Wiggle rides into Twitter storm over 'make helmets compulsory' blog

Nobody is stopping anyone from choosing to wear a helmet.

However, if you choose compulsion, then you are forcing everyone else to wear one, regardless of whether they work or not, and that boils my p:ss

You are forcing people to wear something where the evidence and science are massively mixed and show no significant reduction in deaths. In fact some studies claim compulsion increased injuries and deaths.

Unless you've fully understood all the research and science how can you make a choice for compulsion, which affects everybody. Whereas if you choose to wear a helmet that choice affects only yourself.

To do this as a large influential retailer and then place a
"buy a helmet button" next to a scientifically dubious and misleading article is beyond a joke

Can Wiggins campaign to stop drivers knocking us over in cars, then we wouldn't need to wear helmets all the time.

Wiggle could then write a blog about that.

I am anti helmet compulsion. I wear one on the odd occasion i go mountain biking, and extremely occasionally on the road. Helmets are designed for falling off at slowish speeds, not for being whacked by a 3.5T lump of metal at 40 miles an hour.

The problem with things like the Wiggle guest blog, is not the argument, but the extremely poor biased statistics and emotional blackmail that most of the helmet zealots push.

I'm all in favour of a reasoned debate, and virtually all reason is that compulsion is wrong and that it should be personal and free choice.

helmets are about mitigating the effects of a crash, usually a collision for most which as I have said above helmets are not designed for.

It is better to push for safer infrastructure and education to reduce the chances in the first place.

Also helmets would save lives of many pedestrians and car passengers, but there are no calls for them to be compulsory there.

You don't need data when you've seen a serious head injury of another cyclist, but hey who really cares what Wiggle's opinion is on the matter. Over reaction of people who live their lives on social media...

As George Michael once said

Freedom of speech
Freedom of choice
Freedom to buy from Ribble instead

So are we now having a debate about whether there should be a debate? It's a bit like the UCI congress in here...

I don't see why anyone thinks it is unfair/unreasonable for people to publicly disagree with views published by an online retailer and to state that they won't shop there now. Wiggle is a commercial entity - their choice to publish the material (whether they agreed with it or not) will have been commercially motivated. They wanted to drive more traffic to their site and, hopefully, increase sales. It's a perfectly reasonable reaction, if the material contains false claims or present unsupported opinions as facts, to (a) call out the issues in the material and (b) criticise Wiggle for publishing them and avoid buying from them because of it.

Personally, I don't give a monkey's what they think. I'm not looking for their opinion on the helmet debate (I have my own reasoned opinion on that), just for cheap cycle goods. But if others feel Wiggle is doing harm, why not publicly state their choice not to shop there? Wiggle started the debate in the public domain, for commercial reasons. The consequences of that are easily foreseeable and hardly unreasonable...

The trouble is the more noise there is the more likely it is that the law makers hear it.

Everyone loves to say how our grandfathers fought for our freedom, and yet every day that 'freedom' gets further eroded.

Anyone who says helmets must be compulsory should also argue that walking is also dangerous and requires a helmet too.

And surely cycling in lycra is the most flagrant disregard for one's safety?

I just simply wouldn't ride without a helmet - I understand others don't want to and don't feel they should have to, but considering on a motorbike you have a crash helmet, and in a car you have a huge metal shell around you, I figure a helmet is the least I can do on a bike. I just bought the Specialized Align in Flourescent Yellow. I seem to recall someone previously calling cyclists who wear high vis helmets as lacking "self respect" and "being stupid". High quality arguement that, not wanting to be seen makes you more intelligent?!

No it might not save my life in a major accident, but it could just as easily do so.

I am ambivalent to the issue over Wiggle, although I don't see how they thought they'd come out of it well as it could have been seen as a cynical ploy to sell more helmets.

By the way though, you can buy the same helmet as mine through Edinburgh Bicycle Co-operative (where I got mine) here http://www.edinburghbicycle.com/products/specialized-align-helmet

So much has been said about freedom of choice - what about freedom of speech?

oh FFS ! Wiggle dont make laws, they just express an opinion, which I do happen to agree with.

yes its personal choice, but having had one cracked helmet and seen one or two others saved head injury by them, i can honestly say I dont want to be confronting a post-off head injury suffered by one of my cycle buddies - or worse.

