Complaints over bare-headed Chris Boardman’s helmetless BBC Breakfast bike ride

My favourite comment, recently, was when I overheard.....

"I saw this cyclist this morning, and he didn't have any high vis on."

Not only a great bike rider a clever manipulator of the media ....... That Chris Boardman knows how to achieve his goals. We should all support him even if he does from time to time move in mysterious ways........Chris Boardman I mean not god.

Will someone please think of the children!

Sadly, these comments provide yet more examples of how stupid and irrational people can be.

Boardman goes on national TV to make his case about cycling safety and completely drops the ball. All anybody is talking about is his lack of helmet. Way to go you idiot! Any fool could have predicted this is how it would turn out. What a complete lack of judgement. He has appeared on TV plenty of times and worn a helmet whilst doing so. It would not have hurt him to do so this time so that his message about cycling safety wasn't lost in all the uproar about his lack of helmet. It's no wonder he isn't taken seriously.

I wear an helmet, do have hi viz stuff but dont tend to care so much about that as it in my view doesnt aid drivers seeing you.

We do need to be careful, a minority easily start to dictate how we should all live.

Why should school kids be banned from cycling to school and forced to wear hi-viz kacket in a walking train when the path/road to school is a lighly lite, wide and speed restricted road? Why because the driving standards are so poor aroudn the school! The logic is flawed. Find a sticking plaster over fixing the problem. Same applies here.

Helmet debates always end in tears. Perhaps more to the point, did he have to wear completely black clothing? Was he in stealth mode?

Chris Boardman is a very good spokesman and he is right to to stand his ground on helmet use.

Like he says it's not even in the top 10 of things to make cycling safer.

On a previous programme he has likened the attitude to helmets as similar to the attitude that if children were being shot on their way to school then the answer would be compulsory body armour. Obviously the thing to stop is people being shot and in this case run over.

Apart from the fact that body armour does actually work and helmets don't help one iota if you are struck by a car, it's a good argument.

I have been riding on the road in a club since 1973 and only worn a helmet for racing and back in the day they were even more useless. I recently showed my son a picture of a cyclo cross race in the New Forest in 1975 I think. No one wearing a helmet. he asked if there were a lot of head injuries back then and I have to say that in 41 years of active cycling I have never seen any cyclist suffer an injury that a helmet would have prevented. I accept that theoretically there would have to be some somewhere but mostly it's hands wrist arms hips knees and ankles.

Wear one if you like. A friend of mine likes to mount lights and a head cam on his and says that's the only reason he wears one. But it's pretty much like installing a 5 point seat belt in your family saloon for the drive to work. Pretty unnecessary but hey if you're a nervous rider or need a platform for your joystick or head cam then feel free. (only that 5 point belts actually work).

That there is a debate may indicate that public perception of road safety isn't quite where it should be in a developed country in the 21st century. On the other hand it could be the result of rightwing propaganda like the debate on immigration, a nice way of diverting the media away from the elephant in the room or in this case the lorries on the road.

this website seems to still be on British Summer Time judging by the timestamps of the most recent posts

To those comparing walking with cycling as similarly low risk activities, which merit the same choice of PPE, my points have clearly fallen on deaf ears - If I fall or hit an object when i walk, I'm likely to avoid head injury. If I fall over or hit something when cycling I'm likely to avoid head injury. HOWEVER I cannot walk at up to 35mph, but I do cycle at this speed on my commute to work. The impact on my head onto tarmac or other stationary object is going to be worse at higher speed.

I appreciate statistically the risk of head injury when cycling is small. I also appreciate there's a small window of 'usefulness' where a helmet is efficacious (limited object mass, low speeds, etc). I still choose to wear one when cycling but not when walking, following my evaluation of the risk including potential severity. See above. i also choose to wear reflective clothing in winter months. Anyone who comes to a different conclusion is fine by me.

I applaud CB's efforts to normalise cycling by wearing regular clothing. That he respects and understands my choice to wear other clothing/ equipment is also good to hear.

@Oozaveared, it's interesting how different things appear depending on where you sit.

Many will have flat commutes get to work, many won't. Regardless, the bike is still useful mode of transport. I will encounter gradients over 10%, I could pretty much top 30 without pedalling. I also crawl up hills at 10. But the point is, an 'off' will be at higher speed when cycling than when I walk.

and Warwickshire's not even that hilly compared to some places

Hence my discrimination about PPE for these two activities.

I think if you had a flat commute and cycled at a constant10mph, it would still be a useful mode of transport, as you say. cycling according to those conditions, I daresay I wouldn't wear a helmet either.

In the context of what CB was doing, I understand his attire completely.

Here's a novel idea: Do you enjoy riding your bike? Yes? Good. Do you want to wear a helmet? No? Ok, enjoy your ride. Yes? Ok, enjoy your ride.

