Live blog: Pass-agg van stickers (we prefer ours); Richard Carapaz fails to secure visa for Tour of Britain; Telegraph takes firm position on whether cycle helmets should be mandatory; pass-agg van stickers + more

42 thoughts on “Live blog: Pass-agg van stickers (we prefer ours); Richard Carapaz fails to secure visa for Tour of Britain; Telegraph takes firm position on whether cycle helmets should be mandatory; pass-agg van stickers + more”

1. If you take advice from the

   If you take advice from the Telegraph then think again. Anecdote and individual experience is not evidence. 

   Wear a helmet if you want to but never read the Telegraph.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • jasecd wrote:

     If you take advice from the Telegraph then think again. Anecdote and individual experience is not evidence. 

     Wear a helmet if you want to but never read the Telegraph.

     — jasecd

     And of course its behind a paywall/register-wall so you can’t accidentally read the web version.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • brooksby wrote:

       If you take advice from the Telegraph then think again. Anecdote and individual experience is not evidence. 

       Wear a helmet if you want to but never read the Telegraph.

       — brooksby

       And of course its behind a paywall/register-wall so you can’t accidentally read the web version.

       — jasecd

       It popped up on my MSN news feed. I thought it’d kick off another lengthy helmet debate to be honest.

       Log In or Register to post comments

2. In answer to Señor Chris on

   In answer to Señor Chris on how to reply to J B H Design.  Thank you for sharing the web address.  On their web site they give their telephone number and email (and contact form). Perhaps they are so interested, every cyclist should let them know? 

   I also wonder if cycleoptic obtained the image from a close pass by the van; in which case they may need reminding of rule 163 – because it looks like a close pass. Of course, cycleoptic may be filtering and they could be reminded of that rule.

   I wonder when everyone at J B H Design last read (if ever) the Highway Code?

    

   Log In or Register to post comments

3. I wonder if that company went

   I wonder if that company went to the trouble of actually creating a sticker just for their vans, given the nature of their business and how ‘non-standard’ it looks (they certainly didn’t just buy it in Office World).  And, has been said, how best to reply “Yes, thanks; next?”…

   Log In or Register to post comments

4. I’ve just contacted the

   I’ve just contacted the company asking them to explain their bigoted views regarding the passive aggressive van sticker. I think others should do the same.

   PP

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Pilot Pete wrote:

     I’ve just contacted the company asking them to explain their bigoted views regarding the passive aggressive van sticker. I think others should do the same.

     PP

     — Pilot Pete

     they have another van with the words ‘Caution, blindly following SatNav”. I would suggest that the stickers are to take the piss of all road users plus publicity and advertising of the design company. 

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Pilot Pete wrote:

     I’ve just contacted the company asking them to explain their bigoted views regarding the passive aggressive van sticker. I think others should do the same.

     PP

     — Pilot Pete

     Why?

     Log In or Register to post comments

5. The highway code thing is a
   The highway code thing is a joke.

   Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Rich_cb wrote:

     Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.

     — Rich_cb

     …said Jeremy Clarkson 

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • Rich_cb wrote:

     The highway code thing is a joke. Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.

     — Rich_cb

     Yeah. Getting knocked over by someone who has just passed you turning left across your path in broad daylight tends to blunt your sense of humour. As does drivers driving straight towards you on narrow country roads, then shouting at you and calling you a ‘cunt’ for being ‘in their way’. As does having a porsche overtake your club ride on a blind corner, approaching a bridge. As does having a milkshake thrown at you from a passing car. As does visiting your mate in hospital with a broken hip and shoulder blade after being knocked off by a white van driver, who then drove off. All in the space of three months. Funny that.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Zebulebu wrote:

       Yeah. Getting knocked over by someone who has just passed you turning left across your path in broad daylight tends to blunt your sense of humour. As does drivers driving straight towards you on narrow country roads, then shouting at you and calling you a ‘cunt’ for being ‘in their way’. As does having a porsche overtake your club ride on a blind corner, approaching a bridge. As does having a milkshake thrown at you from a passing car. As does visiting your mate in hospital with a broken hip and shoulder blade after being knocked off by a white van driver, who then drove off. Funny that.

