Safety--a moral responsibility?

[rspecker]

Rapha is currently running a set of advertisements (Rules of the Road) in which cyclists are shown descending technical, high-elevation mountain roads in wool caps, no helmets. And there are a series of other no helmet riding photos as well. The vibe is apparently supposed to be retro-glamour.

The tag line says: "You have to look good when you are riding, you have to impress your adversary with your elegance. To look good is already to go fast."

Sort-of like Reynolds Tobacco associating images of smoking with glamour.

I'm curious if others think there is a moral responsibility of those in the bike industry to promote helmet use. Personally, I think there is. Thankfully I've never had the issue, but I know riders who will say that their lives (or at least their quality of life) was saved by wearing a helmet.

I have thought about buying Rapha in the past--but I'm skipping it now.

[Blue Jays]

Interesting advertising campaign. I'm not entirely certain to whom they're appealing with that imagery.
I've been on rides where accomplished riders opted to ride without helmets...which ain't my cup o' tea...yet I suppose it is their choice.

[goonster]

Yes, safety is everyone's responsibility, but equating safety with helmet use, and riding sans casque with inexcusable recklessness is a fool's game, sez me.

Of course, most bike ads glorify racing, and racing is not a safe way to ride a bike, with or without the lid.

[rustychisel]

Good points.

D'you suppose Rapha care, since they've already sucked the money out of your wallet with their hoakum?

[Louis]

Rivendell and GP are guilty of the same thing - though not quite as blatantly.

Thread drift:

(I feel entitled to criticize them all I want because shortly after I renewed my subscription to the RR (for three years) they killed the paper edition. I was certainly not a member for the discount on their stuff - much of the items I've bought there I've never used, or used once or twice and realized that it was just hyped-up junk. However, e-R does claim to love their soap. That stuff stank like you won't believe.)

Louis

[maximus]

My thought is companies really have no obligation, outside of marketing their products.

I wish I looked as sexy as my bike - and helmets generally look pretty goofy.

In the end, its up to the cyclist. I for one am a fan of keeping my head in one piece. Only zombies like the sight of fresh brains on the pavement...

Interesting debate though.

[William]

The tag line says: "You have to look good when you are riding, you have to impress your adversary with your elegance. To look good is already to go fast."

Sort-of like Reynolds Tobacco associating images of smoking with glamour.



Companies will use any tag line they can to get sheeple to herd through the door.

http://sheep.youssouf.com/old/wallace_gromit/shaun_anim.gif

What image can they evoke in you to get you to stop chewing the cud for a moment and get you to saunter (or run) through their door?

http://media.bigoo.ws/content/gif/animals/animals_170.gif


Personally, I give the Rapha adds a four sheep rating.
http://www.kardkreative.co.uk/MASTER%20KK%20Web%20Page%20Images/Woolie%20Sheep.jpg



William

PS: I don't look to companies to create role models for me or my children. I'll gladly take on that responsibility myself. :) If someone chooses to not wear a helemt, that's their business. That being said, I believe it's safer to wear one...but that's for you to decide if you want to play the odds.

[johnnymossville]

Helmets are safe and goofy looking. Rapha thinks people look better without a helmet on and they're right. They are into fashion and not the cyclist-nanny business. Ever wonder what people would be sporting if the NHTSA dictated what we wear and how we ride?

Lemme tell ya, it wouldn't be pretty.

[BumbleBeeDave]

My thought is companies really have no obligation, outside of marketing their products.

And that marketing is intended to maximize profits, right?

The seeming total deterioration of any recognition by corporations of "the common good" is more and more depressing. Nothing counts except making more money. The scenario is familiar . . . company (in this case, Rapha) uses advertising that seeks to make something inherently dangerous (screaming down the mountain road on a bike) look "cool" to attract viewers to the activity they sell products related to. . . . Impressionable but inexperienced new consumers fall for it and go out and pursue the activity as depicted in the ad (or movie) . . . New consumer effs up because of their inexperience and gets injured/paralyzed/killed/causes same to someone else . . . Advertiser get sued and defends itself by claiming that "it's only an ad" or "no reasonable person would believe we are condoning (name activity here)" . . .

The only question that remains for me is where the dividing line is between the common good and being a nanny to the lowest common denominator of potential customer. IMHO, companies have been excusing their behavior for years in this area, because by now it should be abundantly obvious to "any reasonable person" who thinks up these ads that there ARE plenty of stupid people out there who are going to fall for the ad and some of them are gonna get hurt. The common good as I see it would be taking the initiative to admit this and portraying your products being used in a responsible manner.

Like obscenity, I can't give you a precise definition, but I know it when I see it, and if the ads are described accurately here, then I'd avoid anything by Rapha. The ads make it obvious that the company values profits above people's safety. I'm sure that isn't going to cause them to go broke, but it's about the only thing I can do as an individual. Yeah, I know if you fly off the road on top of a mountain at 50 mph, then a helmet probably ain't gonna save you. And yeah, helmets may look dorky, but so does riding around in a motorized scooter and talking to people by blowing through a tube for the rest of your life.

BBD

[chris175]

we are giving them lip service on this very forum, which is good advertising. safety, in this case helmets, is a personal choice. for whatever reason, i always wear one on my road bikes, but never on my track bike, and i still can't figure it out?

[William]

we are giving them lip service on this very forum, which is good advertising. safety, in this case helmets, is a personal choice. for whatever reason, i always wear one on my road bikes, but never on my track bike, and i still can't figure it out?


Time to pull a "George" and do the exact opposite....it's safer. :bike:


Now, as far as dancing...wearing the helmet is a must. Just too dang dangerous.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e106/scoobysnacksyume/Art/ElaineBeniseDancingSeinfeld.gif




William

[android]

No different than car companies showing SUVs performing all sorts of off road feats that get normal people killed all the time.

We usually have several people swept away in low water crossings every year down here in TX. There are constant public service announcements that say not to drive through the them when flooded, but the people would rather believe the ads and think their SUVs are unsinkable.

[false_Aest]

Hrm car companies would never show someone driving w/out a seat belt... they also have the warning "Closed course. Professional driver. Don't try this at home."

I can't think of a recent motorcycle ad that shows a guy riding w/out a helmet and other safety gear.

Same goes for ATVs.
----

I think if Rapha is gonna go for old-skool, vintage, retro, blahblahblah look they should use protective gear of the same vintage . . . . . . . hell, they should use vintage rider/models too.

[RPS]

The ads make it obvious that the company values profits above people's safety.I’m not sure I agree that they are intentionally and purposely sacrificing and/or trading safety for profits. Using the auto industry again as an example, they know about 3,000 people get killed every month and many more are injured. If driving leads to deaths – which it does -- are they not irresponsible for selling cars?

Furthermore, the auto industry promotes sporty and high-performance models that are more likely to lead to death and injury. How do we explain 400 HP and tires rated for up to 155 MPH? That seems highly irresponsible if viewed strictly from a safety standpoint.

In a way I see the point being made but feel that ultimately it’s up to the consumer to figure out what is right – provided they are not misled through deceptive advertising. Besides, what society views as irresponsible behavior seems to be a moving target IMO.

