Forum Topic

Gordon Ramsay 's accident.

I note from the photo on the front page that Gordon's plea to ALWAYS wear a helmet on your Uncle Ned has fallen on deaf ears with some.The last time I took a tumble I hit my head hard on the road resulting in a nasty dent.That's a nasty dent in my helmet so luckily for me there have been no long term effects affects effectts effects.

Adrian Irving ● 100d120 Comments

Steve I have never been hit by a dog and I hope I never do however I have by a cat.I was riding down the Seven Sisters Road when a cat shot out like an Exocet brushing my front wheel. Off I tumbled on to the road.Fortunately I was wearing a top quality helmet, armoured jacket, gloves and sturdy boots so no harm done apart from a scratched bike.Even more fortunately the lorry driver right behind me was wide awake and slammed on the anchors in time not to hit me.The cat ran off unharmed.Round my way is cat city so please take extra care particularly if you are riding a high wheeler without a helmet. 🐈💥🚴🚑

Adrian Irving ● 42d

Yes cycling is very dangerous. Interestingly one one the things I learnt as a motorcyclist is that if you hit a small dog straight on you have a reasonable chance of staying on the bike but if you hit a cat you will almost certainly come off. Reason being that a cat’s skin is much looser so your front wheel is likely to slip when you hit it.

Steve Taylor ● 42d

"A man has died after falling off his bicycle when two cats fighting in the street ran in front of him and got caught in the wheels.Father-of-two Christian Reeves, from Rugby, sustained a serious head injury in the accident in the Warwickshire town while on his way to work on 30 July.Writing on GoFundMe, his son Dominic Reeves said he was airlifted to hospital and "fought a very hard battle" after an operation to ease pressure on his brain.However, after not responding as hoped to medication, he died on 5 August.Mr Reeves said his dad, 52, wasn't wearing a helmet during the early morning incident.He told the Birmingham Mail: "It's tough to say because I want my dad back, but his injuries could have been lessened or he could have been completely fine if he was wearing a helmet. So wear a bloody helmet."CCTV from a nearby garage reportedly showed two fighting cats had cut across his path. "Sky News

Adrian Irving ● 42d

He could have done with a chin guard.

Richard Greenhough ● 91d

The Aston Villa star Ezri Konsa , 26, said: “It was a recovery session, some players were out in front and as I was coming down the hill I saw Ant and he was lying there with his face bloodied, hands and chin and I just started laughing! At least he wore his ­helmet. That’s the main thing.”The Sun.

Adrian Irving ● 91d

touché.  My Bad. It must be the heat. Thanks for correcting me.

Steve Taylor ● 94d

He already is. 😆

Russell Pearson ● 94d

"The less cyclists the better!" Surely 'fewer' Steve, or are you worried about their weight?

Brian Coyle ● 94d

“ keep enjoying your illegal activities. “Oh dear, you still don’t get it do you?  Whatever,  it’s pointless trying to explain it to you. The snowflakes have brainwashed you. Try to get out and enjoy life a bit or you will become just like the sad, grumpy old man Skidmark is.

Steve Taylor ● 94d

More from Wilhoit - “There is no such thing as liberalism — or progressivism, etc.There is only conservatism. No other political philosophy actually exists; by the political analogue of Gresham’s Law, conservatism has driven every other idea out of circulation."I guess Starmer is a good example of that adage.

Richard Greenhough ● 94d

"Maybe if we pretend we don't read his posts he will stop making us look so silly and boring"

Paul Campbell ● 94d

Was Paul's post below mine insulting then?As I said earlier "I'm done" (bothering with him on this thread) so thankfully I didn't bother to read it.

Adrian Irving ● 94d

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”Perfect example of the Wilhoit adage

Paul Campbell ● 94d

I see you're not getting the irony of your posts. But it just shows up how blinkered you are.If you speed,  then you're putting yourself and others in danger, and then you're more likely to be a burden to the NHS.  But as you say,  morons will be morons, so keep enjoying your illegal activities. 

Nora Watkins ● 94d

Hi Nora.  Have never called anyone a moron for motorcycling at speed on an open road. I have called cyclists morons for jumping red lights, not yielding at roundabouts, speeding on pavements, weaving through traffic when there is a perfectly good cycle lane to use, riding two or three abreast and illegally holding up traffic, tailgating, not stopping at pedestrian crossings etc etc etc. I could go but it would be futile because nothing will stop the morons from continuing to be morons. As said, I don’t particularly care if those morons have a death wish but it’s irritating when said morons have c self inflicted ‘accidents’ and then cause traffic delays and put a strain on our NHS.

