When I listen to above audio from last week's radio interview, I despair ...
Will we ever be capable of repealing helmet laws when we have a mainstream media cheerleading for helmet promoters with nary a thought to evidence or rest-of-world-practice ... and that self-identified doctor - the ignorance, the rudeness ...
... sigh
On the plus side though, what a noble and magnanimous campaigner we have in Alan!
A true champion
Bravo Alan! He sounded very composed and reasonable the whole time. He presented cogent arguments when attacked from all sides. Hopefully some of the listeners who have been undecided about the helmet law in Australia will now support the repeal.
ReplyDeleteThat was an interesting radio segment. i agree, Alan did well in the face of a hostile caller. i feel that Alan did rely too much on mis-information to press his case. The public probably won't be fooled by his incorrect statement that head injuries have not gone down by ratio (as well as number) since the advent of MHLs. This reflects the common-sense attitude of the layperson that a helmet will mitigate the effects of a fall onto the head.
ReplyDeleteAlan, I believe, would be better off pressing the case that cycling, with or without, helmets is still statistically a safe activity and is even more safe at slow speed in inner city/bike lanes. He did allude to this but i think that this is the strongest case for removal of MHLs. The libertarian argument, I believe, will hold no sway. The public are so used to public health initiatives like seat-belts (for example) that shrilly complaining about being told to wear helmets by the 'nanny-state' will have little traction.
regards,
seamus
Starting with an ad hominem attack doesn't sound like a worthy rebuttal of anyone that is educated. How disappointing, doctor.
ReplyDeleteI can understand where the doctor is coming from. If I were treating head injuries, it would probably infuriate me too. Until perhaps I understood how many lives have been lost to heart disease, diabetes, etc from sedentiary lifestyles. "Helmet laws save a few brains, but destroy a lot of hearts."
I replied on fiveAA site. Youtube bit got truncated, please add it :) please remove my prior comment.
ReplyDelete-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
'Idiot' is not a worthy rebuttal of anyone that is educated. How disappointing, doctor.
I can understand where the doctor is coming from. If I were treating head injuries, it would probably frustrate me too. Until perhaps I understood how many lives have been lost to heart disease, diabetes, etc from sedentary lifestyles in Australia. "Helmet laws save a few brains, but destroy a lot of hearts." Around ten thousand people will die of heart attack this year, 20 thousand from heart disease. We have over a million people suffering from diabetes (probably closer to two million with those undiagnosed), costing Australia tens of billions of dollars. Several thousand will die this way, and this is increasing every year. We have among the fattest people, and fattest kids, in the world. This is sad for Australia! Open your eyes Dr. 'Idiot'!
Helmets give people the perception that riding a bike is dangerous, and turns them off, frightening people into cars. Cars cause more, and more severe, head injuries than riding a bicycle, yet we don't have a mandated car-helmet law. Pedestrians are more likely to endure a head injury than a cyclist! We certainly wouldn't endure a pedestrian-helmet law, or would we? This is Australia after all.
Let people ride to the shops without a helmet! Let people visit their local eatery without a helmet. These are not big ideas, or radical concepts (well a bit radical in Australia) but would have a positive effect on our cities qualities.
NT has no helmet law, and the greatest share of trips by bike. The QLD Parliamentary committee "Report No. 39 - Inquiry into Cycling Issues" even proposed the following sensible recommendation:
Recommendation 15
The Committee recommends that the Minister for Transport and Main Roads:
- introduce a 24 month trial which exempts cyclists aged 16 years and over from the
mandatory helmet road rule when riding in parks, on footpaths and shared/cycle paths and
on roads with a speed limit of 60 km/hr or less and
- develop an evaluation strategy for the trial which includes baseline measurements and data
collection (for example through the CityCycle Scheme) so that an assessment can be made
which measures the effect and proves any benefits.
Recommendation 16
The Committee recommends that the Minister for Transport and Main Roads introduce an
exemption from Queensland road rule 256 for all cyclists age 16 years and over using a bicycle from a
public or commercial bicycle hire scheme.
http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/committees/THLGC/2013/INQ-CYC/rp-39-29Nov13.pdf
The text contains a well-informed, cross section of information if you want to find out more.
Not convinced? Then you better buy a 'Thud Guard' for your child. Just in case.
[youtube]07o-TASvIxY[/youtube]
and perhaps mention the youtube contains the 'car helmet' devised in Adelaide!
Delete