[RPS]

There are constant public service announcements that say not to drive through the them when flooded, but the people would rather believe the ads and think their SUVs are unsinkable.The biggest problem is that they float like most cars. ;)

[Der_Kruscher]

Yeah - I noticed that in the last issue of Bicycling there was a multi page ad by Rapha and not one person in the photos was wearing a helmet. This is probably the ad you speak of. It sort of reinforced the idea for me that I hate what Rapha stands for...they're putting fashion above safety just like all of the annoying hipsters cruising around San Francisco helmetless and without lights on their sh_tty cobbled together fixies. There's a snobby vibe that just doesn't appeal to me.

[vjp]

Here in British Columbia we are required by Law to wear a helmet while riding a bicycle, unless you wear a turban/religious head dress. If Rapha are shooting their ads' where it is legal to ride without helmets then what is the problem? They are selling clothes not bicycles, and the clothes they sell are made for adults not children. Be responsible for your OWN safety, Rapha are arbiters of THEIR sense of style not YOUR well being.

[cpg]

I don't have a problem with the Rapha ads. I take a longer view on this. Currently it's fashionable to wear helmets. There's no denying that if you whack your head with a helmet on you probably will fare better than if you hadn't been wearing one. But with that said helmets are fashion too. For those of you who disagree with that I would ask do you wear the cheapest helmet? Why not? Certainly the lowest line Giro is just as safe as the top 'o the line.

I wear a helmet most of the time. I buy the latest and greatest Giro helmet every other year. Why? 'Cause I'm shallow not because I think it's truly better than a mid line Giro.

I don't see that Rapha has any responsibility to us consumers to tell us what to wear. Their job is to sell their products. I don't give all businesses that sort of free pass but we are talking about the bike biz here. It's tiny and nobody is getting rich while exploiting tax payers. Feel free to buy Rapha or not. But basing that decision on an ad that foregoes helmets seems silly to me. Helmets are fashion too.

Curt

[Louis]

Helmets are fashion too.

I disagree. Maybe the styling of the helmet is in part driven by fashion, but the fundamental purpose of the helmet is 100% safety.

[Der_Kruscher]

I disagree - I think that it's your obligation as a consumer to not buy from a company that portrays their products in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable or sells a lifestyle that you disagree with. If you think that helmets are important don't buy Rapha. If you ride without a helmet or don't really care, go nuts but remember that your dollars are a vote either way. And silly or not, there are plenty of younger kids and teens who see these ads and are influenced. It might be a small number overall but pretty much guaranteed that if you have kids, they're reading your magazines.

[Feel free to buy Rapha or not. But basing that decision on an ad that foregoes helmets seems silly to me. Helmets are fashion too.

Curt[/QUOTE]

[velotel]

I think some of you really need to get a little perspective in your lives. And definitely never go to Italy to ride; you'll be in a constant fit over all the cyclists having a grand time riding hard and fast with bare noggins. Used to be much the same here in France but the french have lately jumped into the helmet wearing ethic with a good majority sporting them. But not all. On the other hand I sure am glad this subject came up because I wouldn't have looked at Rapha's site and thus would have missed all those in my opinion excellent photographs. All of which made me want to drive up to Switzerland and ride the same road. Without a helmet too but not because of the photographs but because I don't wear one, never have, doubt if I ever will. Maybe someday people will be able to finally say 'I told you so', maybe not. Amazing how paranoid modern societies become. I'm 63 years old, been riding a bike for more than 50 years, have never crashed and banged my head, and I totally love feeling the air flowing over my head, through my hair. And I really, really love fast, twisty descents off high passes, flowing through the turns, following gravity, adrenalin coursing, laughing with the sheer joy of the speed. Yea, flying off a mountain with a sweet bike. Perfect. Which I thought the ad did a fine job of capturing. Made me want to buy some Rapha clothing, only I won't because it's way too expensive. But nice stuff, or it looks like it is.

[Louis]

Made me want to buy some Rapha clothing, only I won't because it's way too expensive.

Do you know why Rapha's gear is so expensive?

Health insurance premiums because the NHS refused to pay for all those brain surgeries following the last photo shoot... :p

[fiamme red]

If you do wear a helmet, please be sure to remove it and hang it on the handlebars on long climbs. It's so Euro-pro.

http://www.rapha.cc/continental/images/six_gap_028.jpg

[girlie]

Safety a moral responsibility.
I go more the NH way.

girlie

[sloji]

I rode the other day with a friend, I was helmetless, we approached a busy intersection and the light turned yellow and I stopped while he sprinted through...helmet and all.

Behavior will trump the helmet anyday.

I ride with a large group and always wear a helmet on these rides but I missed last Saturday's ride preferring a solo ride. A young racer thought she would descend at 40 mph down a hill when she ran into a dog and both were mangled, helmet and all.

Behavior is the ultimate detail. I don't descend down these blind hills at 40mph and end up lagging far behind...and that's ok by me.

My best friend is in his early sixties as well and has never owned a car and used bikes for transportation his whole life, helmetless.

Fear is a prescription that is honed into the fabric of our society and to think outside that box is to be considered "foolish" and labeled "irresponsible."

[Louis]

Behavior is the ultimate detail.

Behavior involves both decisions made on the bike (you and your buddy at the light, guys next to you falling and taking you out etc.) and decisions off the bike (replacing worn out brake pads or whether or not to wear the helmet). It's not just one thing - it's a whole series of things.

[Viper]

Dear Rapha,

In any language, we'll understand this day. And you should too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8Y6j1U-ozo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaHsY6nuab0&feature=related

Some ads are simply stupid. Some offend women, religion, race while others simply offend common sense, like Rapha. Here's an example of an ad which offends a). women b). blonde women:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l38blGqVeHc

Lead by example and offer examples through leadership. It's what adults do. Children make up their minds, adults make decisions. Seek the highest common denominator, don't accept the lowest or the most simple. Morality, the difference between wrong and right, is being whisked away cause adults all to often prefer to not make decisions and accept the lowest common denominator. "I am not a role model" they say. See Wall Street, financial market, housing market, auto market for examples etc.

Atticus Finch. To Kill a Mockingbird. Should be required reading for all adults, to be read every year.

[Ginger]

That tag line is hilarious. For as many times as I've read on forums about people posing by wearing gear or riding bikes only to the coffee shop that aren't meant to only be ridden to the coffee shop, and how rapha gear is poser gear...it is funny.

"To look good is already to go fast."

And well...none of the rapha guys will ever hold a candle to some of the great racers of the past when it comes to looking good....

That said...

... it's clear from the OP that Rapha isn't trying to sell anything to you. You're not the demographic they're aiming at.

I find often that seems to be what people find so offensive. That their choices aren't reflected by the marketing of a corporation.

Of course, if they drink beer but are against drinking and driving, they still buy beer from some company who adverts parties at bars with beer...all those people in the advert didn't take a bus to get there and yet STILL the consumer buys the product.