Steve Taylor ● 94d

I agree that people break the law every day,  what I'm pointing out Steve is the irony of your comment.  Calling other people morons,  when you're acting like one yourself,  and admitting to it on social media.  Not a particularly clever move if you're involved in an accident. 

Nora Watkins ● 95d

So your bike needs an asbo, to add to your list of traffic demeanors.

Mark Frost ● 95d

"A Labour government, Labour MPs, Labour Mayor and two Labour boroughs will be governing them very soon"Ah yes, the party of "Two Jags" Prescott. You really should have worn your helmet, Humpty.

Richard Greenhough ● 95d

Nora, it is precisely the realisation of their lack of agency and control that is making the bitter old men continue to bleat and whine about cyclists on this forum. And I also agree with your comment about them getting worse. A Labour government, Labour MPs, Labour Mayor and two Labour boroughs will be governing them very soon and the support for things they hate will be rock solid. There is a direct correlation between the volume of bleating from bitter old men who vote Conservative and the immediate prospects for more investment in cycle lanes and more reallocation of road space away from motor vehicles to people nevermind the preservation of the gains we have. They know it and that is why they are shouting louder and more frequently and ever more pointlessly. I love it!

Paul Campbell ● 95d

I don’t. If I had to guess I imagine the figures would be among the better ones in terms of say lower fatalities per miles travelled.The point I was trying to make was that passing a test doesn’t suddenly make you safe to travel at high speeds on a motorcycle (or competent). It’s not proof of competence (though there’s going to be some correlation with competence).Steve may well be a good motorcyclist and possibly be a good judge of the risks  of exceeding the speed limits in given road situations (and indeed even when it might not be safe to travel at the legal speed limit). But Steve isn’t every motorcyclist. I feel that the signs telling you how many motorcyclists have been killed on certain stretches of road in the last say 18 months is something that helps prove that merely passing a test doesn’t automatically show you are capable of handling a motorcycle at speed.

Andrew Jones ● 95d

Yes I too know motorcyclists who didn’t make it into old age. They were hit by cars or trucks. Having said that every motor cyclist, car driver, cyclist and pedestrian will have broken the law. If you think otherwise you are totally delusional. Every Lawyer, Judge, magistrate and police officer will have broken the law whilst driving so stop with this self righteous snowflake nonsense. It’s very silly.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

So when you break the law it's fine,  but when others do it they're morons?  As I said Steve,  ironic,  irresponsible and arrogant that you think you're above the law.  I personally know two motorbike riders who didn't make it into old age.  I'm sure they though they were in control too. 

Nora Watkins ● 95d

Ah yes. My Bad. But despite my exciting life I haven’t exited yet. Touch wood. Stay safe. Stay young at heart or you’ll end up like old Skidmark - all bitter and twisted and angry with life.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

A brilliant slip.Amazed that Captain Skidmark has not jumped on it already with another verbose rant.Really can't wait for his encounter with Julian.I have a vision of him being, in appearance, like Old Jim in the books of The Brentford Trilogy.

N V Brooks ● 95d

"It’s called living an exiting life."Note the Freudian slip !

Richard Greenhough ● 95d

Simon, I don’t read Campbean’s posts because past experience has shown that that he is a lonely old man who spouts utter gobshite.  I assume you are replying to another desperate rant of his. Best to ignore the old codger.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

“ Why is that Steve? ”As you said. Undoubtedly many reasons but one I know with 100% certainty is that motorists often just don’t see them. Especially big trucks.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

“Haven’t you admitted to speeding on this forum Steve? That's irresponsible.”Yes I have, Nora. But speeding in the right conditions isn’t irresponsible. It’s called living an exiting life.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

So, 95.5 percent of all journeys are by modes other than cycling. That makes cycling a minority activity. And it’s gone down from 6.1 percent in 2020. In fact, if you look at the published TfL data cycling has only increased by 0.8 percent since 2015, despite all the infrastructure investment, including the expansion of cycle hire schemes across London. Just fancy that!Doesn’t Idiot Campbell come across as just rather too desperate in his ranting? A deeper insecurity is definitely in there!https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2023/december/new-tfl-data-shows-sustained-increases-in-walking-and-cycling-in-the-capital

Simon Hayes ● 95d

“ I think there may be a gull who disagrees with that statement.”Actually the gull was flying irresponsibly, Richard. It flew into me!  That’s why it’s dead and I’m not. I was riding very responsibly at high speed on an open road.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

“What are your thoughts on those motorcyclists that don't have a silencer on their exhaust?“Depends on the make of motorcycle. I turned up for my test on my beautiful sounding Norton without baffles but the testing officer sent me away 😂 so I had to return on another day on a friends soft purring Honda!

