yay me. I hooked onerustguard wrote:There is a tonne of evidence that says there is no benefit to consuming fluoride, Drinking water containing fluoride put this highly toxic chemical directly into your system, not onto your teeth.The Womble wrote:At the end of the day Jules, its like arguing with anit fluorodation or anti immunisation... ists. youll never win an arguement
Give one child in 'what ever the number is' a shot they react to, and the usual parents will be convinced the governments trying to kill their children
It is also a fact that immunisation has caused fatalities and many cases of severe autism and is suspected of causing many other problems. Of cause when you speak to older people about the days when things like polio was around you soon see the other side of the coin.
Anyone who thinks immunisation is without risks is ignorant and anyone who criticizes parents for weighing up these risks could be called other things too. Having been aware of all this I would be lying if I did not say I had a great deal of trepidation when taking my son to be immunised.
Its funny that people can connect the greater good of immunisation v's the small percentage who are left as vegetables or mentally handicaped.
Yet are totally unable to see that getting the masses on bikes is far better for the greater good of the population health
and also the environment.
Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
- The Womble
- Posts: 3395
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:46 pm
- Location: Brisbane QLD
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby The Womble » Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:33 pm
-
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 10:12 am
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby alex » Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:34 pm
i would still wear a helmet
- simonn
- Posts: 3763
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:46 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby simonn » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:26 pm
It is only as funny as the people who do not understand it and prefer to listen to porn stars and movie stars instead of, I dunno, the medical profession.rustguard wrote:... many cases of severe autism ... Its funny that people can connect the greater good of immunisation v's the small percentage who are left as vegetables or mentally handicaped.
The (only) guy, Andrew Wakefield, who published the (only) autism link has had his study withdrawn because it was wrong and was struck off the United Kingdom medical register.
Herd immunity. A certain percentage of the population need to be immunised or immunisation does not work at all for everybody. That is why it is selfish not to be immunised or have your kids immunised without very good reasons. The opinions of porn and movie stars are not good reasons. The chance of something going wrong whilst being immunised is orders of magnitude less than if there was no herd immunity.
- rustguard
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:31 am
- Location: Perth, WA
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby rustguard » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:45 pm
pasted from your medical profession linkSeveral British cases where parents claimed that their children had died as a result of Urabe MMR had received compensation under the “vaccine damage payment†scheme
- jules21
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 11:14 pm
- Location: deep in the pain cave
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby jules21 » Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:47 pm
- simonn
- Posts: 3763
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:46 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby simonn » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:00 pm
If you look at the link, I was actually quoting:rustguard wrote:pasted from your medical profession linkSeveral British cases where parents claimed that their children had died as a result of Urabe MMR had received compensation under the “vaccine damage payment†scheme
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccin ... retraction
Your disingenuous and dishonest quote is from the litigation section. Litigation != medical profession.Full retraction
In response to the GMC investigation and findings, the editors of The Lancet announced on 2 February 2010 that they "fully retract this paper from the published record."[74]
In any case my response to you is, so what? Are you trying to claim that the study was actually not retracted and its author not stopped from practising medicine?
This litigation actually occurred before the whole mess was cleared up in any case. Follow the references if you do not believe me.
Also, using your argument... I'll see your handful of kids dying from immunisation and raise you millions of small pox, polio... ...you name it deaths.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7001
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby biker jk » Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:58 pm
Clearly an argument on par with most from the "flat earthers" opposing compulsory helmet wearing laws.rustguard wrote:pasted from your medical profession linkSeveral British cases where parents claimed that their children had died as a result of Urabe MMR had received compensation under the “vaccine damage payment†scheme
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby il padrone » Tue Aug 17, 2010 3:12 pm
Fixedbiker jk wrote:Clearly an argument on par with most from the "fear-mongerers" claiming <"a helmet stole my baby".... oops no> , "my helmet saved my life".rustguard wrote:pasted from your medical profession linkSeveral British cases where parents claimed that their children had died as a result of Urabe MMR had received compensation under the “vaccine damage payment†scheme
Two can play at the 'insult' game. Not very gratifying though, eh?