Ginger

[deechee]

I view the Rapha adverts and prints (http://www.rapha.cc/index.php?page=580) as images that make me happy and convey the feeling of being free on the bike. Its art.

When I flip through Bicycling, CyleSport etc. I am constantly bombarded by the same images, large telephoto lens high shutter speed pictures in bright, vivid colors. Then I see the Rapha ads, usually in subdued colors, or even b&w and it stands out to me. It makes me appreciate the simplicity and beauty of cycling.

Take for instance the Serotta sale ad on the top right. I see a cyclists' butt, grey sky and a weird vertical line near the "A". That image to me makes me feel grey. The green looks like moss. For those of you who appreciate art, you know its the details that count. That's all this is. The details. The "air flowing through the hair" feeling you can't convey with a rider wearing a helmet with a low contrast image where you can't see his hair flowing.

[johnnymossville]

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/xnodesign/howdidwesurvive.jpg

[Viper]

I view the Rapha adverts and prints (http://www.rapha.cc/index.php?page=580) as images that make me happy and convey the feeling of being free on the bike. Its art.

When I flip through Bicycling, CyleSport etc. I am constantly bombarded by the same images, large telephoto lens high shutter speed pictures in bright, vivid colors. Then I see the Rapha ads, usually in subdued colors, or even b&w and it stands out to me. It makes me appreciate the simplicity and beauty of cycling.

Take for instance the Serotta sale ad on the top right. I see a cyclists' butt, grey sky and a weird vertical line near the "A". That image to me makes me feel grey. The green looks like moss. For those of you who appreciate art, you know its the details that count. That's all this is. The details. The "air flowing through the hair" feeling you can't convey with a rider wearing a helmet with a low contrast image where you can't see his hair flowing.

Then everything is art and everyone an artist. The world's a stage, right?

Art has limits, even art. Art is a word that carries less and less meaning as it's so overused and leaned on by too many.

Rapha's ads might have an artistic quality, but they're not art imho.

[johnnymossville]

Maybe Rapha could make some tweed knee pads and elbow pads for the safe people.

[Viper]

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/xnodesign/howdidwesurvive.jpg

Through humor you are spot on...we learned, that riding with helmets, using technology, increasing safety, is a good thing. I have Lance's 1994 World Championship win on dvd. There is a nasty skull fracture with blood squirting everywhere in the race. If we can limit those, that's a good thing. If Eddy rode today, he'd wear a helmet. And he does. And the generation gap is displayed through the technological gap; Axel Merckx wore a helmet. And if I ever rode with Eddy, heck I'd at least shave my legs. :)

Perhaps Fabio Carsetelli's death echoed through the peleton, much like Dale Earnhardt's:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/298653/nascar_dale_earnhardt_crash/

[Karin Kirk]

I'm with Ginger (as usual!), the tag lines are ridiculous and to me repulsive. I'd much rather be fast than look fast, and so to me it seems Rapha is making a rather pathetic ply. Sort of reminds me of the ads for Axe body spray.

Then again, I'm obviously way outside their target audience.

re: the photos. I am smitten with the Swiss Alps and have ridden on some of the roads featured. However those photos do nothing for me. The overly-conscious look of the guys detracts from the rest of the nice scenery. The whole thing is way too full of itself, with or without helmets.

Too bad, because I like the clothing. Just not the marketing.

[fiamme red]

Forget about helmetless riders -- we've overlooked another more important aspect of safety that Rapha is indifferent to. Why is almost all their clothing, including winter jackets (http://www.rapha.cc/index.php?page=534), only available in black? What happens if you're out in December doing a Rapha-style "epic" ride and you get home after sunset? What's more important, fashion or visibility?

http://www.rapha.cc/images/products/NewSoftshellJacket_9.jpg

[Auk]

Think for yourself, ride what and how you want. As adults, I think it is the least we could do.

[justinf]

I personally feel that other cyclists have a moral responsibility to keep their morality the hell out of my life. I'll ask if I care what you think. I don't break laws when I ride sans helmet (rarely, but that's beside the point).

Unfortunately, this seemingly fundamental live-and-let-live mentality consistently fails in internet forums. One good reason why I rarely post here these days.

[BumbleBeeDave]

IThe whole thing is way too full of itself, with or without helmets.

Karin nails it . . . :banana:

BBD

[fiamme red]

I personally feel that other cyclists have a moral responsibility to keep their morality the hell out of my life. I'll ask if I care what you think. I don't break laws when I ride sans helmet (rarely, but that's beside the point).The OP was talking about the "moral responsibility of those in the bike industry to promote helmet use," not your moral responsibility to wear one.

[dirtdigger88]

I personally feel that other cyclists have a moral responsibility to keep their morality the hell out of my life. I'll ask if I care what you think. I don't break laws when I ride sans helmet (rarely, but that's beside the point).

Unfortunately, this seemingly fundamental live-and-let-live mentality consistently fails in internet forums. One good reason why I rarely post here these days.

well said- it is not YOUR responsibility to worry about MY helmet-

I can out ride (skills not speed) MOST riders out there- if and when their bike skills exceed mine . . . well they can still kiss my ass when it comes to helmets

jason

[William]

well said- it is not YOUR responsibility to worry about MY helmet-

I can out ride (skills not speed) MOST riders out there- if and when their bike skills exceed mine . . . well they can still kiss my ass when it comes to helmets

jason


You ride a Sears mower. :p



William :D

[fiamme red]

You ride a Sears mower. :p



William :DHis stem is too short. :p

http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/10/24/Bike-Mower-2.jpg

[William]

His stem is too short. :p

http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/10/24/Bike-Mower-2.jpg


Looks like Dirt's been pumping.........or is that pounding dirt? :confused:



William :p

[dsteady]

I have some Rapha clothing and love it. It's incredibly comfortable and their wool-blend jerseys are excellent. I admit, that I first bought them 100% for the styling. Have you seen their "France" Country Jersey? It's as classy as they come. To me they've nailed a riding aesthetic that says you don't have to pose in a bunch of pro-level team kit to enjoy the freedom of riding.

Yes, their preening models and fatuous ad copy are a bit ridiculous but so are most cycling ads when you read between the lines. 90% of us would be faster riders if we first lost that extra 5-10 lbs before buying a lighter bike, or carbon crank or super-light brakes etc.

I think people have overlooked a major point: Rapha sells all that non-helmeted headwear you see in the photos. It's hard to sell headwear without at first finding a head to model it on, and that is what they are doing.

I wear a helmet when I ride and think others should too, but the suggestion that it is one's moral duty not to purchase Rapha because their models don't wear helmets is ridiculous.

daniel

[deechee]

Then everything is art and everyone an artist. The world's a stage, right?
Art has limits, even art. Art is a word that carries less and less meaning as it's so overused and leaned on by too many.


I'm not sure how my comment turned to "everything is art". I'm pretty sure the rapha pics and ads are planned photo shoots with plenty of post-editing. Someone took the time to compose the scene and display it. What I wanted to convey is that for *ME* the images invoke the feelings of freedom on the bike. With a helmet in the picture, it wouldn't be quite the same, like the photoshopped pictures in the earlier posts.

art: 1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

art: is the process or product of deliberately and creatively arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions. In its narrow sense, the word art most often refers specifically to the visual arts, including media such as painting, sculpture, and printmaking. However, "the arts" may also encompass a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music and literature. Aesthetics is the branch of philosophy which studies art.