Steve Taylor ● 95d

Talking of (verbose and insulting) irrelevance. Good morning Mr. Campbell.

N V Brooks ● 95d

Nora has hit the nail on the head. All this incessant bleating about cyclists is from bitter old men who have dedicated far too much time and energy to trying to suppress cycling by opposing all measures that support it only to see them implemented and successful.1.26m daily bike journeys in London in 2023, up 20% since 2019 with bigger rises by far wherever protected cycle lanes have been built. Dragging up a story from 2010 of a minor celebrity who was struck from behind by a petrol tanker on a major road in the US while filming a Discovery programme called “Race Across America” isn’t going to make people wear a helmet to jump on a Lime Bike to go to the shops or the train station no matter how much the bitter old men wish it were so. Really we should spare a thought for these frustrated men: it must galling to be out there every day reminded of your failure and irrelevance as more and more cyclists ride about happily enjoying the freedoms that urban drivers can only dream of and knowing that you are entirely powerless to stop it. Although really I am just going to keep enjoying the schadenfreude as the situation gets worse for them.

Paul Campbell ● 95d

Here is another bloke who is in the news at the moment."Cracknell won a gold medal at the Sydney Olympics in 2000 and another four years later in Athens.After he retired he embarked on a successful career as an endurance champion and television personality. In 2010, he suffered a traumatic brain injury while cycling and only survived because he was wearing a helmet." Guardian.Although he survived he did experience  aftereffects and personality changes which he battled through successfully.Good man.

Adrian Irving ● 95d

Do you have anyidea how that figure compares with any broadly comparable country?

Keith Iddon ● 95d

"motor cyclists riding high speed bikes have passed a driving test and are deemed competent to control the motor cycle"And yet 300-350 motor cyclists die every year on UK roads.Why is that Steve? Multiple reasons of undoubtedly. But at least one of those reasons has to be that even though they are deemed competent, the reality is they aren't competent to ride safely. And excessive speed is a factor in many accidents and fatalities.

Andrew Jones ● 95d

I used to do a lot of speeding,but only the good stuff.

Keith Iddon ● 95d

I refer, Adrian, to the ( and I'm going to use Steve's favourite noun) morons who have removed the silencer on purpose from a factory produced machine.

Mark Frost ● 95d

Haven't you admitted to speeding on this forum Steve? That's irresponsible.

Nora Watkins ● 95d

Mark, I can accept a noisy motorbike can be annoying but as Henry Cole (motorcycling guru) said;"A noisy bike is a safer bike" his point being drivers and pedestrians are much more likely to notice it.

Adrian Irving ● 95d

"I’m not riding irresponsibly when riding my motorcycle at speed."I think there may be a gull who disagrees with that statement.

Richard Greenhough ● 95d

Once again you trip over the argument you offer. I cycle most time and yet, like 80% of all cyclists, can drive a car. I had to pass the same test as you.What are your thoughts on those motorcyclists that don't have a silencer on their exhaust?

Mark Frost ● 95d

You have missed the point. I’m not riding irresponsibly when riding my motorcycle at speed. You cannot compare me to the irresponsible cyclists casually riding through red lights or speeding on pavements, weaving in traffic etc etc. Motor cycles are designed to travel at speed and motor cyclists riding high speed bikes have passed a driving test and are deemed competent to control the motor cycle.  Cyclists on the other hand have not been tested and can ride with impunity.

Steve Taylor ● 95d

My brother is a keen motorbiker,  so I understand the risks.  But you do seem to be missing the point,  you're accusing others of acting irresponsibly,  while doing so yourself.    Helmets on motorbikes are compulsory because you're likely to hit the floor at speed.  The government has chosen not to enforce the wearing of helmets on cycles for some reason. I'm sure they understand the risks better than any of us.  Again it's ironic that you boast about breaking the law,  while calling others morons....