       — Zebulebu

       And that stream of anecdotes makes the joke on the van wrong why?

       It’s poking fun at some cyclists, just as their other stickers appear to be poking fun at other road users.

       Lighten up.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Rich_cb wrote:

         The highway code thing is a joke. Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.

         — Rich_cb

         Yeah. Getting knocked over by someone who has just passed you turning left across your path in broad daylight tends to blunt your sense of humour. As does drivers driving straight towards you on narrow country roads, then shouting at you and calling you a ‘cunt’ for being ‘in their way’. As does having a porsche overtake your club ride on a blind corner, approaching a bridge. As does having a milkshake thrown at you from a passing car. As does visiting your mate in hospital with a broken hip and shoulder blade after being knocked off by a white van driver, who then drove off. Funny that.

         — Zebulebu

         And that stream of anecdotes makes the joke on the van wrong why? It’s poking fun at some cyclists, just as their other stickers appear to be poking fun at other road users. Lighten up.

         — Rich_cb

         The state of road use in this country is not really a laughing matter, is it…

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • vonhelmet wrote:

           The state of road use in this country is not really a laughing matter, is it…

           — vonhelmet

           I suggest you never go to a comedy club anywhere, ever, if you think that the state of the roads is an offensive topic for a joke.

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           The state of road use in this country is not really a laughing matter, is it…

            

           — Rich_cb I suggest you never go to a comedy club anywhere, ever, if you think that the state of the roads is an offensive topic for a joke.— vonhelmet

           Comedy is for micro and macro-aggresive transphobic fascist bigots. All we have left is the gentle comedy of a dog sliding on an icy pond or a cyclist being egged.

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           The state of road use in this country is not really a laughing matter, is it…

           — Rich_cb

           I suggest you never go to a comedy club anywhere, ever, if you think that the state of the roads is an offensive topic for a joke.

           — vonhelmet

           Oh do fuck off dear.

         • vonhelmet wrote:

           Oh do fuck off dear.

           — vonhelmet

           Careful, you might offend someone.

       • Rich_cb wrote:

         The highway code thing is a joke. Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.

         — Rich_cb

         Yeah. Getting knocked over by someone who has just passed you turning left across your path in broad daylight tends to blunt your sense of humour. As does drivers driving straight towards you on narrow country roads, then shouting at you and calling you a ‘cunt’ for being ‘in their way’. As does having a porsche overtake your club ride on a blind corner, approaching a bridge. As does having a milkshake thrown at you from a passing car. As does visiting your mate in hospital with a broken hip and shoulder blade after being knocked off by a white van driver, who then drove off. Funny that.

         — Zebulebu

         And that stream of anecdotes makes the joke on the van wrong why? It’s poking fun at some cyclists, just as their other stickers appear to be poking fun at other road users. Lighten up.

         — Rich_cb

          

         Because these aren’t ‘anecodtes’. They are reports of fact, based on my last three months of riding. And until the issue of cyclists being abused, seriously injured and killed is taken seriously, ‘having a laugh’ about it isn’t particularly fucking funny.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Zebulebu wrote:

            

           Because these aren’t ‘anecodtes’. They are reports of fact, based on my last three months of riding. And until the issue of cyclists being abused, seriously injured and killed is taken seriously, ‘having a laugh’ about it isn’t particularly fucking funny.

           — Zebulebu

           Firstly, look up the definition of anecdote.

           Secondly, the joke isn’t about cyclists getting killed etc it’s about the highway code and the frequent quoting of it by cyclists.

           It’s a gentle joke aimed at a particular type of cyclist, seemingly over represented on this forum.

         • Rich_cb wrote:

            

           Because these aren’t ‘anecodtes’. They are reports of fact, based on my last three months of riding. And until the issue of cyclists being abused, seriously injured and killed is taken seriously, ‘having a laugh’ about it isn’t particularly fucking funny.

           — Rich_cb

           Firstly, look up the definition of anecdote.

           Secondly, the joke isn’t about cyclists getting killed etc it’s about the highway code and the frequent quoting of it by cyclists.

           It’s a gentle joke aimed at a particular type of cyclist, seemingly over represented on this forum.

