 |
 |
Here's what the Newcastle Cycling campaign concluded 7.Peter gave a presentation on cycle helmet research and engaged us all in frank discussion. What a riveting topic! Thanks to Peter for braving this difficult subject and finding a way to bring about the conclusion through our discussion: we are pro-choice. Helmets are a personal decision everyone of us makes. It’s ok to wear one, it’s equally ok not to. But whilst the research jury is out and the topic is a non-topic in the cycling community, sadly it keeps distracting and prying on the public mind! Peter: “No country with high bicycle use has a high percentage of helmet wearing.” The campaign will continue to lobby councils to adopt a pro-choice attitude. From Newsletter http://newcycling.org/news/20110930/september-2011-newsletter-0 Kat On 10 May 2012, at 23:59, Stu Clement <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > 1205100830 > > The terrific helmet debate: one of those where every opinion is right and no one is absolutely right. You gotta love it! > > Stu > > --- > Dr Stuart Clement > Director, World Cycling Research Forum > > Co-Convenor, WOCREF 2012 > +61 (0)405 702 483 > www.wocref.org > [log in to unmask] > > On 2012-05-11 06:41, Kevin Hickman wrote: >>> says that almost half of the people responding thought that cycling >>> on the road was too dangerous. Now where would they get that idea, >>> except from helmet promotion? >> >> To be fair Richard, there's a lot more out there to be afraid of - >> it's not all down to the reinforcing effect of promoting cycling as an >> inherently dangerous activity. >> >> I view helmets, and hi-viz, as just an indicator of how safe people >> feel. If we get the everyday environment people are cycling in right >> then the personal protective equipment will vanish. >> >> The truth will out eventually, and either we'll all be putting >> helmets on as our heads leave the pillow in the morning, or they'll >> just fade away, or people will continue to use them where they feel >> exposed to risk. >> >> I agree that helmets aren't helping the normalising of cycling, but >> it can probably be sidestepped by getting the environment right, and >> thankfully that's where the focus is shifting to now. And let's not >> forget, helmets are such a phaff that if we do get the masses cycling >> they're not going to bother taking helmets with them everywhere. And >> conversely, if people still feel helmets are necessary, the masses >> won't cycle. >> >> Apart from the issue of compulsion, which where it occurs appears to >> mean 'game over' for mass cycling until it's repealed, helmets are >> just a distraction. >> >> Kevin. >> >> On 10 May 2012, at 20:06, burton richard wrote: >> >>> And things like this >>> >> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142157/Bicycle-sales-hit-record-high-20-ride-one.html?ito=feeds-newsxml >>> [30] >>> >>> which says that almost half of the people responding thought that >>> cycling on the road was too dangerous. Now where would they get >> that >>> idea, except from helmet promotion? The story itself implicity >>> promotes helmets, and almost all media reports of collisions >>> involving cyclists report either that a helmet saved the cyclist's >>> life, or its absence killed them. There is some very good research >>> about the persistence of myths which I would recommend reading, and >>> this phenomenon goes a long way to explaining why the myth of >> helmet >>> effectiveness is so strong. Ever since the reports of 85% >>> effectiveness were published, it has been almost impossible to >>> change the public perception that cycle helmets are effective, >>> despite the evidence. On The One Show last year, the infamous James >>> Cracknell one, the chair of BHIT, Angie Lee, was interviewed and >>> said "just ignore the evidence......." and needless to say, the >>> interviewer didn't see fit to ask her why someone dedicated to >>> promoting helmets wants people to ignore the evidence - in line >> with >>> the unstated and denied but blatant BBC policy to promote cycle >>> helmets. >>> >>> On 10 May 2012 18:49, Dave du Feu <[log in to unmask] [31]> wrote: >>> >>>> There is a great deal of material [with sources] here... >>>> http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1020.html [19] >>>> >>>> Whether any of them can be said to constitute 'proof' I don't >>>> know, but the material is certainly very extensive. >>>> >>>> On 10 May 2012 17:34, Jason Meggs <[log in to unmask] [20]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Burton, >>>>> >>>>> Please forgive my ignorance, but I'm not aware of proof that >>>>> promoting >>>>> helmets reduces cycling, can you cite the source(s)? >>>>> >>>>> Very interested, >>>>> Jason >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 6:29 PM, burton richard >>>>> <[log in to unmask] [1]> wrote: >>>>> > Since the only two proven effects of helmet promotion and >>>>> laws are a fall in >>>>> > the number of cyclists and obscene profits for the helmet >>>>> manufacturers, I >>>>> > have some difficulty understanding why a cycling >>>>> organisation would even >>>>> > consider promoting them. At the very least, it makes that >>>>> organisation look >>>>> > as if they are more interested in the manufacturer's profits >>>>> than the safety >>>>> > of cyclists. It was said some time ago, but is still true >>>>> "You can promote >>>>> > helmets or you can promote cycling, but you can't do both." >>>>> > >>>>> > The promotion of cycle helmets is entirely >>>>> counterproductive, and no >>>>> > organisation which has the interests of cyclists in mind >>>>> would do so. >>>>> > >>>>> > Is there someone from the Cycling Embassy of Denmark on this >>>>> group who could >>>>> > explain why they are doing something which won't improve the >>>>> safety of >>>>> > cyclists but will reduce the number of them? >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On 10 May 2012 15:53, Jennings Gail >>>>> <[log in to unmask] [2]> wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Glad you included us all. I agree with you. In SA helmets >>>>> are mandatory, >>>>> >> and there's pressure on