As for art having limits? I think the only limit is the person who won't understand the composer's intention.

[Louis]

Bottom line is that I'm not going to be wearing any of Rapha's kit whether their models wear helmets or not. Maybe I'm just not one of the cool kids, or don't want to try to look like one. It's just not my scene.

Louis

PS On some of my shorter rides I wear a cotton T-shirt :banana:

[sloji]

"Lead by example and offer examples through leadership. It's what adults do. Children make up their minds, adults make decisions. Seek the highest common denominator, don't accept the lowest or the most simple. Morality, the difference between wrong and right, is being whisked away cause adults all to often prefer to not make decisions and accept the lowest common denominator. "I am not a role model" they say. See Wall Street, financial market, housing market, auto market for examples etc."

Are you a vegan, a Christian, do you make millions or give away all your money to the poor? Do you believe in pre-marital sex? Is it ok to shoot a terrorist? Is it your moral responsibility to end an unjust war? What exactly are the attributes that define the highest common denominator?

Be specific Viper because children speak in generalities while adults are forced to be specific.

[girlie]

"Lead by example and offer examples through leadership. It's what adults do. Children make up their minds, adults make decisions. Seek the highest common denominator, don't accept the lowest or the most simple. Morality, the difference between wrong and right, is being whisked away cause adults all to often prefer to not make decisions and accept the lowest common denominator. "I am not a role model" they say. See Wall Street, financial market, housing market, auto market for examples etc."

Are you a vegan, a Christian, do you make millions or give away all your money to the poor? Do you believe in pre-marital sex? Is it ok to shoot a terrorist? Is it your moral responsibility to end an unjust war? What exactly are the attributes that define the highest common denominator?

Be specific Viper because children speak in generalities while adults are forced to be specific.

You have no idea what you just got yourself into........
May the force be with you my friend - I got your back;)
girlie

[mike p]

I could care less if people ride with or without a helmet, it's up to them. If you want to get mad at rapha for something get mad at 600.00 jackets!!

Mike

[sloji]

You have no idea what you just got yourself into ;D
May the force be with you my friend - I got your back.
girlie

Hellen Keller said "Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."

Thanks girlie...bring it on, or should I say is Viper really a good name for a moral leader?

[Viper]

1). Are you a vegan - no I am part caveman part Brad Pitt. Diet is all caveman.

2). A Christian - none of your business, but I do believe in aliens. The real question is...is God Irish?

3). Do you make millions or give away all your money to the poor? - My giving and gifting is again, not your business, but let me give you some free reading about what giving means...Mark 12 41-44 and Samuel 16-7. Amazing what two mites can get ya.

4). Do you believe in pre-marital sex? - Again, like all of your 1D or 2D questions (they lack three dimensions). That said, if you wear a helmet, you can have sex.

5). Is it ok to shoot a terrorist? - Only if it's right between the eyes. Don't waste more bullets than is necessary.

6). Is it your moral responsibility to end an unjust war? - Define war. It's sanskrit meaning 'to obtain more cows'. In the eyes of many, all wars are unjust. Certainly on the losing side and especially on the side that starts the war and loses it. Think about that. A Democrat started Vietnam and a Republican ended it. Why are only Republican wars labeled unjust? Guess dropping American bombs from 15K feet over Kosovo/Serbia in the 90's was totally just.

7). What exactly are the attributes that define the highest common denominator? - Dunno. But Atticus Finch is my corner/cut man. Were your questions cerebral, lofty and deep? If you think so, then you wouldn't know a low or high common denominator.

8). Be specific Viper because children speak in generalities while adults are forced to be specific. - Adults say "checkmate" and you just lost your king.

What's weak is that you take a post and attempt to make it personal. I spoke to Rapha, marketing, advertising. You? You're speaking to me and you dialed the wrong number.


:beer:

[Lance Armstrong]

Safety a moral responsibility.
I go more the NH way.

girlie


Come on down to AUSTIN>>>>

[Lance Armstrong]

Is that a 1st or last name??

What's weak is that you take a post and attempt to make it personal. I spoke to Rapha, marketing, advertising. You? You're speaking to me and dialed the wrong number.


:beer:

[Viper]

Is that a 1st or last name??

Please, I can only answer so many idiotic questions at a time. I have two nuts dude, one name.

[Lance Armstrong]

Does that mean you really have half a brain? I get more girls with only one :)


Please, I can only answer so many idiotic questions at a time. I have two nuts dude, one name.

[e-RICHIE]

Does that mean you really have half a brain? I get more girls with only one :)
that's nuts atmo.

[Viper]

Does that mean you really have half a brain? I get more herpes with only one :)

^ Fixed. :beer:

And:

http://www.jokesnjokes.net/funny.jokes.amusing.humor.laughs/Kids/knock007.htm

Knock yerself out.

[BumbleBeeDave]

I could care less if people ride with or without a helmet, it's up to them. If you want to get mad at rapha for something get mad at 600.00 jackets!!

Mike

. . . that's $750. $150 gloves? Come ON . . . I'm with Mike. Way overpriced whether they wear helmets or not!

BBD

[girlie]

Hellen Keller said "Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."

Thanks girlie...bring it on, or should I say is Viper really a good name for a moral leader?

I was kidding about being in the middle of this one.
I'll sit on the side lines - ride free or die.

girlie

[cpg]

I could care less if people ride with or without a helmet, it's up to them. If you want to get mad at rapha for something get mad at 600.00 jackets!!

Mike


Mike hits it out of the park!

Curt

[OldDog]

On some of my shorter rides I wear a cotton T-shirt :banana:


And I thought I was the only outcast of todays modern, wannabe pro, neon lycra dress up like a billboard crowd.

A number of years back I was tooling along on my high zoot bike (I'm a bike freak, not a fitness freak) in a cotton tank top when a serious looking dudly do-right comes up and begins preaching the benefits of todays modern fabrics. Ya had to be there, he was funny.

Hey Loius, I'd love to buy ya a beer and keilbasa sandwich.

[jimp1234]

I'm actually very flattered that Rapha has attempted to copy my "look" circa 1976. Between you and me, I was just a rank poseur in Vittore Gianni (still the best cycling duds ever) attempting to copy either Felice Gimondi, or Tom Ritchie (before the moustache). As far as helmets and safety are concerned, Dr. Ian Walker of Great Britian has conclusively shown its safer wearing a blonde wig. Some additional research (see below) strongly indicate that orange clown wigs and viking war helmets can work as well...


:beer:

http://www.outthereliving.com/Ian_Walker_move_over_pls.pdf

[sloji]

I was kidding about being in the middle of this one.
I'll sit on the side lines - ride free or die.

girlie

I still love ya...and you did warn me!

