ByronH Posted January 26, 2016 Posted January 26, 2016 Over this past weekend (Sunday afternoon 2:45pm), I saw a gentleman riding his green and yellow Raleigh road bicycle: 1) On a busy road (Beyers Naude) in Randpark Ridge2) Going across a red robot without hesitating (whilst other cars were crossing through green)3) Listening to music on his earphones4) Without a helmet Not sure if anyone recognises or knows who this is, but give him a klap, before he is killed.
timefly Posted January 27, 2016 Posted January 27, 2016 There are a lot for sound reasons to not wear a helmet. For one thing they kill bike share schemes. For another they make riding your bike to the corner shop look like a dangerous activity http://www.howiechong.com/journal/2014/2/bike-helmets
Reinhardt89 Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 Until we have proper cycle lanes away from traffic like in the Netherlands and Copenhagen, and until our motorists start to give cyclists right of way (which we are entitled to) we should wear helmets.
DJR Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 There are a lot for sound reasons to not wear a helmet. For one thing they kill bike share schemes. For another they make riding your bike to the corner shop look like a dangerous activity http://www.howiechong.com/journal/2014/2/bike-helmetsUnsound argument. The fact that he is a Yale forestry student perhaps lead him to a wood-headed type conclusion. He should have stopped after the first paragraph or got a Yale med student to write the rest of the article for him. Because free diving doesn't use a rope and is more deadly than bungee jumping, doesn't mean people should now stop using a bungee rope when they jump!.
Robrider Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 There are a lot for sound reasons to not wear a helmet. For one thing they kill bike share schemes. For another they make riding your bike to the corner shop look like a dangerous activity http://www.howiechong.com/journal/2014/2/bike-helmets This is the reason stupid people shouldn't be allowed to use statistics or "scientific" studies
javadude Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 This is the reason stupid people shouldn't be allowed to use statistics or "scientific" studies What he is saying is 100% true. In fact what he's saying is that you are an absolute moron for insisting that cyclists MUST wear helmets and not drivers of cars. Wearing a helmet in a car will almost certainly prevent head injuries and death in certain accidents, yet no one would take this issue up with drivers of cars. Why not? Its a life saving device, and in South Africa you are way more likely to be involved in a car accident. So, if you don't wear a helmet in car, you are just as dumb as the cyclist who doesn't wear a helmet.
Reden Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 I do not know what riding without a helmet means!!!Means most likely doing a 100km MTB ride in the Karoo stark naked and bare footed."No", "helmet" and "ride" goes into one sentence for me. No helmet, no ride!!!
Eldron Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 Me - I like the opposite approach to safety. Make a steep spike on the steering wheel pointed straight at your chest mandatory and watch the road deaths stop immediately!!
Robrider Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 What he is saying is 100% true. In fact what he's saying is that you are an absolute moron for insisting that cyclists MUST wear helmets and not drivers of cars. Wearing a helmet in a car will almost certainly prevent head injuries and death in certain accidents, yet no one would take this issue up with drivers of cars. Why not? Its a life saving device, and in South Africa you are way more likely to be involved in a car accident. So, if you don't wear a helmet in car, you are just as dumb as the cyclist who doesn't wear a helmet. This isn't an argument about drivers wearing helmets. So your argument is because its dangerous to do other things, you should be dangerous on a bike too... that's a terrible argument! The study was also done in 1978!! Before ABS, airbags, active suspension and who knows what other technology. How many billions have been spent on making cars safer? and how many on bikes. So to answer your question "why not?" that's why not.That's the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Regarding the new york times study. Rule #1 of statistics - Correlation does not imply causality. End of story. It's bad statistics. Regarding the University of Bath study - Do you really think cars in SA will give you more room if you are not wearing a helmet? If you believe that you will believe anything. I'm sorry, the bicycle culture in SA is such that cars don't give a sh**. So, yes, there is a fairly decent study, but if you want to weigh up the the probability of an accident increasing while riding (negligible, especially in SA) to the probability of having a brain injury if something happens (88% reduction with a helmet), then go ahead. Also, the argument that riding with a helmet makes you "feel" safer is also stupid. Going back to the car analogy, then we shouldn't have all these technologies that make it "feel" safe to drive at 160km/h. So take all those safety things out of cars please. The author should have stopped after the first section, where he proves all his own arguments wrong, and before he messes up statistics. I'll end with a quote from your article which "apparently" says don't wear helmets: "I'm not saying that adults should not wear bike helmets. The main point I'm trying to make is that, when compared to other forms of transportation, the fear of head trauma from cycling is likely out of proportion to the actual risk" I.e. Wear a helmet.
Antoo Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 I prefer to ride with a helmet, butmy kids are way to young for me to be anyone's mother in law and anyway, I hate the phrase, 'you know what you should do', so I'm no about to start telling others that they should be wearing helmets.(and changing them every 3yrs)We all pretty much 'know what we should do', know what we'd like to do and do what we're going to do. Most mothers in law do a lot of telling, but are loath to be on the receiving end. I have little doubt that the same with those pushing the thread
SeaBee Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 Ultimately defined idiot passed me the other day. I was out for early morning run. it is PITCH black outside. And this bloke comes by on what I can only presume to be his Tour de Peninsula training ride. (Kudos to him for getting up at that time of day, though...) But, wearing dark clothing, no reflectors, no light front or rear, no helmet. Even knowing about him, I could not see him 20m down the road, I do not know how he suspected any car would have reaction time. I may get shot for this... but it's not always the motorist that's to blame.
BarHugger Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 Make mention of not riding with a helmet and the clown circus arrives.....bottom line...do as you please....your safety is not my concern...my safety and my families safety is my concern........
Eldron Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 Make mention of not riding with a helmet and the clown circus arrives.....bottom line...do as you please....your safety is not my concern...my safety and my families safety is my concern........ I like this guy. Perhaps if people spent as much time judging themselves as they did judging others we might all just get along...
Robrider Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 Make mention of not riding with a helmet and the clown circus arrives.....bottom line...do as you please....your safety is not my concern...my safety and my families safety is my concern........I actually agree with you. I just hate when people use stats and science badly. I know what I'm going to do, I don't really care what others do.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.