cyclists to police each other if we >>>>> don't wear >>>>> >> helmets! I've even been yelled at by drivers for not >>>>> wearing a helmet, as >>>>> >> if I'm breaking some law that puts them at risks! Whenever >>>>> the question of >>>>> >> bike-share / bike-rental comes up, there's the helmet issue >>>>> that just won't >>>>> >> go away... >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On 10 May 2012, at 4:45 PM, Dave du Feu wrote: >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Sorry all, I intended this to go to Jacob, but I guess no >>>>> harm in it >>>>> >> appearing in the forum in case there are other views! >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On 10 May 2012 15:42, Dave du Feu <[log in to unmask] [3]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Thanks Jakob - I've already received another email about >>>>> this, and had a >>>>> >>> quick look. Seems a really exciting publication. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> One thing, I really cannot understand why you are pushing >>>>> helmets. We >>>>> >>> are doing our best over here to try and reduce the >>>>> pressure for helmets, as >>>>> >>> they put people off from cycling (which also has the side >>>>> effect of reducing >>>>> >>> the 'safety in numbers' effect which you also endorse!) >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> I'm concerned about publicising your book in some circles, >>>>> as coming from >>>>> >>> the one of the places which Britain looks up to as an >>>>> example, it will be >>>>> >>> taken as a powerful endorsement of helmets. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> We are worried that they are gaining such credibility that >>>>> there is a >>>>> >>> fear of compulsion coming in. There are already some >>>>> charity bike rides, >>>>> >>> aimed at ordinary cyclists, not racers, where under-18s >>>>> are banned from >>>>> >>> taking part if they are unhelmeted. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Dave du Feu >>>>> >>> Spokes, the Lothian Cycle Campaign >>>>> >>> [Edinburgh, Scotland] >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> On 10 May 2012 15:32, Jakob Schiøtt Stenbæk Madsen >>>>> <[log in to unmask] [4]> wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Dear All, >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> The Cycling Embassy of Denmark has just finished up a new >>>>> publication >>>>> >>>> "Collection of Cycle Concepts 2012". The first edition of >>>>> Collection of >>>>> >>>> Cycle Concepts was published in 2000 and enjoyed a wide >>>>> circulation among >>>>> >>>> everyone interested in bicycle traffic. The simultaneous >>>>> publication of the >>>>> >>>> English version spread the Danish bicycle traffic >>>>> experience to many parts >>>>> >>>> of the world. The second edition, Collection of Cycle >>>>> Concepts 2012, updates >>>>> >>>> the field, featuring new challenges and the latest >>>>> knowledge. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Collection of Cycle Concepts 2012 is not intended to be a >>>>> summary of >>>>> >>>> Danish road standards, but to provide inspiration and >>>>> motivation for >>>>> >>>> creating more and safer bicycle traffic - in Denmark as >>>>> well as the rest of >>>>> >>>> the world. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> You can have a look and download the publication here: >>>>> >>>> >>>>> http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/2012/05/10/cycle-concepts2012/ >>>> [5] >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>> Jakob Schiøtt Stenbæk Madsen >>>>> >>>> Project Officer >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> M. +45 40 70 83 62 [6] >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Danish Cyclists' Federation >>>>> >>>> Rømersgade 5 >>>>> >>>> DK-1362 København K >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> T. +45 33 32 31 21 [7] >>>>> >>>> [log in to unmask] [8] >>>>> >>>> www.cyklistforbundet.dk [9] >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> -- >>>>> >> ** Spokes: spokes.org.uk [10]; twitter.com/SpokesLothian >>>>> [11] >>>>> >> ** Personal: twitter.com/DaveduFeu [12]; >>>>> flickr.com/photos/34847720@N03/sets [13] >>>>> >> ** Great sites: badscience.net [14], 38degrees.org.uk [15], >>>>> copenhagenize.com [16], >>>>> >> thebikestation.org.uk [17], ghgonline.org [18] >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> > >>>> >>>> -- >>>> ** Spokes: spokes.org.uk [21]; twitter.com/SpokesLothian [22] >>>> ** Personal: twitter.com/DaveduFeu [23]; >>>> flickr.com/photos/34847720@N03/sets [24] >>>> ** Great sites: badscience.net [25], 38degrees.org.uk [26], >>>> copenhagenize.com [27], thebikestation.org.uk [28], ghgonline.org >>>> [29] >> >> >> >> Links: >> ------ >> [1] mailto:[log in to unmask] >> [2] mailto:[log in to unmask] >> [3] mailto:[log in to unmask] >> [4] mailto:[log in to unmask] >> [5] http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/2012/05/10/cycle-concepts2012/ >> [6] http://www.wocref.org/tel:%2B45%2040%2070%2083%2062 >> [7] http://www.wocref.org/tel:%2B45%2033%2032%2031%2021 >> [8] mailto:[log in to unmask] >> [9] http://www.cyklistforbundet.dk/ >> [10] http://spokes.org.uk/ >> [11] http://twitter.com/SpokesLothian >> [12] http://twitter.com/DaveduFeu >> [13] http://flickr.com/photos/34847720@N03/sets >> [14] http://badscience.net/ >> [15] http://38degrees.org.uk/ >> [16] http://copenhagenize.com/ >> [17] http://thebikestation.org.uk/ >> [18] http://ghgonline.org/ >> [19] http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1020.html >> [20] mailto:[log in to unmask] >> [21] http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress >> [22] http://twitter.com/SpokesLothian >> [23] http://twitter.com/DaveduFeu >> [24] http://www.flickr.com/photos/34847720@N03/sets >> [25] http://badscience.net/ >> [26] http://38degrees.org.uk/ >> [27] http://copenhagenize.com/ >> [28] http://thebikestation.org.uk/ >> [29] http://ghgonline.org/ >> [30] >> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142157/Bicycle-sales-hit-record-high-20-ride-one.html?ito=feeds-newsxml >> [31] mailto:[log in to unmask]