[sloji]

Have you ever noticed how high the resale is on their items? Look on ebay and they bring close to retail. I have a friend that made me laugh, she would buy $3,000 purses and use them for a year, float them on a credit card and never make a payment and then sell them for the same or more...

fashion can be kind.

[William]

. . . that's $750. $150 gloves? Come ON . . . I'm with Mike. Way overpriced whether they wear helmets or not!

BBD


http://climateprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/twit3.gif

I say Biff, what's all this hallabaluh about Rapha clothing being expensive? I say I look smashing wearing it in my my Astin martin Vanquish.



http://www.jumpstation.ca/recroom/comedy/python/images/twit2.gif

I'm really not sure Nigel, I think the peasants are quite upset about the price. Just as well, I will certainly not choose clothing of an affordable desire,
because I will not jump with common spirits and rank me with the barbarous multitudes of hairy legged bi-cyclists.




William ;)

[Lance Armstrong]

This VIPER needs to get on the bike more and then it will not matter about the 1/2 brain.

Guess his parents thought one name was as much as he could focus one.


^ Fixed. :beer:

And:

http://www.jokesnjokes.net/funny.jokes.amusing.humor.laughs/Kids/knock007.htm

Knock yerself out.

[Viper]

Have you ever noticed how high the resale is on their items? Look on ebay and they bring close to retail. I have a friend that made me laugh, she would buy $3,000 purses and use them for a year, float them on a credit card and never make a payment and then sell them for the same or more...

fashion can be kind.

They do it over there, but they don't do it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnoYNMLwuEU

Bowie tested positive and still won.

[Ozz]

"...Adults say "checkmate" and you just lost your king...."
:beer:
Viper: Good morning, gentlemen, the temperature is 110 degrees.

Wolfman: Holy ****, it's Viper!

Goose: Viper's up here, great... oh ****...

;)

[Ahneida Ride]

It's simple ...

I ride to have fun ... go fast or go slow .. how ever I please .

I ride in cotton shorts and a T-Shirt ... Use clip pedals sometimes too.

I don't really care what image I present .. :banana:




Components can't just look good either, They must be functional ....

[mikki]

My thought is companies really have no obligation, outside of marketing their products.

I wish I looked as sexy as my bike - and helmets generally look pretty goofy.

In the end, its up to the cyclist. I for one am a fan of keeping my head in one piece. Only zombies like the sight of fresh brains on the pavement...

Interesting debate though.


Totally agree. My helmet absolutely saved my pea brains in my accident. Helmet broke; head didn't.

[rspecker]

well said- it is not YOUR responsibility to worry about MY helmet-

I can out ride (skills not speed) MOST riders out there- if and when their bike skills exceed mine . . . well they can still kiss my ass when it comes to helmets

jason

Flamme red had it exactly right. I intentionally did NOT ask whether there is a moral responsibility to wear a helmet. Except for the fact I feel bad when I hear about serious bike injuries, I suppose I'm indifferent to whether any particular rider wears a helmet. I've never formed an opinion on that issue and would need to think about that more. Although on group rides that I influence I would require them.

Anyway, I was making a comment about the power of advertising and (with all due respect) I doubt you and justin are as pretty as those Rapha pictures, so I doubt my kids would be influenced by your bare noggin to skip the helmet!

[justinf]

I responded the way I did because many of my friends are in the cycling industry at the source, a couple of those guys are buddies with the Rapha guys, and I simply don't see this as an "us" and some vague sense of "them" issue. But, perhaps this is just the wrong venue, once again.

As far as how we look/ride/act on the bike, I guess it depends on who your kids are as to our possible influence, right?

[CNY rider]

.

Anyway, I was making a comment about the power of advertising and (with all due respect) I doubt you and justin are as pretty as those Rapha pictures, so I doubt my kids would be influenced by your bare noggin to skip the helmet!


Having ridden with Jason and Justin this summer I'd say they are two righteously stylin' dudes.......
Rapha's got nothing on 'em.

[Louis]

It is a parent's responsibility to provide for their children. It is easier to provide if the parent is able-bodied. It's up to the parent to decide what types of behavior are responsible and what types are not. I have no children, but sometimes I do wonder what my cats would do if I never came back from a ride. I assume that they would miss me. Or at least miss the food in their tray.

You make your own decisions and you and your kin live with the outcomes.

Louis

[Ginger]

Having ridden with Jason and Justin this summer I'd say they are two righteously stylin' dudes.......
Rapha's got nothing on 'em.

Yep.

Worry about it. You look at the Rapha adverts, your kids don't. Jason and Justin (particularly Justin) are the people your kids want to be like.

[e-RICHIE]

Yep.

Worry about it. You look at the Rapha adverts, your kids don't. Jason and Justin (particularly Justin) are the people your kids want to be like.


aw heck spinelli is the new poster boy for Craft apparel.
feel your inner helmet atmo.

[cadence231]

feel your helmet atmo.

That's what she said.

[dsteady]

. . . that's $750. $150 gloves? Come ON . . . I'm with Mike. Way overpriced whether they wear helmets or not!

BBD

Moral outrage over a $600 jacket? Have you guys taken a look at what forum you're on?

I wouldn't pay it either, but methinks thou dost protest too much.

dn'l

[Louis]

Moral outrage over a $600 jacket? Have you guys taken a look at what forum you're on?

People say this all the time, but I disagree. IMO:

$600 jacket = outrageous, unless the jacket is breathable, waterproof and only 5 mils thick but warm down to 0*

$4000 frame and fork = not outrageous if it's a great ride, outrageous if it's a POS

PS Not one of the framesets I own was that expensive. I would gladly pay $200 for gloves that match the jacket description I give above.

[dsteady]

People say this all the time, but I disagree. IMO:

$600 jacket = outrageous, unless the jacket is breathable, waterproof and only 5 mils thick but warm down to 0*

$4000 frame and fork = not outrageous if it's a great ride, outrageous if it's a POS

PS Not one of the framesets I own was that expensive. I would gladly pay $200 for gloves that match the jacket description I give above.

North Face made a softshell jacket like that, I think they wanted $500 for it. It had electric conducting fabric and two camera batteries that cold dial up or down the temperature.

My point is that it is relative. You may think a 4K frame and fork can be worth it (and I'd agree with you) others would think we're both insane. I wouldn't spend $600 for a cycling jacket either, but I see no reason to judge those who do. Besides, we shouldn't be outraged at Rapha, we should be outraged at the devaluation of our dollar.

Getting back on track: what really concerns me re: helmets are all the young kids riding fixies, no brakes, and no helmets. In the right hands a fixie moving through mid-town traffic is thing of beauty, but most of these kids aren't that skilled.

dn'l

[rspecker]

Yep.

Worry about it. You look at the Rapha adverts, your kids don't. Jason and Justin (particularly Justin) are the people your kids want to be like.
You are probably exactly right about this. Fast real riders count for more. Anyway, I actually agree with justin et. al. that they can and should do whatever they want and don't and shouldn't really care what I think about the whole biz anyway. But the ads still bug me precisely because they are such good pictures. That was my point. Cheers!

[hybridbellbaske]

I haven't seen the ads in question, although I generally get a warm and fuzzy feeling from the Rapha brochures I have seen in the past.