           — Zebulebu

           You didn’t use ‘anecdote’ in the literal sense of the word. You used it in the context it’s often used – as an inferior comparator to empirical evidence. In that context, these are not ‘anecdotes’ – they are ‘statements’, supporting a factual proposition, which is – poking fun at cyclists quoting the Highway Code whilst hundreds are maimed and killed every year is not funny.

         • Zebulebu wrote:

           You didn’t use ‘anecdote’ in the literal sense of the word. You used it in the context it’s often used – as an inferior comparator to empirical evidence. In that context, these are not ‘anecdotes’ – they are ‘statements’, supporting a factual proposition, which is – poking fun at cyclists quoting the Highway Code whilst hundreds are maimed and killed every year is not funny.

           — Zebulebu

           So now you’re a mind reader as well.

           You might not find it funny, did I?

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           You didn’t use ‘anecdote’ in the literal sense of the word. You used it in the context it’s often used – as an inferior comparator to empirical evidence. In that context, these are not ‘anecdotes’ – they are ‘statements’, supporting a factual proposition, which is – poking fun at cyclists quoting the Highway Code whilst hundreds are maimed and killed every year is not funny.

           — Rich_cb

           So now you’re a mind reader as well.

           You might not find it funny, did I?

           — Zebulebu

           Whereas you know exactly why the sticker is there.

           Why don’t you stop digging as you show no sympathy for those injured by van drivers.

         • hirsute wrote:

           Whereas you know exactly why the sticker is there.

           Why don’t you stop digging as you show no sympathy for those injured by van drivers.

           — hirsute

           Point out the post where I showed a lack of sympathy?

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           Whereas you know exactly why the sticker is there.

           Why don’t you stop digging as you show no sympathy for those injured by van drivers.

           — Rich_cb

           Point out the post where I showed a lack of sympathy?— hirsute
           Your second post.
           For all your bluster about mind reading, you went on to say ‘I deduced’.
           Stop digging.

         • hirsute wrote:

           Your second post.
           For all your bluster about mind reading, you went on to say ‘I deduced’.
           Stop digging.

           — hirsute

           Firstly, look up the meaning of deduce.

           Secondly, I didn’t show a lack of sympathy I simply asked why those anecdotes had any relevance?

           The sticker doesn’t insult cyclists, it doesn’t threaten them or victim blame, it just pokes a little fun.

           Their other vans poke fun at other road users so they’re not even specifically targeting cyclists.

           The desperate desire to be offended on this thread is nothing short of pathetic.

           Stop digging and get a sense of humour.

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           Your second post. For all your bluster about mind reading, you went on to say ‘I deduced’. Stop digging.

           — Rich_cb

           Firstly, look up the meaning of deduce. Secondly, I didn’t show a lack of sympathy I simply asked why those anecdotes had any relevance? The sticker doesn’t insult cyclists, it doesn’t threaten them or victim blame, it just pokes a little fun. Their other vans poke fun at other road users so they’re not even specifically targeting cyclists. The desperate desire to be offended on this thread is nothing short of pathetic. Stop digging and get a sense of humour.

           — hirsute

           It’s one of those irregular verbs then. I deduce, you guess, he uses mindreading.

           You replied to someone who had related incidents which had lead to a serious injury with ‘lighten up’ and showed no sympathy.

           If you had read properly what people have said on this article, you wouldn’t be glibly telling us all to get a sense of humour.

         • hirsute wrote:

           It’s one of those irregular verbs then. I deduce, you guess, he uses mindreading.

           You replied to someone who had related incidents which had lead to a serious injury with ‘lighten up’ and showed no sympathy.

           If you had read properly what people have said on this article, you wouldn’t be glibly telling us all to get a sense of humour.

           — hirsute

           The other poster told me why I had used a word and that I had deliberately used it in a non-literal way despite the fact that using its literal meaning made perfect sense and was entirely appropriate. That’s not a deduction as it doesn’t follow any logic.

           Looking at the van sign in the context of the signs on the other vans the logical conclusion is that is it an attempt at humour and that it concerns cyclists and the highway code. Hence a deduction.

           We all have anecdotes about poor driving on the roads.

           Why is that relevant to a joke? Are van drivers not allowed to make jokes because some van drivers drive poorly? Does that extend to cyclists? Pedestrians? Any other group you can think of?

