tomasrojo Registered User
#1,441

murf said:
I'd question the second Doctor's information there. The old one about 80% reduction has been dropped and the original study withdrawn as far as I know, and 20% of all transport hospitalisations are cyclists? That honestly sounds excessive, I'd very much like to see the backing on that one, particularly what they're in for - were they doing sport at the time? Downhill mountain biking is not transport.



Yeah, looks like a crock alright. To be honest, once someone says that helmets prevent 80% (or similar proportion) of head injuries, I stop reading, as they clearly haven't looked into the matter in any detail at all.

1 person has thanked this post
tomasrojo Registered User
#1,442

Also cycling is more than 1 or 2% of trips. Not sure what it is these days, but it used to be 3 or 4% nationwide, and 10+% in Dublin city centre.

I suspect there is conflation of serious and minor head injuries in his stats (assuming they're at least broadly accurate). Cycling isn't especially productive of serious head injuries. Public policy shouldn't take too much interest in scrapes and bruises, which are most "head injuries".

3 people have thanked this post
Corca Baiscinn Registered User
#1,443

murf said:
I'd question the second Doctor's information there. The old one about 80% reduction has been dropped and the original study withdrawn as far as I know, and 20% of all transport hospitalisations are cyclists? That honestly sounds excessive, I'd very much like to see the backing on that one, particularly what they're in for - were they doing sport at the time? Downhill mountain biking is not transport.


That's what I wondered too, he didn't give a source for his figures and mountain biking, a cycle race or a sportive are rather different from a toddle to the shops. i wonder does the RSA here just have generic "cycling collision" stats. The other thing I wonder about re these recent letters is the "Dr"title. We don't know if the writers are doctors of medicine, philosophy, statistics or software engineering so can't tell whether their academic and professional experience deserves more weight than that of the (wo)man on the Clapham Omnibus.

2 people have thanked this post
Corca Baiscinn Registered User
#1,444

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/britons-encouraged-to-ditch-cars-for-short-journeys-by-2040-g2tsnfprs?CMP=Sprkr-_-Editorial-_-TheTimesandTheSundayTimes-_-News-_-Unspecified-_-Statement-_-Unspecified-_-ACCOUNT_TYPE&linkId=36739751

Saw this shared on cyclist.ie and Dublin Cycling Campaign's FB page. It's a lot more imaginative re cycling than anything in our Draft National Mitigation Plan, published on 15th March . Of course the lead in is 20+ years so easy to make promises. Some of the comments are funny though especially the one that building more roads is the solution to congestion! Lots of anxiety re how older people will manage, someone should tell them re ebikes

Chuchote Registered User
#1,445

Irish Times letters today, from 1) Brian O'Brien in Kinsale, 2) Michael A Carroll of Mount Merrion and 3) Leslie Lawless of Dublin 4

The perennial debate about the pros and cons of cycling helmets appears to have found its way into the letters page. Speaking as a cyclist and intensive-care specialist, I have no doubts about the protection helmets offer. For the sceptics though, I can recommend a simple “n=1” experiment. Don a cycling helmet and hit yourself firmly on the head with a brick. Remove the helmet and repeat the manoeuvre. Detailed statistical analysis will probably not be required to reveal the difference. Note to younger readers: do not try this as a Young Scientists exhibition project.

==

My problem, as a cyclist, with other road users, is that car drivers do not signal at T-junctions, pedestrians ignore red lights and other cyclists also ignore red lights and cycle on footpaths; although, to be fair, the latter often do so for their own safety. Whatever the arguments, for and against, I shall continue to wear a helmet and a hi-vis vest. I feel safer that way, and I also say a prayer to my guardian angel as I set off.

==

If a key solution to minimising accidental injury is always to wear a helmet, then perhaps we should wear a helmet in all accident-prone situations, such as each morning in the shower, when we go up or down the stairs and when we drink alcohol.


==


Also a lovely piece by Laura Laker in the Guardian about why we cycle:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2017/apr/20/its-good-to-hear-cycling-to-work-reduces-your-risk-of-dying-but-thats-not-why-i-do-it?CMP=share_btn_fb

My commuting story began at university. I remember being astonished one morning when I realised my friend Szilvia had cycled from Finsbury Park in the rain. Getting on a bike and riding five miles in such conditions sounded miserable, but she looked happy and bright, and told me how great it was.

We lived fairly close to one another and she offered to ride with me one day. As I pedalled frantically to keep up with her through Regent’s Park, and Camden, it was like I’d grown wings. Before long, like her, nothing short of a gale force wind with pigeon-sized hailstones was going to stop me from experiencing this feeling every day.

For the first time in my life I started getting fit. I arrived at university feeling awake, alert, and generally in a good mood. I continued to cycle to various temp jobs around London after graduation, carrying my work clothes in a pannier and getting changed in the loos.

On crisp, sunny mornings, I’d cycle through the city feeling like it had rolled out the red carpet just for me. I’d levelled up on urban living: I’d whizz past the stationary traffic and queues for buses and try not to look too smug.