I must say though that, unless they are being ironic (and given the tone of the Rapha stuff generally, I don't think they are), that tag line is ridiculous.

I have two Rapha jerseys, both bought at significant discounts, and I love them. However, they are both XXL's, and my tummy fills them out pretty darn well, so the joke's on them if they think I either go fast or look good whlist wearing them!

[Louis]

However, they are both XXL's, and my tummy fills them out pretty darn well, so the joke's on them if they think I either go fast or look good whlist wearing them!

Good one ;)

Perhaps we should suggest to them that they would have more cred around here if they discontinued everything larger than Size M...

[Viper]

Firstly:

http://www.helmets.org/mandator.htm

There's several pov's and issues raised in this thread a). is Rapha being responsible to the cycling community by generating advertisements with cyclists on the road without helmets b). does Rapha lack morality in creating these advertisements c). is Rapha jumping sharks with their slogans and verbiage of looking fast versus actually being fast d). do advertisments play a role, influencing or not e). should we care at all?

a). I believe Rapha is being irresponsible. BMW creates commericals where in fine print it reads "Do not attempt this, professional driver used." It took quite a while, but cigarette advertisements now offer many warnings atmo.

b). I believe Rapha is not demonstrating the right, proper and safe way to ride a bike. The cycling community posts threads on forums and acknowledges when a rider goes down, don't we? We reach out to fallen cyclists, it matters, their injuries or death and even if we don't know them personally, we can relate and empathize.

c). Ginger felt the OP, "It was simply it's clear from the OP that Rapha isn't trying to sell anything to you. You're not the demographic they're aiming at. I find often that seems to be what people find so offensive. That their choices aren't reflected by the marketing of a corporation" and that's not the OP's thrust. The very title of the thread is regarding morality, responsibilty on Rapaha's behalf as the OP discusses, "Rapha is currently running a set of advertisements (Rules of the Road) in which cyclists are shown descending technical, high-elevation mountain roads in wool caps, no helmets." It's about the no-helmets thingy. I don't think it's bitterness on anyone's behalf to point out Rapha's controversial, if not pathetic and perhaps somewhat dangerously misleading advertising. We all get that Rapha sells some serious Kool Aid, but this used-car-salesman approach on their behalf is weak. At best their verbaige is insincere, disingenuous. At worst, it glorifies an illegal (depending on location) form of cycling. Evil Knievel wore a helmet.

We should ask and expect more of the supposed leaders of the cycling community (such as Rapha) to support the no-duh, no-brainer concept of riding with a helmet!

"Obedience must be rescued from the mire of the world" said Oswald Chambers.

I don't dig everything the cat had to say, but Mr. Chambers was a bright man. Substitute obedience with discipline, accountability or responsibility, sew it onto one of the super-fast, 50mph, downhill wool caps and send it back to Rapha. It'd be cheap for Bodyglove to come out with advertisements, nifty black and white photos showing surfers paddling through the ocean where fisherman are chumming as Great Whites circle the surfers and it reads, "You have to look good when you are surfing, you have to impress your adversary with your elegance. To look good is already to go surfing." It'd be a cheap advertisment and it'd strike a never in the surfing community where we lose surfers to shark attacks.

Bottom line, swoop would either have a lot to say about Rapha or nothing at all. For me, it's like the OP stated, it's about morality.

[William]

Fashion is fashion.

When it comes to helmets, it is about fashion whether you can admit it or not. All helmets have to pass the same safety requirements. The $224 Giro Ionos is no safer for you than the $20 Giro Makai. One could make the argument that the Ionos will have better ventilation….probably true. But in that case you could get the Giro Stylus for under $80…again, just as safe for you than the more expensive models of Giro, Bell, Lazer, etc…

When it comes to cycling clothing, Rapha makes good stuff. But so do a number of other clothing makers…their wares are just as good at a much lower price. The real difference is niche advertising and making a fashion statement. You may like their clothing, nothing wrong with that. But there is also a feel good, warm & fuzzy, part of the exclusive team statement that goes along with it. That’s what they are trying to tap into, and that’s what you’re buying into.

Bottom line:
There are those that can’t afford Rapha.

There are those that can but don’t buy it because they know they can get just as good product at a lower cost elsewhere.

There are those that can afford it and purchase it.


If you’re bothered by the pricing, Rapha isn’t talking (targeting) to you.






William

[ThirtyEast]

This is an interesting thread although we seem to have veered from what the OP is asking. Does not wearing a helmet make one immoral or unethical? Let's toss out the silly moral question and just look at the ethics of the situation. Let's also assume that there is nothing inherently bad about not not wearing a helmet and say that in general, adults in our society should be able to do more or less what they want so long as it does not directly negatively affect any one person or groups of persons.

I think we have to ask who is negatively affected and how when a cyclist decides to ride sans helmet. Let's say a helmet deficient cyclist goes for a ride. Who does this hurt?

Does this hurt other cyclists?
It's hard to make this case, whether we're talking about riding in a group or simply as part of the cycling community. Many of the most safety-conscious riders are also the worst and most dangerous on the road. Safety equipment does not equal safe riding. It's hard to see how any other rider, at any time, is imperiled by our cyclist not wearing a helmet.

Does this hurt society in general?
Perhaps. After all, riders without helmets are indeed more likely to suffer the types of head injuries, which if not immediately causing death, can lead to long and costly hospital and recovery costs, some of which are absorbed by county/state/federal medical centers and other members of the cyclists healthcare network. However, riding a bike in the first place, helmet or no, can be deadly and potentially costly in medical terms.

Does this hurt a cyclist's family and friends?
Potentially, yes. Certainly we have an ethical responsibility to care for our family and children. Riding a bike without a helmet is exacerbating the inherently risky behavior of cycling and puts us more at risk of being killed or reduced to a vegetative state and therefore incapable of providing the care we're obliged to. Again, it's a sad truth that cyclists with helmets do get in life-ending accidents on a far too regular basis. Similarly, we put ourselves and our families' quality of life in jeopardy every time we get in a car, plane, train, eat sushi, cross the street, get a vaccine, go swimming, etc. I think we do have an ethical requirement to mitigate unnecessarily risky activities that could unduly put the well-being of our loved ones and dependents at risk. This begs the question, should we be riding our bikes at all, helmet or no?

[A.L.Breguet]

Rapha stuff is way too expensive for me. I guess I'm not the demographic they're after.

I wear a helmet.




.

[OldDog]

One of my motorcycling buddies never wears a helmet. Two years ago he was hit by a car running a stop sign. No serious head injury. Lost his left leg above the knee though. Cager got a ticket for running the sign. My buddy has a new trike on order based on a Harley Ultra Classic. We will run together again soon.

A few years back a local triguy was out riding, got taken down by a dog. Not a scratch on his helmet. But he is paralized below the waist. The dog, a local known terriorist, got the dealth penalty. The owner, a discombobulated pile of rejected genes, got a fine.

Helmet or no helmet, it's nobodys business but your own and your love ones (we all gotta answer to our sweeties). Life is to live. Live it on your terms.

