Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Helmet believers ♥ their little helmets



Oh gawd...here we go again.

Dr Dinh has had a letter published in this week's Medical Journal of Australia (MJA 198 [8] - 6 May 2013), which he then reports on in his article on The Conversation subsequently syndicated to the Brisbane Times...



...and oh boy!...are mainstream media excited.



Nothing he says extinguishes the fact that cycling here has yet to be made 'irresistible' as it has in the Netherlands (currently still a helmet- free country - don't do it, guys!!!), Denmark and Germany .

Somewhat weirdly though, I felt pretty chuffed when I noticed that he'd hyperlinked me in his article at 'publicised court cases'...clearly we (anti-helmet law campaigners) are getting under his and his colleagues' helmet promoting skin.

Oh...but it's so tiresome playing these little games - and expensive...

...ah...now that reminds me to get a wriggle on and submit my freedom of information request to the Australian Research Council (ARC) for details of all ARC grants provided to various academic institutions for bicycle helmet studies over the past 25 years...so...

Check

♫always look on the bright side of life...whew whooh, whew whooh whooh whooh whooh whooh♪♫


2 comments:

  1. Has anyone noticed that the completely discredited notion that cycle helmets prevent 85% of head injuries if taken as a ratio of 15% to 85% converts into a ratio of 1:5.6666 for helmeted versus non-helmeted injuries?

    How can a polystyrene hat that just meets the standards required to be called a "cycle helmet" physically provide such amazingly effective protection?

    Shouldn't motorcyclists be asked to wear bicycle helmets?

    I smell something fishy...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes it does seem to appear that bicycle helmets are considered by some to be utterly magical!

    ReplyDelete