Nora Watkins ● 95d

Riding  at high speed on a motorcycle does not equal riding irresponsibly on a bicycle through red lights or pedestrian crossings or on pavements or weaving between cars. When riding a motorcycle at high speed one is always conscious of other road users and courteous to them because if there is an altercation the motorcyclist is fully aware that he or she will come out worst. This is something that many cyclists simply fail to comprehend especially the morons who refuse to wear helmets.

Steve Taylor ● 96d

Oh what a lovely day but too hot for me so I have come inside to keep cool and update emails etc.Anyway I'm sure your not interested in that so to the point of my post.Not only do I always wear a helmet I often as not wear workmanlike gloves, a hangover from my motorcycling training. Something my instructor said has stuck in my mind ever since about helmets and gloves.Asked if open faced helmets and no gloves were OK to wear his reply was;"Absolutely if you don't mind your chin and hands being scraped along the tarmac at fifty miles an hour."Not ideal I think you will agree.

Adrian Irving ● 96d

What a fascinatng thread.

Keith Iddon ● 96d

Aren't you the person who admitted to driving at high speed on a motorbike Steve?  Slightly ironic that you're now worried about the impact on the NHS.The comments on the recent posts about cycling behaviour on this forum have hit a new low.   

Nora Watkins ● 96d

>Hot Weather.Or sweaty 🧦

Russell Pearson ● 96d

Again, pure unadulterated conjecture. What’s to be bitter about? If cyclists want  to injure or kill themselves, what’s to be bitter about?  Admittedly, I get somewhat irritated when I see moronic, irresponsible cyclists gadding about and I consider the impact they could have on our overstretched NHS when they injure themselves due to their foolish and selfish behaviour. Bitter? Nope!

Steve Taylor ● 96d

Hot Weather.

Janice Evans ● 96d

If not angry,  then certainly quite bitter based on your comments Steve.  You're not the only one,  but they do seem to have ramped up recently.

Nora Watkins ● 96d

Oh dear, oh dear. More snowflake conjecture. What’s to be angry about. I certainly don’t give a hoot if cyclists want to wear helmets or not and I have no interest in Ramsey. Likewise why would I be angry if cycling in London is dangerous and why would I be angry if some people’s posts put others off cycling? The less cyclists the better! I particularly have no interest in anything Vine has to say anymore. If anyone is constantly angry, it’s him.

Steve Taylor ● 97d

Lovely advice Nora though, Steve seems to prefer a very bitter milk on his cornflakes.

Mark Frost ● 97d

So many bitter and angry comments on this forum.  The sun has been shining today,  go out for a walk and get rid of the anger Steve. 

Nora Watkins ● 97d

“ Bring forth some statistics for cycle on cycle accidents”Why? You guys have all the accident stats at your fingertips, surely? If not why are you always banging on about cycling being dangerous and why advocate for more and more cycle lanes which won’t be used by many?

Steve Taylor ● 97d

Nice to see that you carers have lete you out again Captain Skidmark.

N V Brooks ● 97d

Uh oh Maddy is pre-loading.

Paul Campbell ● 97d

You do an exquisite job of that all by your silly little self !

Madeleine Hazard ● 97d

Cyclists wearing the equivalent of a dashcam, all for it.Too many morons on two and four wheels using the roads. Evidence is key to substantiate claims. There is a chap who posts on the Ealing forum who claims so many dangerous drivers deliberatele aim at him. However, despite sporting both a helmet and body cam he has never been able or willing to post a single clipof evidence. When 'called out' he claimed 'camera failure'.

N V Brooks ● 98d

Opening up a new, desperate and ultimately futile line of attack there Steve.Bring forth some statistics for cycle on cycle accidents

Mark Frost ● 98d

People, rightly,  should be put off cycling around London because it’s incredibly dangerous due to the extreme arrogance of cyclists. The cycling lobby are continually bleating on about how dangerous cycling is and highlighting all the accidents, injuries and deaths caused to cyclists. That’s why cyclists feel compelled to wear head cams and body cams isn’t it?  If not why do they wear cameras?  Surely it’s pretty inconvenient and uncomfortable?

Steve Taylor ● 98d

I haven’t read all the posts so may have missed this having been said already, and I won’t be reading replies, but wanted to remind everyone. Jeremy Vine is against cycle helmets I believe because he thinks it will put some people off of cycling . Priorities 👍

Maggie Dodge ● 99d

A cyclist is rarely going to go faster than 30mph (and most of the time they will be peaking 15-25 mph as an estimate) whereas a motorcyclist will when traffic conditions permit be travelling at speeds that are a significant proportion (and perhaps more) of the speed limit. There are still plenty of 40/50 or more roads, even in London. It would be too impractical to enforce helmets for motorcyclists just on roads where speed limits were higher than 20mph.