[Pete Serotta]

Helmet or no helmet, it's nobodys business but your own and your love ones (we all gotta answer to our sweeties). Life is to live. Live it on your terms.

Let adults police themselves and be held accountable for themselves.....

Folks I ride with can wear a helmet or not--it influences in no way my fondness for them,,, :D ;) :D

[sloji]

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/SafetySkills/SafetyQuiz.htm

morality quiz; http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/morality_play.htm

[paczki]

The thread is too long for me to read, so I hope no one has already posted this. If so, I'm sorry!

Cops stop "topless" Horner

By Susan Westemeyer
Chris Horner left his helmet at home, but brought his pro license
Photo ©: Mark Zalewski (Click for larger image)

Most cyclists in Spain are legally required to wear helmets, so when a Spanish policeman saw a group out for a ride and one rider not wearing a helmet, he pulled that rider over. Fortunately, Team Astana's Chris Horner knew that professional riders are not covered by the law.

Astana is holding its training camp on Tenerife, in the Canary Islands, and a group of riders including Horner and Lance Armstrong went out for a ride, when the group was stopped by the Spanish police.

"Horner found it funny because he knew the rules – he lived for some time in Spain – and knew there is an exception for professional riders," Astana spokesman Philippe Maertens told Cyclingnews. "He had to explain the rules to the policeman." After showing his identification to prove that he was, indeed, a pro rider, he was able to go on his way.

The 37-year-old actually had his rider's license with him as proof. "He always has it with him as he knows the Spanish rules," Maertens said. "Probably he was the only one who had it with him."

The Spanish law requiring helmets took effect in January of 2004. The exceptions are: when riding in cities or towns, during "periods of extreme heat", when riding up steep hills, for medical reasons and professional cyclists. Any riders during a competition are not required to wear a helmet, either. Violators are subject to a fine of up to 90 euro.

[sloji]

"Folks I ride with can wear a helmet or not--it influences in no way my fondness for them,,, :D ;)"

Thanks Pete, it's that kind of logic that makes my head feel good.

[toaster]

I'm in favor of helmets, I wear mine 100% of the time on a bicycle.

That said, isn't the point of a thick wool cap to keep your head warm in very cold conditions?

It's very difficult to get the right type of head covering that will keep your head warm and get your helmet over that. I've tried many different types and there seems to be point where the thickness of the cap interferes with the helmet fit. I've got my ears covered and my helmet on but it's still not warm enough.

When we see the Euros and others in training camp or elsewhere wearing big thick wool caps sans helmet during the cold temperatures isn't there some sense of utility in the use of the wool cap?

Granted, in extreme riding conditions (speed, fast technical descending) a helmet is safest. Although, do we have to adhere to the helmet rule when a cap is going to increase our comfort when used thoughtfully?

[Viper]

The thread is too long for me to read, so I hope no one has already posted this. If so, I'm sorry!

Cops stop "topless" Horner

By Susan Westemeyer
Chris Horner left his helmet at home, but brought his pro license
Photo ©: Mark Zalewski (Click for larger image)

Most cyclists in Spain are legally required to wear helmets, so when a Spanish policeman saw a group out for a ride and one rider not wearing a helmet, he pulled that rider over. Fortunately, Team Astana's Chris Horner knew that professional riders are not covered by the law.

Astana is holding its training camp on Tenerife, in the Canary Islands, and a group of riders including Horner and Lance Armstrong went out for a ride, when the group was stopped by the Spanish police.

"Horner found it funny because he knew the rules – he lived for some time in Spain – and knew there is an exception for professional riders," Astana spokesman Philippe Maertens told Cyclingnews. "He had to explain the rules to the policeman." After showing his identification to prove that he was, indeed, a pro rider, he was able to go on his way.

The 37-year-old actually had his rider's license with him as proof. "He always has it with him as he knows the Spanish rules," Maertens said. "Probably he was the only one who had it with him."

The Spanish law requiring helmets took effect in January of 2004. The exceptions are: when riding in cities or towns, during "periods of extreme heat", when riding up steep hills, for medical reasons and professional cyclists. Any riders during a competition are not required to wear a helmet, either. Violators are subject to a fine of up to 90 euro.

I carry this wherever I go, don't leave home without it:

[taz-t]

any thread about Rapha - minimum 5 pages of responses

any thread on helmet/no helmet - 3 page of responses

So... Ralpha and helmet/no helmet. Is the correct equation:

5 + 3 (8 pages)?

5 x 3 (15 pages)?

5 cubed/power of 3 (125 pages)?

- taz

[flydhest]

I think you have hit on something that is overlooked by the simple-minded arguments that people make that wearing a helmet is safer than not wearing one, thus anyone who rides without one is doing something wrong/foolish/immoral/unethical. Take your post and substitute "riding on roads with traffic" or "riding down hill at 40 miles per hour." Now, do that same substitution and think about it with regards to any bike ad. Any shot of folks riding bicycles in traffic or down a hill that could lead to high speed . . . isn't that also, by the logic of the thread, immoral and unethical?

This is an interesting thread although we seem to have veered from what the OP is asking. Does not wearing a helmet make one immoral or unethical? Let's toss out the silly moral question and just look at the ethics of the situation. Let's also assume that there is nothing inherently bad about not not wearing a helmet and say that in general, adults in our society should be able to do more or less what they want so long as it does not directly negatively affect any one person or groups of persons.

I think we have to ask who is negatively affected and how when a cyclist decides to ride sans helmet. Let's say a helmet deficient cyclist goes for a ride. Who does this hurt?

Does this hurt other cyclists?
It's hard to make this case, whether we're talking about riding in a group or simply as part of the cycling community. Many of the most safety-conscious riders are also the worst and most dangerous on the road. Safety equipment does not equal safe riding. It's hard to see how any other rider, at any time, is imperiled by our cyclist not wearing a helmet.

Does this hurt society in general?
Perhaps. After all, riders without helmets are indeed more likely to suffer the types of head injuries, which if not immediately causing death, can lead to long and costly hospital and recovery costs, some of which are absorbed by county/state/federal medical centers and other members of the cyclists healthcare network. However, riding a bike in the first place, helmet or no, can be deadly and potentially costly in medical terms.

Does this hurt a cyclist's family and friends?
Potentially, yes. Certainly we have an ethical responsibility to care for our family and children. Riding a bike without a helmet is exacerbating the inherently risky behavior of cycling and puts us more at risk of being killed or reduced to a vegetative state and therefore incapable of providing the care we're obliged to. Again, it's a sad truth that cyclists with helmets do get in life-ending accidents on a far too regular basis. Similarly, we put ourselves and our families' quality of life in jeopardy every time we get in a car, plane, train, eat sushi, cross the street, get a vaccine, go swimming, etc. I think we do have an ethical requirement to mitigate unnecessarily risky activities that could unduly put the well-being of our loved ones and dependents at risk. This begs the question, should we be riding our bikes at all, helmet or no?