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           The other poster told me why I had used a word and that I had deliberately used it in a non-literal way despite the fact that using its literal meaning made perfect sense and was entirely appropriate.

           — Rich_cb

           That was your third post not your second.

           Never mind, you clearly don’t understand why people have responded in the way they have.

         • hirsute wrote:

           That was your third post not your second.

           Never mind, you clearly don’t understand why people have responded in the way they have.

           — hirsute

           Many drivers are dangerous, some deliberately so. Anyone that rides regularly on our roads will have anecdotes galore regarding dangerous driving.

           That does not make every driver culpable and it shouldn’t preclude every driver from making light-hearted jokes even if they are at our expense.

           A lot of the comments on here look like Liam Neeson style collective responsibility.

           Is there another reason for getting annoyed at this joke?

         • Rich_cb wrote:

           … Secondly, the joke isn’t about cyclists getting killed etc it’s about the highway code and the frequent quoting of it by cyclists.

           It’s a gentle joke aimed at a particular type of cyclist, seemingly over represented on this forum.

           — Rich_cb

           And you know all this because…?

         • brooksby wrote:

           … Secondly, the joke isn’t about cyclists getting killed etc it’s about the highway code and the frequent quoting of it by cyclists.

           It’s a gentle joke aimed at a particular type of cyclist, seemingly over represented on this forum.

           — brooksby

           And you know all this because…?

           — Rich_cb

           i took it as a joke on the oft repeated stickers warning cyclists not pass these vehicles because of blind spots which are nothing more then excuses of ‘well we warned them’.  

         • brooksby wrote:

           And you know all this because…?

           — brooksby

           I deduced it was a joke about cyclists and the highway code by carefully analysing the use of the words ‘cyclists’ and ‘highway code’.

         • Zebulebu wrote:

           The highway code thing is a joke. Some of you are seriously lacking in a sense of humour.

           — Zebulebu

           Yeah. Getting knocked over by someone who has just passed you turning left across your path in broad daylight tends to blunt your sense of humour. As does drivers driving straight towards you on narrow country roads, then shouting at you and calling you a ‘cunt’ for being ‘in their way’. As does having a porsche overtake your club ride on a blind corner, approaching a bridge. As does having a milkshake thrown at you from a passing car. As does visiting your mate in hospital with a broken hip and shoulder blade after being knocked off by a white van driver, who then drove off. Funny that.

           — Rich_cb

           And that stream of anecdotes makes the joke on the van wrong why? It’s poking fun at some cyclists, just as their other stickers appear to be poking fun at other road users. Lighten up.

           — Zebulebu

            

           Because these aren’t ‘anecodtes’. They are reports of fact, based on my last three months of riding. And until the issue of cyclists being abused, seriously injured and killed is taken seriously, ‘having a laugh’ about it isn’t particularly fucking funny.— Rich_cb

           Totally agree my sense of humour for that kind of stuff has long been worn out by repeatedly being near missed by objects that can kill me and no one giving a damn to fix it

6. That helmet dude needs to up

   That helmet dude needs to up his bike skills. Debris stuck in the front wheels. Dog at my homework…

   

   Log In or Register to post comments

7. BtBS is still away.  That has

   BtBS is still away.  That has tended to lower the volume of the “debate” somewhat.

   Waitrose gives me a free Telegraph every so often, I do have to explain that I will never read it, so nasty, but there is something about a broadsheet for putting under the bicycles for storage and cleaning.  The tabloid size is just not as effective.  Even the Guardians attemp at the parisian size didn’t work, I very much missed the broadsheet Indy.

   I do understand that I am contributing to their numbers and therefore ad revenue, but I need a cleanish floor, better half and her tolerance of my habit and all that.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • ktache wrote:

     BtBS is still away.  That has tended to lower the volume of the “debate” somewhat.

     Waitrose gives me a free Telegraph every so often, I do have to explain that I will never read it, so nasty, but there is something about a broadsheet for putting under the bicycles for storage and cleaning.  The tabloid size is just not as effective.  Even the Guardians attemp at the parisian size didn’t work, I very much missed the broadsheet Indy.

