sweaty helmet unless you crash, then it springs into action.

If it isn't legal here, it jolly well should be.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1980043 19-Mar-2018 17:54

MikeB4:
Rikkitic:

As long as we are so busy passing laws to protect people from themselves, when are junk food palaces going to be banned? There is plenty of solid scientific evidence that hamburger heavens clog arteries and cause diabetes. Not if such food is consumed in moderation, of course, but people cannot be counted on to do things in moderation so they must be protected from themselves. Of course alcohol should also be the first to go. Smoking while driving and talking to a passenger must certainly be prohibited, as these are distractions. Jogging can only be permitted after a full medical examination, as this is known to have caused heart attacks in the unfit. Restaurants must carry warnings against consuming large pieces of meat due to the danger of choking. No motorcycles without training wheels and no swimming without a life vest. I could go on and on.

Talking with my son, even on grass a bike helmet can lessen the impact on the brain. Coming off a bike at a low speed of say 10k and striking an egg sized stone has a likely hood of causing brain damage.

He and I discussed this over the weekend and he believes the "nitwits" promoting the abolishing of the law need to spend some time with patients in rehab units to see what it is really like to have disabilities. I personally don't get the problem, the helmets are lightweight, not expensive, easy to wear and can prevent very serious injury and guess what being disabled is not fun at all, riding bikes safely is.

I believe this whole anti helmet thing is a pile of petulance.

I feel for some it satisfies the anti establishment need. I don’t mean that for all though. We can’t say ban the law and expect humans to make the correct decision even though many will. It’s not a nanny state issue it’s a silly human issue

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1980059 19-Mar-2018 18:21

Rikkitic:

MikeB4:

Talking with my son, even on grass a bike helmet can lessen the impact on the brain. Coming off a bike at a low speed of say 10k and striking an egg sized stone has a likely hood of causing brain damage.

He and I discussed this over the weekend and he believes the "nitwits" promoting the abolishing of the law need to spend some time with patients in rehab units to see what it is really like to have disabilities. I personally don't get the problem, the helmets are lightweight, not expensive, easy to wear and can prevent very serious injury and guess what being disabled is not fun at all, riding bikes safely is.

I believe this whole anti helmet thing is a pile of petulance.

Welcome back Mike. Good to see you again.

I learned to ride a bike at an early age. Throughout my childhood and youth, I rode long distances through city and country traffic to school and other places. I never wore a helmet. Neither did anyone else. Most of us survived the experience.

I am not against helmets or other protective devices. I am against coercion and the 'one size fits all' approach of the law. Information and education should be widely available so people can make informed choices, but the choice should be up to the individual, not the government. Exception only for children, of course. Although I and many others made it through our childhoods unscathed, children must be protected.

I did too, but no way were my girls riding cycles in this new traffic.

Its fine to avoid Govt coercion, but why does the Govt coerce people to force them to use helmets?

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1980061 19-Mar-2018 18:22

Geektastic:
MikeB4:

Rikkitic:

As long as we are so busy passing laws to protect people from themselves, when are junk food palaces going to be banned? There is plenty of solid scientific evidence that hamburger heavens clog arteries and cause diabetes. Not if such food is consumed in moderation, of course, but people cannot be counted on to do things in moderation so they must be protected from themselves. Of course alcohol should also be the first to go. Smoking while driving and talking to a passenger must certainly be prohibited, as these are distractions. Jogging can only be permitted after a full medical examination, as this is known to have caused heart attacks in the unfit. Restaurants must carry warnings against consuming large pieces of meat due to the danger of choking. No motorcycles without training wheels and no swimming without a life vest. I could go on and on.

Talking with my son, even on grass a bike helmet can lessen the impact on the brain. Coming off a bike at a low speed of say 10k and striking an egg sized stone has a likely hood of causing brain damage.

He and I discussed this over the weekend and he believes the "nitwits" promoting the abolishing of the law need to spend some time with patients in rehab units to see what it is really like to have disabilities. I personally don't get the problem, the helmets are lightweight, not expensive, easy to wear and can prevent very serious injury and guess what being disabled is not fun at all, riding bikes safely is.

I believe this whole anti helmet thing is a pile of petulance.

It seems to me that the airbag helmet I referred to solves the problem.

No sweaty helmet unless you crash, then it springs into action.

If it isn't legal here, it jolly well should be.

Whats the cost? $200? $350? Maybe a motorcycle helmet, and knee and elbow pads and a speed restriction of 5kph might be cheaper!

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 22