I wear a seatbelt in a car because a) it's a legal requirement, and b) there is evidence to suggest that they actually have some impact on safety. Neither of which could be argued about cycle helmets.

@Farrell, give it a break buster! I was just replying to a post earlier relating to the possibility of wearing a hemet whilst driving or walking...... UTTER BOLLOCKS!

My point is was that all CB has done here is re-ignited the helmet debate rather than saying, Look we as cyclists or even just people riding a bike doing all we can to reduce our chance of injury. Now, government, do your part.

Surely there is some level of shared responsibility to improve safety?

Its a bit like going back to the Middle Ages. "You're not carrying a posy. Are you mad, you'll die of the bubonic plague?" or "I have friends who carried a pocket full of posies and the doctors say it saved their lives" or "He got a fever but they bleed him and covered him in leeches and poultices and it saved his life"

So many members of the public pitching in with zero knowledge but their own favourite folk remedy for saving cyclists' lives. No need for evidence. Off to the stake with Chris for heretically suggesting its a load of codswallop and posies and bleeding, poultices and leeches actually give no benefit at all. Can't deny the baying mob though can you?

YAWN!
We live in a free society, I wear a helmet to train in but if I am riding to the shop I don't, I would rather my daughter rides a bike with no helmet than sits in her room on a computer.
I agree with Chris lets look at the real issues around rider safety, a helmets worth Jack S**t when you get hit up the arse by a car at 60mph.
Would a helmet have saved Pete Longbottom, NO.

For the newbies out there Pete was a top rider in the 90's and an old Team mate of Chris's. Got chucked into the path of an oncoming car by another car which 'didn't see him'

Nick Gritton.

And on the same day as he posted that load of utter cr4p he also posted that he wouldn't let his 10 year old ride not only on roads but also on an approved cycle path! Hypocritical tw4t!!

How about not having compulsory wearing of helmets with the proviso that a cyclist with head injuries who does not wear a helmet is kept alive only long enough to harvest the organs?

I have been thinking about this....
I have been riding a bike since 1977, I have been racing since 1978 and had full seasons till 1992, and have raced at least once every year since then, I have been involved in the cycle trade for 38 years.
My point? I can't name a person who was killed by a head injury.
I wear one as I said before when training, because if it saves me from concussion that's a result, but if it stops one person riding a bike as they feel intimidated that they should wear one its a bad day.
Ps been a long time but there is nothing better than 60 mph down an alpine pass with no lid on!

Surely the baseline questions that should be asked are:

1. Can head injuries be caused through the pursuit of cycling?

2. If yes, can the impact of any of those head injuries be mitigated through the use of a helmet?

These days it seems that Boardman is more interested in grandstanding in his attempts to show himself not using a helmet whenever he can deliberately causing confrontation and provocation.

Rather interestingly and inconsistently on his part he always wears a helmet when he does his TdF or this year's Tour of Britain pieces for TV. I would also wager that none of his kids go out on their bikes helmetless.

All rather small minded by a decorated cyclist and if the best contributions to cycling safety he can offer are piffling suggestions like "work out where you want to go" or "give space to lorries" really it's time to return to the day job/backroom designing aero frames.

When cycling as a sport, I wear a helmet.
When pootling around town, I don't.
I guess that I agree with Chris Boardman on the normal clothes and ease of cycling thing.

Quote:

We should enforce stabilisers too. Most incidents occur when people fall off their bikes. Stabilisers make it harder to fall off bicycles, and so reduce risk of injury. I don't see why people don't use them. If enforcing them saves one life, it's worth it.

I once had to turn a corner on my bike. When I turned it, I felt the stabilisers come to my rescue and stop me tipping dangerously far over. I'm sure I would have fallen off, and died, if the stabilisers hadn't caught me. Stabilisers saved my life, and they might save yours too.

I see many adults not riding with stabilisers every day, and sometimes even children!!! It's really riles me up! Irresponsible!!! We cyclists should do everything we can for our own safety, and that includes using proper safety equipment while riding so we can stay stable. You never know when you might have to turn a corner, just like I did. Just remember folks, 'Stay Safe - Stay Stable'. Simple enough, right!?

Unfortunately I have a different story involving stabilisers. While driving through town I got caught behind a young cyclist with stabilisers. In my need to get to the tail of the queue that was up ahead, I just had to get past this cyclist. I made the judgment call that I could get past safely even if it was a bit of a squeeze. I caught the stabiliser and broke it with my front wheel, the modern 4x4 is indeed a heavy old beast, this in turn threw the youngster under my rear wheels and caused an explosion in which we all died.
How safe are your stabilisers now?
The youngster wasn't wearing a helmet either.