     I do understand that I am contributing to their numbers and therefore ad revenue, but I need a cleanish floor, better half and her tolerance of my habit and all that.

     — ktache

     The free Telegraph is always handy if you run out of toilet paper.

     Log In or Register to post comments

8. Interesting, slightly OT

   Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:

   https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them

   The biggest misconception about football helmets is that they prevent concussions. They don’t. Helmets protect the skull. Concussions are caused when the brain moves inside the skull; helmets do little if anything to prevent the brain from rattling inside the skull. Helmets are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • brooksby wrote:

     Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:

     https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them

     The biggest misconception about football helmets is that they prevent concussions. They don’t. Helmets protect the skull. Concussions are caused when the brain moves inside the skull; helmets do little if anything to prevent the brain from rattling inside the skull. Helmets are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

     — brooksby

     That’s overly simplistic as far as protective qualities are concerned – as are many helmet designs – but is more to do with the use of the helmet, and increased strikes due to a perceived safety aspect, in the NFL.. that is different to their stituation in cycling, even considering risk compensation.

     Most helmets are designed to reduce the linear acceleration during a collision, the acceleration is correlated to cranial injuries hence reducing it *may* help in reducing the severity of such an injury including – possibly – concussions. It’s also been known for a long time that rotational accelerations can be heavily implicated in concussions and other brain injuries (seen years ago, for example, in the military with glancing impacts from bullets) – this is one of the reasons for interest in technologies such as MIPS. For some generally interesting details on TBIs this might be worth looking at for some (there’s plenty more information out there obviously…)

     https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3979340/

      

      

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • brooksby wrote:

     Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:

     https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them

     The biggest misconception about football helmets is that they prevent concussions. They don’t. Helmets protect the skull. Concussions are caused when the brain moves inside the skull; helmets do little if anything to prevent the brain from rattling inside the skull. Helmets are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

     — brooksby

     Yes I saw that today but thought that sums up perfectly what I’ve been trying to tell people about concussions in these cycle helmet debates for years now.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Awavey wrote:

       Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:

       https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them

       The biggest misconception about football helmets is that they prevent concussions. They don’t. Helmets protect the skull. Concussions are caused when the brain moves inside the skull; helmets do little if anything to prevent the brain from rattling inside the skull. Helmets are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

       — Awavey

       — brooksby Yes I saw that today but thought that sums up perfectly what I’ve been trying to tell people about concussions in these cycle helmet debates for years now.

       I do think this is misrepresented.  Helmets aren’t going to stop concussion – as I am currently suffering from post-concussion syndrome following a bike crash, I can vouch for that.  However, the helmet did mean the percussive injury (which was enough to crack my helmet in two) was taken by the helmet, preventing my skull from taking it and leaking brain all over the road.  

        

       Helmets may not stop concussion, but they have a role in reducing death and life changing injury.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • cjf82 wrote:

         Interesting, slightly OT article about US football in the Grauniad:

         https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/06/helmets-dont-eliminate-concussions-its-time-for-the-nfl-to-ditch-them

         The biggest misconception about football helmets is that they prevent concussions. They don’t. Helmets protect the skull. Concussions are caused when the brain moves inside the skull; helmets do little if anything to prevent the brain from rattling inside the skull. Helmets are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

         — cjf82

         — Awavey

         Yes I saw that today but thought that sums up perfectly what I’ve been trying to tell people about concussions in these cycle helmet debates for years now.

         — brooksby

         I do think this is misrepresented.  Helmets aren’t going to stop concussion – as I am currently suffering from post-concussion syndrome following a bike crash, I can vouch for that.  However, the helmet did mean the percussive injury (which was enough to crack my helmet in two) was taken by the helmet, preventing my skull from taking it and leaking brain all over the road.  

          

         Helmets may not stop concussion, but they have a role in reducing death and life changing injury.

          

         Your helmet failed badly if it split in two.  The other thing to consider is that in many cases your head may not have even the contacted the ground at all if it had not been massively bigger due to a helmet.  They are not always going to make an crash better. 

         Log In or Register to post comments

9. 5 people dead a day, 2

   5 people dead a day, 2 cyclists killed a week, LMFAO!

   Log In or Register to post comments