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
- Mean Machine
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:52 pm
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby Mean Machine » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:03 pm
Absolutely. It's a shame not everyone is mature enough to think for themselves and needs a mummy every time they come back from the toilet or go for a ride/drive. But hey, here's my pay cheque, be my guest, subsidies away if making me do the right thing (in your eyes of course) makes you sleep better at night.steveagle wrote:Helmets are mandatory for motorbikes and scooters, would you argue that they should be optional too?
-
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:41 am
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby Percrime » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:47 pm
Bwahhhhahhhhhhhahhhhhhhhaaasteveagle wrote: Ive seen a friend fall off his bike riding downhill and break his jaw. The helmet was cracked on the side where his head impacted. Luckily no brain damage. Imagine the damage with no helmet. Dont tell me the helmet DID NOT protect him?
Damm funny face your mate has, unless it was a full face helmet. He landed on his jaw and broke it. How do you think it got broken. Then he fell over and broke the helmet. Harley riders have long argued that the face is a good crumple zone. His jaw may have saved his life.
- justD
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:50 am
- Location: Auckland, New Zealand
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby justD » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:52 pm
Repeating what has been said already: I like riding with a helmet for the sake of safety most of the time, but while the helmet laws are in place I think our chances of getting widespread bicycle hiring options are pretty slim and I would love to make use of those myself and think they would do a lot to spread good will towards cyclists as more people give cycling a try.
- The Womble
- Posts: 3395
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:46 pm
- Location: Brisbane QLD
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby The Womble » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:56 pm
- The Womble
- Posts: 3395
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:46 pm
- Location: Brisbane QLD
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby The Womble » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:57 pm
- hannos
- Posts: 4109
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby hannos » Tue Aug 17, 2010 7:59 pm
steve wrote:My vote this year will be against mandatory bicycle helmet laws so I did a little searching but found little so far.
http://www.vexnews.com/news/10087/cover ... -comrades/
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... id=3570047
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N%C3%A1ndor_T%C3%A1nczos
http://www.cycle-helmets.com/helmet_statistics.html#
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/764 ... t-protest/
Mod Says: This entire bit about your political orientation / opinions has been removed as we are not supporting political discussions on the forum. That being said, if you can tie it into your main point of your opinions on Helmet Laws - then this is a real cycling discussion.
I know my vote is worthless alone but if there is a good option to vote against the mandatory helmet laws i will take it ?
I am sure plenty of others on the forum here will be interested as well.
Cheers Steve.
What this tells me is you're unstable.
You'd much rather cast your vote against something as trivial as mandatory helmets as opposed to health infrastructure, public transport, economy, carbon emissions etc.
Steve, you are one very shallow person.
- The Womble
- Posts: 3395
- Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 6:46 pm
- Location: Brisbane QLD
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby The Womble » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:03 pm
AND fired up
NNNNNoooooooooooooooooooo weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey!
-
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:41 am
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby Percrime » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:04 pm
Lots less people would die in cars if they wore helmets.The Womble wrote:Lots ore people would die from travelling in cars if they didnt wear seatbelts too
- hannos
- Posts: 4109
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby hannos » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:05 pm
The Womble wrote:Hannos, you seemed to have wandered into a serious thread
AND fired up
NNNNNoooooooooooooooooooo weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey!
ooops! my bad. I'll just go over there --->
or is it over here <--- ?
-
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:41 am
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby Percrime » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:08 pm
Tells me he thinks individual freedom is worth more than health.. PT and the entire planet. Very deep Steve. As to hannos that shallow mercenary person easily bribed by political handouts..hannos wrote:
What this tells me is you're unstable.
You'd much rather cast your vote against something as trivial as mandatory helmets as opposed to health infrastructure, public transport, economy, carbon emissions etc.
Steve, you are one very shallow person.
- hannos
- Posts: 4109
- Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:18 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby hannos » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:20 pm
Percrime wrote:Tells me he thinks individual freedom is worth more than health.. PT and the entire planet. Very deep Steve. As to hannos that shallow mercenary person easily bribed by political handouts..hannos wrote:
What this tells me is you're unstable.
You'd much rather cast your vote against something as trivial as mandatory helmets as opposed to health infrastructure, public transport, economy, carbon emissions etc.