I’d chat to others at the traffic lights. Often I’d get to places quicker than public transport could carry me. Often it was the best part of the day.

9 people have thanked this post
tomasrojo Registered User
#1,446

For those of you playing Helmet Debate Bingo, you can cross off "Let me propose an experiment; hit yourself in the head".

8 people have thanked this post
tomasrojo Registered User
#1,447

It occurred to me this morning while looking over the threads since the AGSI proposal is that the only thing I find stressful about cycling is thinking about how it's going to be ruined by people with authoritarian tendencies and simplistic arguments.

20 people have thanked this post
HivemindXX Registered User
#1,448

tomasrojo said:
For those of you playing Helmet Debate Bingo, you can cross off "Let me propose an experiment; hit yourself in the head".


That was a two for one. You get to tick off "I'm a medical professional so my opinion is more important".

9 people have thanked this post
AndrewJRenko Registered User
#1,449

Chuchote said:
Irish Times letters today, from 1) Brian O'Brien in Kinsale, 2) Michael A Carroll of Mount Merrion and 3) Leslie Lawless of Dublin 4



Interesting that Michael Carroll links in helmets/hi-vis and praying to his guardian angle - equal degrees of proven effectiveness for all three.

5 people have thanked this post
rubadub Registered User
#1,450

HivemindXX said:
You get to tick off "I'm a medical professional so my opinion is more important".

I jumped to the conclusion he was claiming to be a "medical professional" too, until I read further, hopefully nobody apparently that stupid is taking care of people.

I have talked to many intelligent people who might say similar to him -BUT -they have certainly not been aware of the "perennial debate about the pros and cons of cycling helmets", most are ignorant about it, and so it is fair enough that they think it is all "pro". This guy sounds like he should be well aware of the "cons", but then talks like he is totally unaware. So maybe "intensive-care specialist" simply means he has spent a lot of time in intensive care, perhaps after carrying out his brick experiment one too many times on himself.

3 people have thanked this post
magicbastarder Registered User
#1,451

there's a simple issue with all these 'i'm a medical professional and i've held the brains of cyclists in my hands' sort of letters - the presumption that the accident has already taken place.
in the limited context of their experience, yes, a helmet is more likely to do good than harm, but they are judging cycling based purely on the - thankfully very rare - moments when things have gone wrong, and in a specific way.

i wouldn't claim to have cycled a tenth as much as some people on this forum, but i can tell you this - my couple of injuries - six stitches in my chin and a bit of glue in my top lip in one accident, a sprained ankle in another - are dwarfed by the pleasure and health benefits i've received from cycling.

(that said, i've heard enough about injuries in actual cycle racing to make me think twice about ever trying it).

3 people have thanked this post
Chuchote Registered User
#1,452

Today's batch, from Mark Fox of Shankill and Patricia O'Riordan of Rialto.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/cycling-and-the-environment-1.3056942

It is no surprise that the Environmental Protection Agency recently noted that it is clear that current and planned policies are simply not sufficient to meet the EU target for Ireland of achieving a 20 per cent cut in greenhouse gases (based on 2005 levels) by 2020.
Commuting by bicycle replaces the use of fossil fuel-based transport methods, and you would think it should be encouraged. However, the infrastructure for cyclists remains poor and unsafe. For example, commuting cyclists have to contend on a daily basis with the need to avoid broken glass littering Dublin’s cycle paths, which is often not removed for months. This forces cyclists to use glass-free bus lanes to reduce the risk of puncture, but to the chagrin of some taxis and bus drivers honking their horns.
It seems that in the hierarchy of commuters, the cyclist is regarded as an unwanted inconvenience while the needs of fossil fuel-based commuting methods are prioritised and preferred.
Is it any wonder that transport-based emissions will continue to rise unabated?

==

The skateboarders are all very quiet compared to the cyclists. Are they just a mellower bunch?

2 people have thanked this post
Roadhawk Registered User
#1,453

Chuchote said:
Today's batch, from Mark Fox of Shankill and Patricia O'Riordan of Rialto.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/cycling-and-the-environment-1.3056942


...still quite puzzled with the hype on air pollution in Ireland...looking at the following links from the EEA and EPA... Ireland seems to be better than good in the stats/graphs.

http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/air-quality-in-europe-2016

http://www.epa.ie/air/quality/
http://www.epa.ie/pubs/reports/air/quality/epaairqualityreport2015.html

mcgratheoin Registered User
#1,454

Roadhawk said:
...still quite puzzled with the hype on air pollution in Ireland...looking at the following links from the EEA and EPA... Ireland seems to be better than good in the stats/graphs.


Not sure if i'm reading you correctly if you're talking about the emissions reference, but air pollution and emissions aren't the same thing. Air pollution covers particulate matter (e.g. soot/smog), nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, lead etc... Mainly things that are a short to medium term risk to health rather than the gases that contribute to climate change.

1 person has thanked this post
magicbastarder Registered User
#1,455

of course we're not too bad. we don't have to deal with our own pollution. our major population centre is on the east coast of an island where the prevailing wind is from the south west.

3 people have thanked this post

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!