Andrew Jones ● 99d

Captain Skidmark does nothing to promote safe cycling with his increasingly deranged posts.

N V Brooks ● 99d

Two things that have kept me amused today about this thread:1.A potential organ donor ftom Grove Park insisting that he is correct despite clear data that he is not.2.Ongoing and increasing derangement when he is so obvviously wrong.

N V Brooks ● 99d

Usual deflection tactics. Idiot Campbell will be the first to whinge when one of his cycling chums cracks his head open after a pothole related accident.Single handed he does more to discourage cycling than any number of dangerous vehicles or lack of infrastructure.

Simon Hayes ● 99d

Two things that have kept me amused today about this thread:1. Chris realising he constantly rides a bike without a helmet and so do his children2. Incredulous old men googling head injuries for car occupants and releasing to their dismay that I am right and they have been living in some weird bubble where they thought cars were force fieldsLovely stuff.

Paul Campbell ● 99d

No, you are just a potential organ donor too dense to accept that there will be more injuries of all type to drivers of motorised vehicle because the minority transport method you incessantly and boringly champion only represents, at best 7% of all journeys. Get Tom to explain the basic maths to you

N V Brooks ● 99d

I'm just a driver who doesn't suffer from motonormativity to the extent that I am in denial about how common traumatic brain injuries are for car occupants. It is enjoyable to watch the incredulity of people resisting knowledge though.

Paul Campbell ● 99d

"Doesn't matter what you think."Nor what you think, Humpty, blinded as you are by your prejudice against motor transport. The truth is out there....

Richard Greenhough ● 99d

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/16/the-brain-is-very-vulnerable-dutch-cyclists-urged-to-wear-helmets-as-road-deaths-rise

Michael Good ● 99d

Doesn't matter what you think. The stats are out there and readily available on head injuries in cars. The only thing that is surreal is the wilful motonormativity of those who deny how common head injuries in cars are.The risk is not the same - a quick crash course in the most basic laws of physics will help. You almost got the point when you mentioned helmets being used for sports driving. ALmost ...

Paul Campbell ● 99d

This thread has descended beyond the absurd into the stupidly surreal.I always where a helmet when on my bike, I do not feel safe without it.  Does not matter whether I am cycling for an hour or a 5 min trip to the shops.  Gordon Ramsay is right, be safe on your bike and wear a helmet.The idea of wearing a helmet in a car is of course correct if you are on a race track, rallying or similar but for simple commuter journeys you are legally required to wear a seat belt and these days you would struggle to find a new car without any airbags - so I think the risk of head injuries whilst driving your car is pretty minimal.A more interesting question is that if a motorbike rider is legally required to wear a helmet whilst not legally allowed to drive at more than 20 mph in many parts of London why should it be optional for a cyclist who might be able to ride at the same speed?  The risk for both is the same

Justin Stephenson ● 99d

‘Cycling is freedom’. There you have it. When Campbell is allowed out from his institution he gets a simple pleasure from riding his bike. How nice.Helmet wearing isn’t a deterrent to cycling. That’s a lazy assumption put out by advocates such as the LCC. What’s more of a deterrent is the cost. Bike buying has dropped off a cliff apart from expensive, high end ones (who buys those I wonder?). The Santander scheme has seen a massive slump in usage since its annual fees increased, hence the desperate Sunday offer recently introduced. Quite a few bike retailers have gone into liquidation. The boom has gone bust.What Campbell and his chums should also bear in mind is that a vast number of people simply don’t enjoy cycling, including those kids they always throw into the mix.

Simon Hayes ● 100d

When I cycled I eschewed the idea of wearing a helmet save for riding on the busiest roads. That was until Samuel, my daughter's boyfriend at the time, hit some debris by the clock tower in Hanwell and rode into the path of a Ford Transit on which hit his head and then his head hit the ground. Were it not for his very badly damaged helmet he would, at the least, have sustained serious injuries. I never rode without wearing a helmet after Sam's accident.