Steve, you are one very shallow person.
pray tell, Percrime, who AM I voting for since I've already easily been bribed? Because I sure as hell haven't decided yet so you must be from the future...
...or a d*ckhead.
Have a nice night.
-
- Posts: 1047
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 9:41 am
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby Percrime » Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:42 pm
Why you charming gentleman you are going to vote for whoever loses of course. And then lie about it.hannos wrote:Percrime wrote:Tells me he thinks individual freedom is worth more than health.. PT and the entire planet. Very deep Steve. As to hannos that shallow mercenary person easily bribed by political handouts..hannos wrote:
What this tells me is you're unstable.
You'd much rather cast your vote against something as trivial as mandatory helmets as opposed to health infrastructure, public transport, economy, carbon emissions etc.
Steve, you are one very shallow person.
pray tell, Percrime, who AM I voting for since I've already easily been bribed? Because I sure as hell haven't decided yet so you must be from the future...
...or a d*ckhead.
Have a nice night.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7001
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby biker jk » Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:06 pm
It wasn't an insult. Just highlighting another of your outlandish claims. When they are exposed you resort to "it's just my opinion" that fewer people are cycling because of mandatory helmet laws. Where's the evidence? Bicycle sales have been rising for some time now. You then shift the argument to "oh, but more people would be cycling if there wasn't a mandatory helmet law". How may more? Prove it.il padrone wrote:
Two can play at the 'insult' game. Not very gratifying though, eh?
- steveagle
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 3:41 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby steveagle » Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:57 pm
I dont see how this is a laughing matter... Are you saying that the helmet caused the jaw breakage? Im guessing the impact of his head on the ground caused the jaw to dislocate.Percrime wrote:Bwahhhhahhhhhhhahhhhhhhhaaa
Damm funny face your mate has, unless it was a full face helmet. He landed on his jaw and broke it. How do you think it got broken. Then he fell over and broke the helmet. Harley riders have long argued that the face is a good crumple zone. His jaw may have saved his life.
Imagine the damage to his head without a helmet hitting the ground at relatively high speed. There would certainly more bleeding and bruising to the brain/skull. This i am 100% sure. How is this not obvious to people.
No, a helmet will not necessarily save a life, but it will reduce the damage caused in some circumstances (and any reduction is good). IMO anyone who disagrees is wrong.
- il padrone
- Posts: 22931
- Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
- Location: Heading for home.
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby il padrone » Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:26 pm
Not really so sure what these 'outlandish claims' were. However if you want some data on the reduction in bicycle use with helmet compulsion, look herebiker jk wrote:Just highlighting another of your outlandish claims. When they are exposed you resort to "it's just my opinion" that fewer people are cycling because of mandatory helmet laws. Where's the evidence? Bicycle sales have been rising for some time now. You then shift the argument to "oh, but more people would be cycling if there wasn't a mandatory helmet law". How may more? Prove it.
Just one piece of data graphed from that site, but please read more of it, and tell us where it is incorrect.
Cheers
Pete
"An unjustified and unethical imposition on a healthy activity."
-
- Posts: 463
- Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 12:52 am
- Location: Kalamunda, WA
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby zues » Wed Aug 18, 2010 2:00 am
In my household I ride after work and on the weekends mainly on low traffic -rural roads. Rarely ride to work because I havent got a PSP route and wife doesnt want me to . Most people who ride to my workplace ride a PSP.
My daughter rides for fitness and pleasure as well. Only rides locally or along the river PSP without a bike helmet - She reckons its not cool would mess the hair. Wouldnt ride to work as riding facilities are not safe or adequate on route to work. Reckons helmet laws wouldnt stop her riding around anyway.
She has spent time in Europe and reckons that bicycle riding is seen as a legitimate form of transport while in Australia its percieved only as a leisure activity.
- damhooligan
- Posts: 3409
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 5:16 pm
- Location: melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Election time voting against mandatory helmet laws.
Postby damhooligan » Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:40 am
but it is a reason...The Womble wrote:And again, there are several reasons that people choose not to ride a bicycle. Helmets are not THE reason.
it does keep pople from riding...
SCHIJNVEILIGHEID !!
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+11:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.