Cycles in the Sand

Another study

A major study of bike helmet use around the world from more than 64,000 cyclists has found helmets reduce the risks of a serious head injury by nearly 70%.

Uh, huh…

Much the same as studies have found motorcyclists will reduce the incidence of head injuries by wearing a helmet. Although, not all fatal injuries relate to the head. Getting crushed by a vehicle is likely fatal and no helmet will reduce that. So, really, it’s all about the risk of hitting your head and the likelihood of reducing injury.  So far, so good. This is stuff we know. And it is up to the individual to make a reasoned assessment of the risk and either wear a helmet or not according to preference and a balanced view of the risks involved. Personally, I don’t. I ride very little on public roads, so my risk is minimal.

Ah…

The legislation of mandatory helmets for cyclists is a controversial topic and past research on its effectiveness has been somewhat mixed,” the study said. “Irrespective of past research, the results of this review do not support arguments against helmet legislation from an injury prevention perspective.”

Australia’s nanny state surpasses even ours for pettifogging interference in our lifestyle choices. It is not the place of the state to legislate for our own safety from ourselves and our own bad choices. Hence, my absolute opposition to helmet laws and seat belt laws. As adults, we should make an informed decision. So, give us the information and leave us to make the decision.

Of course, below the line the totalitarians line up to give us the line that as we get free healthcare, the state is justified in reducing our liberties.

This argument is risible. There is no such thing as free healthcare. The “taxpayer” is not some benevolent benefactor; it is us. I am a taxpayer and I have paid in far, far more than I have ever drawn out, so if my lifestyle choices cause me to have a need, then I am merely getting back some of what I have paid over years . That is how insurance works. And that is supposed to be what National Insurance was. Yes, yes, I know, Ponzi scheme and all that, but the point remains. I am not getting a freebie from some mythical benefactor who then gets to tell me how to live my life. I am paying, so I decide and the totalitarian fucktards who think that it is okay to tell me what to do can go fuck themselves.

And, while we are at it, why don’t we ban contact sports, motor sport, running, jumping, walking, or, indeed any activity that might, possibly, result in injury that will need treatment by our glorious socialised healthcare provider? The list is potentially endless. Imagine what a drab, dull world it would be if our only consideration was to reduce the strain on healthcare that living causes. We might not live forever, but by God it would certainly feel like it. Death would be a blessed relief.

13 Comments

  1. Get the bikes off the pavements and off the roads then no-one will need helmets!

    But then cyclists that ride three-foot behind panel vans and do 40 mph downhill on 30 mph limit roads clearly don’t believe that Newton’s laws apply to them so impact with the ground will do no damage either.

  2. I always refused to wear a helmet. It affected perception of what was going on about me. Those insisting are the same as anti-smoking fascists. Perhaps.

  3. Whether or not I sea a helmet depends upon the roads I’m using. About town I don’t bother with it but I will if I’m venturing out on to roads where I judge that it is safer to do so then I will. Until my recent move I didn’t wear one to cycle to work across South London but now that I’ve a dual carriage way section of a major road to contend with I do.

    I will continue to decide when and where I do (or don’t) wear a helmet and the nanny state brigade can partake of the sex and travel option.

  4. “Get the bikes off the pavements and off the roads then no-one will need helmets!”

    So totalitarian JimS wants to dictate to me what my mode of transport should be. How about we get your mode of transport off the roads and make you cycle instead JimS?

    As for your second point, Darwinism will sort those out in time.

    • Yeah let’s have a free for all, let’s drive like the cyclists, use any side of the road we like, drive on the pavements, walk on motorways, skateboard on cycle paths, play tennis and football in the streets!

      Bicycles are a 19th century invention, the poor man’s horse, designed to be ridden on unmade roads, (hence the mudguards). Metallised roads are for motor traffic, pavements are for pedestrians, tennis courts are for tennis players, football pitches for footballers, velodomes for cyclists.

      My preferred means of transport in town are walking and taking the bus. I don’t like sharing pavements with 14 mph bikes, crossing roads in contention with bikes that have run the lights or are riding through pedestrians on a zebra crossing or sitting in a bus behind a 2 mph cyclist.

      Totalitarian no; the greater good, yes.

      • Yeah let’s have a free for all, let’s drive like the cyclists, use any side of the road we like, drive on the pavements, walk on motorways, skateboard on cycle paths, play tennis and football in the streets!

        Strawman.

        the greater good,

        Three of the most chilling words in the English language. For someone who claims not to be totalitarian, you sure have a firm grasp of their language. That some people use a mode of transport badly, does not mean that method of transport should be restricted or is obsolete.

      • “Bicycles are a 19th century invention…”
        So are cars, so what?
        “designed to be ridden on unmade roads…velodromes for cyclists.”
        Modern bicycles are nothing like 19th century cycles. There are bikes designed to go off road, bikes designed for the road, and track bikes designed for the velodrome. To say that modern roads are for motor vehicles only is a ridiculous assertion, and that is all it is, a totally unsupported assertion.
        “My preferred means of transport in town are walking and taking the bus.”
        That is your choice, and unlike you I am perfectly happy for you to have that choice. Buses and pedestrians get in my way too, I don’t get all bansturbatory about it, I just deal with it.

        LR, I went and posted a comment from work again, sorry I forgot. If you find it in the spam bin could you delete it as I have expanded on it here.

  5. All helmets should be a matter of personal choice. I only ever wear a helmet here if I think I’m going to encounter one of the occasional police revenue raising checks. Hardly anyone wears a helmet here, although there is a €350 fine (reduced to €175 if paid within 10 days) for not wearing one. But the police will ignore you not wearing a helmet unless they’ve been tasked to stake out a spot and ticket all the offenders.

    Personally, I love riding without a helmet. It just epitomises freedom.

    As I understand it, even if you’re wearing a helmet, any impact at over 30 mph is likely to scramble your brains (as happened to Michael Schumacher), so they have a limited use as protection anyway.

  6. What is always left out is the “risk avoidance” factor. The safer you feel, the more risks you take, and I firmly believe that it nullifies any pretend safety aspects by increasing the general level of risk.

    A large spike poking out from the steering wheel towards the driver’s chest would concentrate minds and do a lot more than all the belts in the world (which I never wear either incidentally).

    Riding motorcycles without a helmet can also be very enjoyable, less noisy, less strain on the neck and much better vision (all that increases safety) but for the most part, I would still wear one when riding in London because of the dust, rain and cold!

  7. I always wear a helmet when cycling, it is just a habit now and I don’t notice that I’m wearing it. I got my first cycling helmet back in the eighties, mostly because my wife was struggling to think of what to get me for my birthday. Since I cycled a lot, it seemed like a good idea. Not much later, a guy in a Ford Fiesta turned right straight across my path and I wrote his car off with my head. I came away a bit dazed and with a chipped tooth and a cut lip that needed a stitch. I certainly don’t take risks just because I’m wearing a helmet. The cartoon linked to by Prog pretty much sums up the reason why.

    Prog, are you called Prog because you like Prog Rock? If so there is an ELP tribute here, http://www.noddyspuncture.co.uk/ .The website hadn’t been updated last time I looked, but there is a gig planned in Rochdale on 3rd of December.

Comments are closed.