I wear a helmet all the time, and for a simple reason.
I had a big accident many years ago, I wasn't wearing a helmet. I was unconscious for about 5 hours, and smashed 3 vertebrae. That really hurt!!
I was told simply, if I don't wear a helmet in future the out come may not be so good! So it is either cycle slower, or protect the parts that matter.
Can't comment on the blog or twitter post as they have disappeared but if there was a referendum on this I would vote for compulsory helmet wearing.

i remember the good old days when people were entitled to an opinion. you may not have agreed with it (as is your right) and thought it was a load of cobblers,but they were entitled to view it.

Surely that is all part of a debate. i find it quite saddening on the compulsory helmet issue that if anyone calls for them to be made compulsory there is a vociferous/nasty reaction to what they are saying. When Brad, or Cav or Laura Trott voiced their opinion the reaction was frightening, as is the case everytime something like this occurs

Surely it is not much of a debate if everytime someone sticks their neck above the parapet they are machine gunned.

i remember the good old days when people were entitled to an opinion. you may not have agreed with it (as is your right) and thought it was a load of cobblers,but they were entitled to view it.

Surely that is all part of a debate. i find it quite saddening on the compulsory helmet issue that if anyone calls for them to be made compulsory there is a vociferous/nasty reaction to what they are saying. When Brad, or Cav or Laura Trott voiced their opinion the reaction was frightening, as is the case everytime something like this occurs

Surely it is not much of a debate if everytime someone sticks their neck above the parapet they are machine gunned.

> Story features the H word in title
> Comments BTL go ballistic

surely there should have been the option of clicking another button ' Buy everything else besides helmets from Wiggle'

To my mind there are three issues here:
1. Wiggle publishing third party opinion
2. Wiggle supporting compulsion (which they now deny, but "WE SAY YES!" seems kind of emphatic)
3. An article which is based on spurious data, poor analysis and dubious "facts"

With the first, I have no problem.

With the second, I personally have sufficient problem to take my custom elsewhere - but that's entirely my subjective view and I'd hardly expect everyone to agree.

With the third, however, I think we should *all* have an objective problem with the debate being polluted by poor data and flawed arguments, no matter which side of the fence they are shouted from.

Im not sure if the owners of my local bike shop have an opinion about helmet use because they have never expressed one to me and i am grateful to them for that and, as such, will continue to go to them for bikes and bike related products. If i want a lecture on what i wear on my head whilst cycling i can go to my mums or just come on here and listen to you lot* whine on about it.
As a consumer in a liberal capitalist democracy i can choose where to do my shopping and an online retailer (who just happens to sell an extensive range of the product they wish to make mandatory) who upsets me, however trivial, will be demoted down my list of preferred retailers.

*i, of course, include myself in that whining

They've made themselves look a bit daft, but there's some massive over-reacting going on here. Boycotts? Really?

Surprising naivety as far as social media goes though (depending on how you interpret the back-pedalling). It doesn't matter about guest blogs or whatever- if it's on Wiggle's site, twitter account or whatever they can't be surprised when people think the content reflects their position.

Oh, to be bothered…..

Noise. Wiggle/Wiggins and other big cycling brands should wade into this *debate*, but it was just an opinion. It hasn't lead to immediate Gulag-like enforcement of all the non-helmet wearers.

And to boycott a store for a comment like this (which could help avoid serious injury!) is hilarious. People are acting like Wiggle recommended the drowning of kittens.

If they are going to come out and use all their social media and advertising powers to call for compulsory helmets, then they are themselves just a bunch of helmets.

The way they ploughed into this inflammatory topic with such gleeful naivete suggests one of two things;

They either do not have a clue about cyclists or they simply do not give a fuck about cyclists.

Either one of those reasons is offensive to me as a customer, so my money will be going elsewhere. Wiggle can stick it up their arse.

Genius move from Wiggle.

I'd suggest it's very very stupid for bicycle retailers to advocate helmet laws. Helmet laws reduce cycling. Shrinking the market is a *dumb* business move. That a higher percentage of cyclists would have to buy helmets won't make up for all the money they'd lose from there being far fewer cyclists.

Bicycle retailers: Supporting compulsory helmet laws will likely *HURT* your business - both in terms of goodwill *now* and fewer cyclists should your campaign succeed. Don't be so stupid!

This just in: people on the internet severely overreact to someone's opinion. Conspiracy theories abound and reason is ignored; details to follow, but all will be forgotten by then.