helmets increase danger
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Proposed Motion of No Confidence in URCM Moderation
Next: Ok cyclists - is this reasonable behaviour?
From: JMS jmsmith2010 on 24 Apr 2010 09:40 On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 06:28:18 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk> wrote: >In message <nc74t5d3e3aaae7dv72nlsh8mqhrjtl841(a)4ax.com>, at 23:26:30 on >Fri, 23 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: >>On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:46:37 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk> >>wrote: <snip> >You are such a pathetic, poor loser. Why does anyone even bother >discussing things with you? You ask for evidence, get it, then deny >you've been given it. That's it, I'm out. Excellent - pity you won't see this. I asked you, quite a reasonable question, to back up what you said regarding cycle helmets playing a part in risk compensation. You mentioned a book - no quote, no page reference - just the title. I asked you for perhaps a quote from the book which supported your view - you could not provide one. I conclude that you cannot provide any evidence whatsoever of any research which has specifically concluded that wearing a cycle helmet increases the risk to the wearer as a result of risk compensation - and you take your ball home. If you had set out to prove that you were so bigoted - you could not have done better. Well done. -- Many cyclists are proving the need for registration by their contempt for the Highway Code and laws. The answer: All cyclists over 16 to take compulsory test, have compulsory insurance, and be registered. Registration number to be clearly visible on the back of mandatory hi-viz vest. Habitual law breakers' cycles confiscated and crushed. (With thanks to KeithT for the idea)
From: Roland Perry on 24 Apr 2010 10:33 In message <0qs5t5tc92dc0iuefaqqnl64dcjcq29e1q(a)4ax.com>, at 14:40:00 on Sat, 24 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: Oh well, you won't go away, so I at least need to respond to the latest set of lies: >I asked you, quite a reasonable question, to back up what you said >regarding cycle helmets playing a part in risk compensation. > >You mentioned a book - no quote, no page reference - just the title. It's a world famous book. And I did provide a page number. It's simply incredible the hole you dig for yourself! >I asked you for perhaps a quote from the book which supported your >view - you could not provide one. I provided one. Shame you can't accept that. -- Roland Perry
From: Roland Perry on 24 Apr 2010 10:33 In message <r5t5t5llvbvc1qgdn8hrc001osuv0qcadd(a)4ax.com>, at 14:42:05 on Sat, 24 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: >What a retort - never, ever heard that one before. Then you need to get out more. -- Roland Perry
From: JMS jmsmith2010 on 24 Apr 2010 11:48 On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:33:10 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk> wrote: >In message <0qs5t5tc92dc0iuefaqqnl64dcjcq29e1q(a)4ax.com>, at 14:40:00 on >Sat, 24 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: > >Oh well, you won't go away, so I at least need to respond to the latest >set of lies: > >>I asked you, quite a reasonable question, to back up what you said >>regarding cycle helmets playing a part in risk compensation. >> >>You mentioned a book - no quote, no page reference - just the title. > >It's a world famous book. And I did provide a page number. It's simply >incredible the hole you dig for yourself! >>I asked you for perhaps a quote from the book which supported your >>view - you could not provide one. > >I provided one. Shame you can't accept that. If you are referring to: "He quotes Mayer Hillman, for example, saying "in the first major study of cycle helmets" he had "surveyed the growing body of evidence from other risk taking, that shows that the use of protective equipment and safety devices modifies behaviour". What he didn't say was : Mayer Hillman states the evidence for risk compensation is `overwhelming'. In fact here have been no systematic reviews of the evidence for the relevance of risk compensation to bike helmets. What empirical evidence exists for risk compensation behaviour? (ref http://www.mayerhillman.com/Articles/EntryId/47/Debate-the-relevance-of-risk-compensation-to-cycle-helmet-wearing.aspx) That is hardly conclusive in supporting your view. Still - I suppose that is the best that you can do. I apologise for my exaggeration re the page ref You did indeed say "Cycle helmets pages 144-147". So despite a full three pages on cycle helmets - you could not even provide a quote which supported your view. No problem. I have the book on order. I will do - what you were unable to do - provide some relevant quotes from the book. Whether they support your argument or not - we will have to see. (I hope you haven't been telling porkies) -- Many cyclists are proving the need for registration by their contempt for the Highway Code and laws. The answer: All cyclists over 16 to take compulsory test, have compulsory insurance, and be registered. Registration number to be clearly visible on the back of mandatory hi-viz vest. Habitual law breakers' cycles confiscated and crushed. (With thanks to KeithT for the idea)
From: JMS jmsmith2010 on 24 Apr 2010 11:52
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 15:33:55 +0100, Roland Perry <roland(a)perry.co.uk> wrote: >In message <r5t5t5llvbvc1qgdn8hrc001osuv0qcadd(a)4ax.com>, at 14:42:05 on >Sat, 24 Apr 2010, JMS <jmsmith2010(a)live.co.uk> remarked: > >>What a retort - never, ever heard that one before. > >Then you need to get out more. ffs - whooooosh ..-----------------------------> On the contrary - I really think that it is you who needs to get out more. -- Many cyclists are proving the need for registration by their contempt for the Highway Code and laws. The answer: All cyclists over 16 to take compulsory test, have compulsory insurance, and be registered. Registration number to be clearly visible on the back of mandatory hi-viz vest. Habitual law breakers' cycles confiscated and crushed. (With thanks to KeithT for the idea) |