N V Brooks ● 100d

Hi Mark, well done for wearing  high viz. Always a good idea.Not wearing a helmet for short trips sounds OK but most accidents happen close to home I believe.Discouraging some?  Maybe some people should be discouraged.Just a thought.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

Thanks for the advice which is appreciated. Every cyclist should think long and hard about this matter but it remains an issue of personal choice. I tend not to wear a helmet for shorter trips balancing the very low risk of a collision against convenience. However, every journey I wear high viz no matter how short.Children and inexperienced cyclists should wear them but I would be against any sort of legal requirement as the harm of discouraging cycling would outweigh safety benefits.

Mark Evans ● 100d

I'm afraid that that reply definitely indicates there is some scrambling in your large egg-head, Humpty. You should have worn a helmet !

Richard Greenhough ● 100d

At this stage of the thread it is just wilful motonormativity to ignore the high rate of deaths and serious injuries caused by head trauma for drivers and passengers in car accidents and focus on subjective anecodotes to dismisss the evidence that cycle helmets are not the magic solution for cycle safety. Mass and velocity do not care about your velophobia and insistence that cyclists are held to higher standards than drivers but they do bounce driver's heads off hard objects in their cars to break their skulls or smash the soft tissue of their brains against bone.Again Wilhoit is apt:“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”Cycling is freedom and total anathema to confused authoritarians. Just one of the great things about it.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

"So why do you refuse to take personal responsibility for your safety when driving your car by putting on a crash helmet?"Perhaps because in a car you are surrounded by a protective metal box and held in your seat by a safety belt ? One of my colleagues cycles to work every day, and one day someone in a parked car opened his door right in front of her and she hit it, went over the top and landed heavily. Had she not been wearing a helmet then a fractured skull would have been likely. Given the fragility of your large egg-head, Humpty, if you want to go round on your bike without a helmet, then the likelihood is that you will end up with scrambled egg for brains. In fact, judging by some of your posts, you may already have done so.

Richard Greenhough ● 100d

Oh dear me, the Grove Park potential organ donor has woken up in a bad mood. Then again when doesn't he?

N V Brooks ● 100d

Bit early to be so hysterical Campbell. Be careful out there. Wear your tin foil hat and don’t let the baddies get you.

Simon Hayes ● 100d

I couldn’t give a toss what you or Gordon say on the matter. All you have done is prove that neither of you has a clue and you are both incapable of acknowledging let alone registering that there are facts and evidence that challenge your uninformed prejudices. Try not to get angry when you see Chris not wearing a helmet on his Lime Bike or an older lady using Cycleway9 to go shopping and  just let them live their lives without being judged, othered and harrassed by stupid old men.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

You’re a pigeon Simon. You are unable to progress an argument. Your incontinent verbosity just gives cycle campaigners like me lots of useful material to share with Traffic Officers and politicians when we wish to prove that the opposition to safe cycle infrastructure should be ignored. Which is what I am now going to do myself as you are going round in ever-decreasing circles trapped in your illogical argument and repeating the same empty tropes and cliches as you’ve been doing for years

Paul Campbell ● 100d

I can see I'm banging my head against a brick walltrying  to make my point so I will make it simple for you.Gordon says he nearly lost his life but was saved by wearing a helmet so ALWAYS wear one.I think he's right and everything that can be done to encourage people to do so should be done including celebrities leading by example.If you want to keep arguing against this then find an empty room and shout at the walls. I'm done.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

Cycling is a niche activity. You know that but won’t admit it. Doubling a small number is still a small number.What you don’t understand is that cyclists don’t help themselves with their choices. Wearing a helmet reduces the risk of sustaining a serious head injury if you fall off, even if travelling at low speeds or stationery. Try banging your head on a kerb if you don’t believe me. The risks are different in a vehicle as you know, and diverting the subject doesn’t win you any arguments.There’s no blind prejudice on my part. That’s your projection. If people want to cycle, that’s fine, but they need to be as responsible for their behaviour as other road users are. You don’t seem to understand that.

