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mean 'game over' for mass cycling until it's repealed, helmets are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]