"I didn't realise Carlton Reid was so young"
?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
"Is it really safer to wear a helmet when cycling?"
(153 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Hang-on, that's next week.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Hang-on, that's next week."
?
Posted 13 years ago # -
chdot: "?"
I followed your link to the Twitter entry and assumed that was Carlton Reid's photo in the top-left corner. If it's not then I'm multiply confused (no change there of course).
Posted 13 years ago # -
I have no idea what you are both talking about but it is kind of funny. :-)
Posted 13 years ago # -
"assumed that was Carlton Reid's photo in the top-left corner"
Yes
Not sure whether it's an oldish photo or just "kind'.
But, obviously, - as we all know - cycling makes you look ten years younger...
He must be mid 40s.
Posted 13 years ago # -
chdot: "?" (the second one)
Dave de Feu mentioned ina Spokes e-mail that there's a consultation evening in Newcraighall primary School in conection with the proposed housing development of the area. There's a chance that a new path and even a bridge for cyclists, wlkers etc. might come out of it. But the consultation isn't until next week.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"But the consultation isn't until next week."
Yeah I worked that out after I posted (though I assume it would have been well under way by now if it was tonight).
I haven't seen the details but I know the area well and, in general, think it's sad that another bit of green is (probably) about to vanish.
It wouldn't be so bad if the developers were made to pay for a serious (improvement to the) path network - especially between ASDA and Musselburgh Station.
But...
Posted 13 years ago # -
chdot "But... "
?
Posted 13 years ago # -
You mean there's already a good path between Musselburgh Station and Newcraighall?
Posted 13 years ago # -
THIS IS EDINBURGH
(too much time on forum..)
Posted 13 years ago # -
Ah, I see. I do keep trying to pull things eastwards. There's just no forums about East Lothian that I know of (and I did live in Leith and Edinburgh for years and still work in Edinburgh).
Posted 13 years ago # -
"You mean there's already a good path between Musselburgh Station and Newcraighall?"
Well there's the 'proper' route past QM -
http://edinburgh.cyclestreets.net/journey/212144
But I meant the, direct, dotted line here -
http://edinburgh.cyclestreets.net/journey/212145
It's a while since I've been. Was always something of an adventure - former railway embankment with bridge over Newcraighall Road. Used to be 'dangerous' due to underground fires - think they have been bulldozed out of existance.
Land is/was owned by Sustrans.
Route starts here -
Film trivia quiz - which two famous film directors have stood on bridge?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Seem to be way off topic!
Posted 13 years ago # -
On this topic, not a bad thing!
"Ah, I see. I do keep trying to pull things eastwards. There's just no forums about East Lothian that I know of (and I did live in Leith and Edinburgh for years and still work in Edinburgh). "
Nooo. I was just anticipating chdot and his oft repeated refrain (I paraphrase) "Something really great for cycing could happen here BUT... this is Edinburgh (so it probably won't)." :-)
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Something really great for cycing could happen here BUT... this is Edinburgh (so it probably won't)." :-)
Oh I'm so predictable.
Wots the answer to the quiz...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Wots the answer to the quiz...
If you clikc the link you'll remember :P
Posted 13 years ago # -
Now I've less beer inside me, I shall hazard; Lindsey Anderson and Bill Douglas. 10 points please.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Is that 10 points for each answer?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Way hey a helmet thread and I didn't even notice it.
None one has mentioned the elephant in the room, with regards to cycle helmets, money!
Pick up any cycle helmet and look at it closely, what is it mostly made of? Polystyrene, with a think plastic shell You know, that stuff they use for packaging, disposable cups, etc, all thing which are just thrown away, because it is so cheap.
So ask your self how much does it cost to make a cycle helmet? Well the total cost of design, tooling, manufacturing, packing, shipping, advertising and distribution to the retailer is is about £2.50 per unit.
Now ask your self why do cycle helmets retail at between £40 and £100+?
Cycle helmets are big business. If this was all about safety, wouldn't there be programmes giving out free cycle helmets? Making them available at near cost price?
It is not about safety, it is about profit and there plenty of scaremongering stories to help drive sales...
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Now ask your self why do cycle helmets retail at between £40 and £100+?"
Mine cost £25 from EBC and I got it free after winning a £25 voucher by entering their "why do I ride" competition with a poem (which got printed in the summer catamagalog
I guess what I am trying to say is that some people may be fooled into spending a wad of wonga to go for a "safer" helmet but most people with the expensive helmet at simply posers
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Now ask your self why do cycle helmets retail at between £40 and £100+?"
Mine cost £25 from EBC and I got it free after winning a £25 voucher by entering their "why do I ride" competition with a poem (which got printed in the summer catamagalog
I guess what I am trying to say is that some people may be fooled into spending a wad of wonga to go for a "safer" helmet but most people with the expensive helmet at simply posers
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Now ask your self why do cycle helmets retail at between £40 and £100+?"
You can ask yourself the same of jeans (although that's more like £4 - £400...). There is no point to my point.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"You can ask yourself the same of jeans"
Indeed. My wife just bought a pair in a charity shop for £4, because it's a brand that (apparently) makes jeans that fit her shape. She'd seen them (new) at £100 and didn't buy.
The actual jeans really don't look like they are made of better material - or finished much better than 'normal' priced jeans.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@spytfyre "I guess what I am trying to say is that some people may be fooled into spending a wad of wonga to go for a "safer" helmet but most people with the expensive helmet at simply posers"
Your assumption here is that there is some sort of link between price and safety. There isn't.