Simon Hayes ● 100d

Deaths and life-changing head injuries are common for drivers. And there are far higher numbers of victims. There is no requirement for either motorists or cyclists to wear helmets. Well done. You’re catching on. Cycling is increasing in London and increasing much faster in areas where there are protected cycle lanes. Cycling has doubled in Chiswick High Road since the cycle lane was put in. Reports of cycling falling in areas where car dominance continues with no safe cycling infrastructure very much help to reinforce everything I have said.As I have said to you before keep posting because your blind prejudice always enables me to expose the vacuity of the arguments of the extremist motor lobby whose representatives are always a gift to cycle campaigners but none more so than you. So on second thoughts please do be my guest and embarrass yourself as much as you like 👍

Paul Campbell ● 100d

The only person embarrassing themselves is you. Constant streams of nonsense spewing forth. If a cyclist falls off and bashes their head then the injury will be worse without a helmet. It’s recommended to wear one.  There’s no requirement for motorists in any vehicle, save motorcycles, to wear protective headgear. You are just being stupid. Again.Interesting to note that cycling levels have stagnated, even in London. Your constant braying is probably due to your fear that cycling is nowhere near as popular as you like to think.https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2024/04/25/official-statistics-show-bicycling-stagnation-in-england/

Simon Hayes ● 100d

That is even more stupid than your usual contributions. I am consistent in advocating for freedom and personal choice in helmet wearing for drivers and cyclists. Neither need bigoted authoritarians or celebrity chefs instructing them on how to assess and manage their risk of head injury or the best way to prevent it.  When will the local extremist motor lobby grow bored with the futility of their attempts to abnormalise and suppress cycling? You’ve lost!  Cycleway 9 is constantly busy with a diverse population of cyclists enjoying the safety and choosing what they wear to move around locally. The cycle campaigners have won. The template is proven, understood and will be replicated many times over post GE. Grow up, accept it and stop embarrassing yourself routinely on social media.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

I look forward to seeing Idiot Campbell sitting in his car wearing a helmet. Because everything’s he says about others applies to him too. Only the truly stupid fail to realise their own stupidity.

Simon Hayes ● 100d

Thank god for small mercies and the brevity of your response.

N V Brooks ● 100d

Well it certainly reinforces the vacuity of the motor lobby which I couldn’t hope to have better representation.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

Seems apt

N V Brooks ● 100d

Personal responsibility eh? So why do you refuse to take personal responsibility for your safety when driving your car by putting on a crash helmet? The old Wilhoit adage applies perfectly to the hypocrisy of the motor lobby: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

Paul Campbell ● 100d

There was a very famous fatality in the Tour de France in 1995, that of Olympic gold medalist Fabio Casartelli. He died after crashing on the Col de Portet d’Aspet, striking his head on a concrete post when he fell while descending. His death prompted the mandatory wearing of helmets on mountain stages in all subsequent editions of the Tour.Despite what idiot Campbell says, if you come off a bike at speed and bang your head you will be in trouble. Ignore his deflection about cars and his other banalities, this is about personal responsibility. The drugs he takes probably make him feel invulnerable, but he’s not.

Simon Hayes ● 100d

No Michael. Cycle campaigners are insisting on separation and protection of cyclists from large vehicles on major roads and junctions. Apart from that it was a pretty good post. And I'd add to it that research shows that drivers are less considerate of cyclists when they are wearing helmets and Lycra than they are of people dressed in everyday clothes without helmets. And seeing as drivers are the primary cause of injuries and deaths of cyclists well I think we can live with Chiswick folk cycling their shopping bikes in LTNs and on cycle lanes to the shops or the swimming pool without wearing some polystyrene on their bonces.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

" It is interesting how 'some' cycling campaigners don't wear hrlmets, not sure what the reasoning is behind that."This is not new  Why should they ?The reasoning behind it, is that the main proponents of cycling helmets have always been helmet manufacturers; using dubious stastistics mainly concerning Australian children; Along witn celebrity endoprsements from hard-of-thinking "nouveau's"; who were clearly cycling too fast for their middle-age reflexes to cope withIf you check I doubt you'll find few if any fatalities inmajor professional cycling races the tours or the classics going back to the start resulting from head injuries alone.Of the four fatalities which have occured during the 121 year history of the Tour De France for instance none were the result of head injuries.Nowadays the professionsls do what they're told to do by the teams and the sposnsors as they've always done in the past. So they were their helmets as orderdWith the result that head injuries are still a problemin the sport only nowadays its called concussion. Which is recoverable This is the result of the brain moving around inside the skull which even an impact absorbing helmet seemingly can't prevent.Helmets always show damage becaue that's exactly what they're designed to do. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the much tougher human skull would sustain similar damage  Ramsay's bruise is interesting. I recieved a similar bruise on my left arm solely as a result of stretching out and grabbing hold of a lampost for balance while stationary at some  traffic lights; and tearing a muscle in te process While cycling campaigners it seems are still insisting on the right of cyclists to ride along on on the inside of large vehicles going around left hand bends and corners where they are most likely to be unseen by the driver.Seeming totally unaware of the first rule of safe cycling; never assume that the person in the other vehicle can, or has necessarily seen you.michael adams   

