Remember kids... always wear a helmet. (The almighty bikeradar helmet thread)

Banning seems weird to me, just like compulsory wearing, but I just saw the article and there hasn't been a helmet arguement for a while.

What skydancer said. It does show they understand the issues.

The main question I'd have is how they have arranged this with their insurance; the article doesn't say anything about it. In my experience, it's generally insurance companies that force helmet-wearing.

Also, this will look very familiar to @bright:

Bungee cords were the biggest cause of injuries, but have since been phased out.

In my experience, it's generally insurance companies that force helmet-wearing

I've found that many people/orgs wrongly cite insurance as the reason for lid compulsion. When you drill down to it this isn't the case.

Cycle activity insurance from the UK's main insurer, butterworth spengler, isn't at all bothered about helmets

I went to boarding school with Butterworth Spengler.

Yes, I probably just didn't drill into it enough and took people's word(s) for it. I wasn't thinking of Butterworths, as they've obviously been working with cycling orgs for a long time, but other cases way outside of that context.

https://youtu.be/5U524dNRHTw

Not keen on the angle these headlines are taking

twitter thread: https://twitter.com/mrdanwalker/status/1627788288575655939?s=20

1 Attachment

Not keen on the angle these headlines are taking

Well, aside from the fact that he is a complete non-entity whose bike crash is not newsworthy, and his unevidenced speculation even less so, they're just reporting what he said. I had the misfortune to be exposed to the BBC this morning, and they were going heavy on Putin's expected speech to the Duma, which is not even reported speech but mere speculation about what might be in a statement likely to be full of far more dangerous delusions than a concussed man thinking his helmet saved his life. It's mainstream media, you can hardly be surprised that they spin every story to reflect their biases, and the best way to avoid getting angry about it is to avoid it. And of course it might even be literally true that wearing a helmet saved his life; he has no way of knowing for sure and neither do we. It's reasonable to conclude that on balance there's no material difference between wearing a cycle helmet and not, but that is not the same as saying they are completely useless in every situation.

Sure, I get it. And I completely agree it’s nothing like as important as other situations happening in the world currently.

I’m not surprised, just disheartened about how such a non-entity story, as you say, is picked up in this way with a seemingly ‘cycling is dangerous’ type spin. I’m happy to avoid reading them, and I usually do, but plenty of people do read them, and it affects how they think about cycling, and I think that’s important

Whether deliberately or not, the press for the most part propagates popular prejudice against cycling, aided by a general lack of cycling skill in the population. Cycling's main crime is that it isn't economically relevant. It is a low-risk activity that is very good at fulfilling people's needs without costing them much (except for the small minority of expensive kit junkies), and that keeps people healthier so they even spend less on healthcare. However, commercial imperatives dictate that we should always try to get people to spend more, that manufacturers build in obsolescence, etc., and that, really, people ought to be discouraged from cycling, and if they insist to still do it despite all the fearmongering designed to put them off, additional manufactured needs are generated for them so they have to spend more money.

commercial imperatives dictate that we should always try to get people to spend more

Obviously that's the purpose of corporations, but it's odd to conclude that such Marxist outlets as the BBC and Grauniad are involved in some conspiracy with the cycle industry. Simple stupidity is a sufficient and far more likely explanation for their position on this question.

Doing a schools Bikeability course and the Deputy Head came out to ask why some of the children were not wearing helmets - it's parental choice.
Later my colleague went to talk to her about something else and she had banged her head and was holding an ice pack on it.

had your colleague fallen off their bike?

Do the parents provide some sort of permission slip stating their child won't be wearing a helmet then?

Not trying to be a dick, just genuinely curious and can understand that the school will not want liability for an (unlikely) head injury.

Do the parents provide some sort of permission slip stating their child won't be wearing a helmet then?

That's exactly the kind of arse-backwards thinking we should be opposing. The choice should be presumed to be left to the child unless the guardian has directed otherwise

Arse should be backwards.

No recumbents then?

Arse should be backwards

And head should be over heels, but I'm not here to police the geometrical accuracy of idioms

The choice should be presumed to be left to the child unless the guardian has directed otherwise

Cycle Trainers take on the duty of care (doc) from the teachers/parent/guardian

They need to know what the previous holders of doc's view on helmets and enforce that.

The consent form is where they express this view.

Cycle Trainers comply with their view

Which has the same effect as what I said. @Familyman would have cycle trainers force helmets onto children whose guardians had not expressed a preference.

Where did I say I'd force anything now?

That is wrong

As is the fact that some Boroughs build in compulsory helmets for young people as a clause in the contract with the cycle training supplier, and don't ask for parent opinion

You didn’t.

From what I hear he also had his Channel 5 pass in his pocket.
So I’m saying that as I have never heard of a cyclist with a Channel 5 pass on them, dying as a result of a Vehicle vs Bicycle incident on a roundabout. Carrying a Channel 5 pass almost certainly saved his life. And you know you can’t disprove that fact.

My daughter's school is doing a week's course in the next few weeks, and there was a box to tick if you wanted your child to wear a helmet.

I feel sorry for the teacher ^^^ who hit her head in normal day to day activities! Maybe everyone should wear helmets all the time?