Leatt Pant MTB 4.0 review

@robgodd The poor guy himself suffered a traumatic brain injury and his skull was so badly shattered a significant portion of it had to be removed - do me a favour, have a look around cycling helmet manufacturers and see if any of them claim the foam hats they produce will protect against or even mitigate that level of injury. I'll wait if you like, but I can save us both the time and tell you what you'll find: none of them. Not a single one of them will. Because they don't, and they *can't* based on simple physics. Once the point of failure in a material is reached all(or as near as makes no odds) of the additional force beyond that necessary threshhold transfers through to the object beneath. Since bicycle helmets are rated for forces roughly equivalent to being dropped straight down from a stationary start 1.5m above a hard surface. Now, I'm not an expert in vehicle crash investigation, but I'm *fairly* sure that any impact or series of impacts powerful enough to render a quarder of your skull into gravel, put you in a weeks-long coma, give you massive amnesia, and leave you with ongoing symptoms of traumatic brain injury are a little bit, a teeny-weeny amount, a little smidgeon-widgeon more than what bike helmets are rated for. That's why none of the companies that make them claim they will help in such circumstances: because they know it would be a lie, and that unlike uninformed punters, carbrained journalists, or "medical professionals" who think wearing a helmet would save you from a broken arm(an actual scenario encountered by a mate, who's nurse at the A&E tutted and harrumphed her way through his whole treatment due to his lack of helmet despite his bonce having come through *being hit by a car* - another scenario bike helmets are worthless in - completely unscathed), the lawyers for those companies know their business and understand that if you lie in advertising you will get sued into the ground.

The Battle of Ypres April 1915. The German infantry division advanced using das Brumptstadt Fahrarden. The slow speed kept them behind the cloud of chlorine gas as it drifted towards the Commonwealth trenches. The offensive cleaved a two mile gap in the Western Front. The use of cycles was copied by the Japanese as they invaded Singapore and Burmah. By then war technology had embraced wider low pressure tyres, carbon frames and hydration gels. The German forces decided not to incorporate cycling as part of Operation Session, as bike theft in London and the South East was rife and would have caused huge casualties. Ironically superior advancement of tyre technology led to a British victory at El Alamein. This technology played a key part in the US Marines victory at Iwo Jima.

The appropriate response to Google pissing on your cereal is not a fancy new sugar that removes the taste of urine. Stop using Google products where you can. Firefox browser and DuckDuckGo search engine have had noticeable upticks in market share by explicitly NOT pushing AI.

my thoughts exactly...I wonder how that approach is working, with motor vehicle drivers...🤔

I do not wish to diminish the personal tragedy, but one never hear calls for pedestrians or even hikers to wear clothing with integrated lightening rods.

RE Andy Burnam / Heidi Alexander - this is the best thing in many ways - set an example (even if currently it leads to lots of online name-calling). And imagine some of the political alternatives! The folks in the apparently second-placed party seem incredibly unlikely to be doing so. And even the current "new Greens" seem less interested in ... y'know, environmental things. OTOH I wish Heidi could be bolder. And I fear that like anyone ambitious enough to get to the top (exception B Johnson - well, I guess there was the Corbyn bicycle...) Burnam will be trimming his transport policy sails to fit the wind (should that be "bunker-fuel-burning engines"?)

@mattsccm Bull bars aren't banned, they just have to conform to regulations so they are deformable or have plates that allow crumple give on contact, rather than rigid steel bars that can smash into pedestrians and cyclists with no give at all, catch them and drag them under the wheels. If you think that's a problem, do one. Why should who is responsible for a collision remove the responsibility of people driving a tonne of machinery on the road from having safety features to at least mitigate some of the effects of a collision?

I'd be willing to bet that's lazy use of stock photography rather than deliberate misinformation, but the result is still the same.

@smallbeer You obviously don't realise how many bulls there are wandering around Chelsea, in and out of the china shops, that he needs to protect his Range Rover from.

I agree, it's bloody 'elf and safety overreach, can't help some people, I put some meat, sorry, neat decoration on the front of mine and the polis were round poking their noses in like that (mind you, that was a mistake...) (etc)