Michael Adams ● 100d

It's not unrelated. People who are concerned about cyclists mot wearing helmets while they drive around without wearing a crash helmet are ignorant of the real dangers of driving without a crash helmet, suffering from motonormativity whereby the high numbers of deaths and serious head injuries in cars are just normal and to be expected whereas the far smaller number of cycling related incidents are something that must be prioritised immediately, prejudiced against cyclists or thick. Or in your case more likely all four.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

Thank's for your suggestion regarding research Paul but that's for another day as this thread is about cycling not your attempt to divert to cars. However I promise I will try harder to grasp what ever you think I haven't, however unfathomable.Now you just take care of your Uncle Ned for me, there's a hard road ahead for some.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

As have I but you haven't been able to grasp it. Maybe you could research head injuries in cars to help move your thinking along a bit.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

What's good is I have had my fun but at the same time made a serious point.You know what they say in the States; if you wear a five dollar helmet you must have a five dollar brain.If you don't wear a helmet at all, well, I'm sure you can follow the logic.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

You’d think the advocates for switching the cycle lane to try A4 would be humbled by the demonstrable success of Cycleway 9 but I guess that people who think that it is fine to run an A road through a busy shopping street while objecting to a cycle lane do lack the faculties for such sophisticated thinking.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

Go and play with your 🧦

Russell Pearson ● 100d

You aren't the sharpest tool in the box, are you Russell?The clue is in "busy shopping street". You build transport to where people want to go.

Michael Robinson ● 100d

That's good. There is nothing as effective as cycling in flushing out the authoritarians and they will be pleased with your exemplary compliance.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

Of course I do Paul, even the mutt wears one, but, like me, not in the bath.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

So you do wear your helmet when driving and walking your dog. Well done Adrian.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

Let us applaud Messers. Campbell and Robinson for not wearing helmets and thereby being high profile potential organ donors. Thanks from the organ donor register and potential recipients of your stupidity.

N V Brooks ● 100d

That's a very astute horticultural diversion, thank you.

Mark Frost ● 100d

Paul, you got me there.I have to be honest I don't always wear a helmet.I draw the line to wearing it in the bath.Well, you have to take some risks in life.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

I’m sure the cycling loonies Campbell and Robinson are expendable, so traumatic head injuries to them aren’t really a concern. However Headway, the brain injury charity, beg to differ with the outraged cyclists of Chiswick.https://www.headway.org.uk/news-and-campaigns/campaigns/cycle-safety/And you can hurt yourself quite badly without anyone else being involved, not even those evil cars. One local councillor sustained a serious injury by falling off his bike while trying to get on it. It wasn’t even moving at the time.

Simon Hayes ● 100d

IF you can keep your head with a helmet when all about you  Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,  But make allowance for their doubting too;Then you will soon be able to cross HAMMERSMITH BRIDGE and LTNs with your head in the air and not you know where.A nod to RK.

Adrian Irving ● 100d

If protected cycle lanes are so important, why did a couple of local buttons, campaign so hard to ensure C9 runs through the middle of a busy shopping street rather than the A4?

Russell Pearson ● 100d

Yes the guy who had his legs crushed by the driver of a skip lorry on Chelsea Embankment today will likely feel that he would have benefitted more from a protected cycle lane at the spot where a tipper truck driver killed pregnant 36 year old Charlotte Landi in 2017 and where Kensington and Chelsea Council has steadfastly refused to install safety measures than by being instructed by a celebrity chef to wear a helmet.

Paul Campbell ● 100d

Doesthe Mulberry Bush have a cycle lane around it?

Keith Iddon ● 100d

Do you wear a helmet on your Lime Bike trips?Do you wear a helmet in your car? Do you wear a helmet when crossing the road?

Paul Campbell ● 100d

'Some' cycling campaigners don't really have a brain to protect, I imagine.

Claire Moran ● 100d

It’s interesting how some people claim to be concerned about cyclist safety but fixate on advocating the least effective measure, personal protective equipment, while they oppose the most effective measures, protected cycle lanes and measures that remove or reduce the biggest source of risk (motor vehicles).

Michael Robinson ● 100d

It is interesting how 'some' cycling campaigners don't wear hrlmets, not sure what the reasoning is behind that.

Chris Blackwell ● 100d