Now try this, without looking at you helmet, what standard has it been tested to and what was the date of manufacture?
Why do I ask?
The test standards have have been steadily changed of time, most helmets now meet the lower (and newer) standards. Increasingly helmets are being labeled as "meeting one of the following" standards and there being a list of different test standards. Note that "one of", now the helmet manufactures will say that because they sell into a range of markets and don't want have to label for individual markets. But it also makes it more difficult for the buyer to work out which is the safest.
Then there is issue of age, when dealing safety equipment it is normal to replace items on a fixed time scale as the materials used to make the equipment degrades over time, i.e. the polystyrene used in you helmet hardens over time. In high risk working environments, all safety equipment is regularly checked and any item which has passed it's replacement date is destroyed (even the seat belts in cars are checked annually as part of the MOT test). Cycle helmets should be replaces every three years, but how often is this pointed out to customers? How many people look to see how old the helmet they are buying in a sale is, it could be old stock that has been sitting at the bottom of a pile of boxes for two years.
@kaputnik "You can ask yourself the same of jeans" well yes jeans are about fashion, and so are cycle helmets. The difference is scaremongering isn't used to sell jeans.
Just look at the direct advertising of cycle helmets (as apposed to the indirect advertising which manufactures and retailers keep at arms length), how often is the safety standard ever mentioned? It isn't! So they are not selling safety, they are selling fashion.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Min I'm sorry I even thought you might have thought that. I'd just had a bad experience with a beer bottle smashing against the wall at the back of the house just a few feet from where I was playing with my daughter. I was looking for anti East Lothian sentiment (so I could join in) where there wasn't any. I'm feeling happier now.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Sorry Kim
"Your assumption here is that there is some sort of link between price and safety. There isn't."
No that's not my assumption. I meant that is the assumption of the fooled:
"some people may be fooled into spending a wad of wonga to go for a "safer" helmet but most people with the expensive helmetatare (typo) simply posers
Why do you think I spent only £25? I am not fooled nor do I pose. Yes I know it is just a piece of polystyrene (not your average packing material though) and yes I know it is a thin piece of plastic (whether is is made from vending cups I doubt) but I very much believe it is better at absorbing the shock of hitting the road/windscreen/etc than my skull would be.
This is my belief I am wearing one as it may or may not help, what's the risk of wearing it? None. What's the risk of not wearing it? Perhaps none also. BUT should I take a fall and it cracks wide open (and my skull doesn't) I will look on it as £25 well spent for had I not worn one and had the same fall and been left as a burden on my family the question I would have in my mind for the rest of my life would probably be "what if I had worn one?"
To address your point on age of helmet, yes I was buying a new one as I was concerned mine had passed it's best.
To answer the question of what regs does it meet? No I don't know, it is not something I burned into my memory so I would have to go look at it to check but since I walked in today sadly that is not going to happen. The question there is one of trust, I trsut EBC to have made and legally sold a prodct that has been tested and is fit for purpose and since you are so down on me for my choice to wear one I will check this out when I get home (I think EBC will love me when I start asking them legally what would happen if I had an accident wearing their helmet and it didn't save my skull)There is no (thankfully) MOT for bikes or bike kit, that is down to the user to take personal responsibility for. Plenty people I see with completely bald tyres (or no brakes/lights/bell/etc) and again that is personal choice (shops cannot force people to part with cash and by now this sort of advice is beyond the obvious, ie, if you don't kit your bike out you are a moron). If they hit a car they are the ones likely to pay for it, drivers (myself included) pay for a skilled mechanic to MOT our vehicles and make sure they are safe because if they aren't and we hit something/someone there is a nigh infinite difference in the damage we will do.
scaremonger
Nounscaremonger (plural scaremongers)
1. Someone who spreads worrying rumours or needlessly alarms people.
I don't think this is needless alarm - roads are not the best in this country for bikes, if we lived in Denmark perhaps I would not be wearing a helmet. I think the one thing we need to do is see what we can obviously agree on beyond the argument of should helmets be worn and that is the reason they are even needed
The entire country needs to have better infrastructure to allow cycling as a default safer option away from the mental drivers who are on the roads only looking out for themselves. Sadly, I don't think this is coming in my lifetime.Posted 13 years ago # -
Here is the contradiction, you wear a helmet because you believe that it might save your life in the event of road accident, but don't seam to be worried that it hasn't been tested for that purpose. If you were to ask the EBC about the whether the helmet was legally sold a product that has been tested and is fit for purpose, they could probably tell you that it has been tested to EN 1078.
However, it is highly unlikely they will tell you that this will give you lifesaving protection in the event of a road accident, because it hasn't been tested for that purpose!! Cycle helmets are designed for and test to withstand low speed (less than 12 mph) impact, they are not designed or intended to protect the wearer in the event of a road accident, which is why there is no direct advertising claiming that they do.
Hence the point of the comment on scaremongering. Why is it that cyclist are told that they should wear helmets, but not pedestrians? The risk of head injury is about the same, so why are we not being encouraged to wear walking helmets?
The simple reality is that cycling and walking are fairly safe activities, it is just that people perceptions are that one activity is more dangerous than the other.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"If you were to ask the EBC about the whether the helmet was legally sold a product that has been tested and is fit for purpose, they could probably tell you that it has been tested to EN 1078."
What does this sentence even mean?? Have you had a bang on the head?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Kim: perhaps not the effect you intended but having read the pdf you linked to, and the quite useful wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet I am now heading off the bike co-op to buy new helmets from 'Specialized'.
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
