Cyclists Reject Safety Council's Helmet Claims and Proposals

galway | rights, freedoms and repression | press release

Friday May 14, 2004 12:00

by Shane Foran - Galway Cycling Campaign

galwaycylist at yahoo dot co dot uk

c/o Galway One World Centre, the Halls, Quay St., Galway.

087 9935993

The Galway Cycling Campaign has rejected the National Safety Council's recent call for compulsory cycle-helmets for children and has dismissed the National Safety Council's claims regarding helmets as false and untenable.

Cyclists Reject Safety Council's Helmet Claims and Proposals

The Galway Cycling Campaign has rejected the National Safety Council's recent call for compulsory cycle-helmets for children and has dismissed the National Safety Council's claims regarding helmets as false and untenable. Irish Cycle Campaign groups have previously called for the National Safety Council to be scrapped on the grounds that it effectively functions as a front for the car lobby and motor insurers. The latest NSC proposal is viewed as a thinly disguised attack on cycling, designed to allow the Irish Motor Insurance Industry to argue for reduced damages in respect to any children injured by their customers. In support of their claims, the National Safety Council have referred to the much criticised and discredited "Towner report" published on behalf of the UK Department of Transport in 2002. The numerous criticisms that have been raised regarding the Towner report include.

* No reference to traffic casualty trends, hospital admission data, or large population evidence. No reference to any cost-benefit analysis.
* Report includes serious misrepresentation of Australian data
* Based on "research" described as "scientifically untenable"
* Selective use of evidence in favour of helmets with little reference to studies showing negative effects.
* Exaggeration of dangers of cycling - figures for UK cycling accidents are overestimated by a factor of ten (x10)

The main effect of such helmet laws elsewhere has been discourage cycling without showing any improvement in the rates of death and injury among cyclists. Indeed in some countries such as the Australia, the US and UK cycling has been shown become more dangerous with increased helmet use. Cycling is already known to be the safest form of transport. The British Medical Association has found that all things considered, the health benefits of regular cycling significantly outweigh any increased risk of injury. In Denmark it has been found that regular adult cycle commuters show a 40% lower mortality than their non-cycling peers. Ireland has among the highest levels of heart disease and obesity in the EU and is facing a public health crisis as about 13,000 Irish citizens die of heart disease and related conditions annually. According to recent reports, Irish teenagers are among the most obese in the European Union. In this context, any measure that would criminalise children for engaging in healthy exercise such as cycling would be a public health disaster. The European Cyclists Federation, the British Medical Association and The Royal College of Physicians have all rejected compulsory cycle helmet use.

Shane Foran 087 9935993
Galway Cycling Campaign -Feachtas Rothaiochta na Gaillimhe
c/o Galway One World Centre, the Halls, Quay St., Galway.

More information on cycle helmets available at:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org

Reviews of Towner report:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1067.html
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2002.pdf
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2004.pdf

Galway Cycling Campaign Letter to Irish Medical Organisation on Cycling Helmets
http://www.eirbyte.com/gcc/submission/imo_helmets.html

save preference

Comments (11 of 11)

Organ Doners

by student - na

Fri May 14, 2004 12:14

Encouraging people to wear helmets is a good thing why do doctors and nurses call cyclists who dont wear helmets, organ donors? Becuase if you dont wear a helmet in an accident you are more than likely to be brain dead, and harvested for organs.

Helmets are a good idea

by kokomero

Fri May 14, 2004 13:40

having been knocked off my bike in a bus lane I feel I owe my health if not my life to the cycle helmet I was wearing at the time. To my mind if seatbelts and crashhelmets are obligatory for motor vehicles then cycle helment should be obligatory for bikes.

Missing the point

by P1 - none

Fri May 14, 2004 13:55

It should be noted that there is a higher risk of head injuries in car accidents compared to any other form of transport except motorbikes. Do the 2 correspondents above wear helmets every time they take a car trip?

The important item here is that the body proposing this change has an anti-cycling agenda. We have experienced enough shabby treatment from the road lobby in recent years without this underhand method to permit insuramce companies avoid their responsibilities. I think it is not head injuries they are concerned about but the possibilitiy of avoiding paying out for any accident involving a cyclist with no helmet whether or not head injuries are involved.

Oh belt up!!!

by Lone gunman

Fri May 14, 2004 14:54

If you cyclists started to learn the basic rules of the road,you mightnt be treated so shoddily.Or find yourselves being flattened by people who are trying to watch out for other dimwitts in leathl weapons,not to mind sucidial bike riders.
While you are about it how about putting basic saftey devices on your expensive bikes?Like Bells and lights.Which are the law anyway.
The sooner you lot are made have compulsory insurance,saftey gear and some form of points system.the safer and better the general public will be.

Rant on

by P1

Fri May 14, 2004 15:02

Idiot!

cars the problem

by pat c

Fri May 14, 2004 18:16

and trucks etc. cyclists ned more respect and legal protection on the roads. but... if you fall off your bike and hit your head, you would be a lot beter off if you are wearing helmet.

try banging your head off a wall without a helmet!

now try it with a helmet!

see!

Compulsion

by ekes

Sat May 15, 2004 01:49

You can keep arguing about the value of helmets as long as you like. I am reasonably sure, in the unlikely event of cracking your head while cycling, they are a bonus!

However, the question here is compulsion. Making folks do something, that puts an additional barrier to something that is i) good for them, healthy, preventing future heath problems; ii) good for the environment, cutting car use; iii) liberating for younger people as it gives them mobility. There are enough barriers already, cycling isn't actually that dangerous! The more people cycling the safer it is anyway. It saves lives by helping a healthy lifestyle.

On Yer Bike

by Guy Bague

Sat May 15, 2004 07:39

This is bollox. If you don't like Ireland, go and live in Denmark and take your bike with you.

Re. Guy Bague

by expatriate

Sat May 15, 2004 12:02

Mr. Bague you dumb ignorant prick, if you got out of your own little box more you might actually realise that many more continental European countries besides Denmark actually take serious measure to promote facilities for cyclists and are not so completely enslaved to the automobile industry as the Brown Paper Envelope Republic of Ireland and Her Royal Britannic Majesty's Disunited Kingdom.

Allow me to name a few of these countries in which I have spent some time and made extensive use of my bicycle ... the Netherlands, Germany, Austria and Switzerland ... the list is non-exhaustive .....

And before you attempt to give some advice to ME about leaving and taking my bike with me, let me tell you that I have long since left. Thank God because I no longer have to listen to the drivelling of pricks like you in real life, which would be incredibly more annoying than reading your attempts to contribute to debate in cyberspace. I must admit that for reasons of personal convenience, I didn't take my bike with me, but bought one in my new abode about seven years ago and thanks to regular maintenance it's still going well ........

With all the money I saved on petrol I could nearly afford the deposit on an over-priced jerry-built pile of bricks and mortar in Dublin, but I think I'll invest it in something giving better value for money than the Free State currently offers .....

Meggage for P1

by lone gunman

Sat May 15, 2004 13:58

what would you expect from an pig like you but a smelly green grunt! Dumb fuck!

Looking after #1

by MTB

Sat May 15, 2004 23:55

You're simply mad if you forego your lid. Forget the cars and the buses, you can fall off a bike in lots of ways. I've cycled for years, raced mountain bikes and most of my damage was self-inflicted, minimised by wearing a helmet.

I've also been mowed down by blind bastards too, but that's another story.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Voltaire Network

Cyclists Reject Safety Council's Helmet Claims and Proposals

Comments (11 of 11)