[cpg]

I think you have hit on something that is overlooked by the simple-minded arguments that people make that wearing a helmet is safer than not wearing one, thus anyone who rides without one is doing something wrong/foolish/immoral/unethical. Take your post and substitute "riding on roads with traffic" or "riding down hill at 40 miles per hour." Now, do that same substitution and think about it with regards to any bike ad. Any shot of folks riding bicycles in traffic or down a hill that could lead to high speed . . . isn't that also, by the logic of the thread, immoral and unethical?


What about economists that ride fixed gear on the road without brakes? Immorality defined. :)

Curt

[Louis]

I think you have hit on something that is overlooked by the simple-minded arguments that people make that wearing a helmet is safer than not wearing one, thus anyone who rides without one is doing something wrong/foolish/immoral/unethical. Take your post and substitute "riding on roads with traffic" or "riding down hill at 40 miles per hour." Now, do that same substitution and think about it with regards to any bike ad. Any shot of folks riding bicycles in traffic or down a hill that could lead to high speed . . . isn't that also, by the logic of the thread, immoral and unethical?

Clearly one needs to distinguish between things that are easy to remedy and things that require more effort. This post suggests an equivalence that I think we all agree does not exist.

[Pete Serotta]

I agree in "most" cases, one is safer with a helmet than not - - BUT has anyone ever seen statistics published on accidents to support the below? ( I have not)

- - Does this hurt other cyclists? NO unless one is "unsettled" by riding with others who do not wear a helmet

- - Does this hurt society in general? I assume this is financially - and I have not seen any figures or studies to support that rider (adults) are more prone to "tax" the health system by not using a helmet... LETS DO AWAY WITH CIGAR and Cigarettes and this will save the health system far more. If we do not ride it will also eliminate bicycle wrecks :D
__________________________________________________ ______________
WE can not live in a padded environment - ALL must take responsibility for their actions.
__________________________________________________ ______________
Riding at night with or without a helmet and with cars is FAR MORE dangerous but no one is saying not to do that.

__________________________________________________ ______________



This along with a select few other topics in our culture is based on a "personal" belief and not supported by facts and studies. (I grant you that if you fall and if you severly hit your heat _ You COULD BE IMPACTED to a higher degree than if you did not fall)
__________________________________________________ ______________
WHy can we not "live and let live" enjoy the sport, wear and ride the way you want, AND let others do the same. Even after 60 years, I do not understand why others can not follow this simple courtesy. YOU are not being hurt, or infringed on if I or someone else does not ride with a helmet. In a side note, the law of many states allow riding a motorcycle without a helmet - logic would say that is more exposed if for no other reason than speed.

I RESPECT YOUR RIGHTS so Please respect mine is all one should ask :D

Yep I will get off my soap box and go for a ride (yeah with a helmet - but that is my choice and not one to be mandated)

Be more respectful of others - - none of us have all the answers nor even all the questions so lets chill :D :D

[BumbleBeeDave]

Seems this thread has morphed into the pros/cons of each of us wanting to wear a helmet--or not. But the OP simply seemed to be asking for opinions on whether Rapha or other companies have a moral obligation to depict their products being used safely in their advertisements.

So it seems to me it all comes down to whether it really IS safer to wear a helmet while riding. I don't think that's something that can be totally proved one way or the other. Truly truly accurate statistics probably aren't available and never will be. I strongly suspect that the majority of "close calls" where someone crashes and is saved from serious injury by their helmet are never reported. The rider just goes "Whew! Glad I had my helmet on!", throws away the cracked helmet and buys a new one. End of story. Same for "close calls" when the rider isn' wearing a helmet. So take it on faith. Wear one or not. Your call. You might get lucky--or not.

Personally, I avoided Rapha before and I will continue to avoid them, but mainly because they are way overpriced and way too pretentious for my taste. Way too much snob appeal. I can buy other products other places that work just as well for far less money. Yes, I was indulging in a luxury when I bought my Serotta, but I also looked at it as an investment because I fully took into account that a Ti bike will last literally forever. No rust, no metal fatigue. I just don't see the products that Rapha sells that way. If their $150 gloves cost 3x as much as some from Pearl or Specialized I would expect them to last three times as long. I am reasonably sure they won't. Same for bibs, tights, or windbreaker jacket that's going to get folded up and stuffed in my jersey pocket hundreds of times in succession. But based on all I've heard anecdotally about Rapha products they aren't that much better enough to justify the way higher price. A Ti frame is investment grade equipment. Their clothing isn't.

BBD

[Pete Serotta]

all about fashion and no "unreasonable" price can be put on fashion. My daughters tell me what designer purses sell for (No they can not afford them) ,,My first question "are they made by CAMPY" :cool: :cool:

[sloji]

C'mon, who loves their Rapha Softshell jacket? Zippers under the arm, the bite collar that women love...

I'd like to see a Rapha line for women, no helmets, going fast or slow...

[flydhest]

Clearly one needs to distinguish between things that are easy to remedy and things that require more effort. This post suggests an equivalence that I think we all agree does not exist.

nope, i do not think we all agree.

[Louis]

nope, i do not think we all agree.

Fly,

All I'm saying is that its a heck of a lot easier to slap a helmet on your head than it is to get the idiot drivers out there to behave in a more cyclist-friendly matter. You're entitled to disagree if you like, but I stand by my statement.

Louis

[girlie]

Fly,

All I'm saying is that its a heck of a lot easier to slap a helmet on your head than it is to get the idiot drivers out there to behave in a more cyclist-friendly matter. You're entitled to disagree if you like, but I stand by my statement.

Louis

Story.

I actually had a women comment on me not wearing a helmet after she acted like a jackass in her car. Like she all of a sudden cared about my well being after beeping at me repeatedly and almost driving me off the road. She actually had the nerve to say that I should be wearing a helmet.

I laughed and answered, "Oh so you all of the sudden care about my wellbeing." This was after I caught her and tapped on her window until she rolled it down. I think she didn't know what else to say...like not wearing the helmet justified her carelessness and aggression somewhere in her brain.

I just think it's a funny story.

girlie

[Louis]

Think about how carefully folks would drive if cars did not have seat belts, but did have a dagger installed in the center of the steering wheel pointing right at their chest...

[Viper]

Story.

I actually had a women... almost driving me off the road.

girlie

All the more reason to wear a lid atmo.

:beer:

[girlie]

All the more reason to wear a lid atmo.

:beer:

That is a good reason to wear a helmet.
And there are many many more good solid reasons.
BUT I still say - ride free or die.

girlie

[Viper]

That is a good reason to wear a helmet.
And there are many many more good solid reasons.

girlie

atmo:

[Viper]

BUT I still say - ride free or die.

girlie

"Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."
~Janis Joplin* via Kris Kristofferson

"Discipline gives you freedom."
~Viper

* = This is what "freedom" looks like:

[girlie]

I wear my helmet most of the time.
I understand the possible implications of not wearing it.

What more needs to be said?

girlie

[Viper]

I wear my helmet most of the time.
I understand the possible implications of not wearing it.

What more needs to be said?

girlie


Ride free or die, you say. It sounds so macho. What if it were, "Die free or ride"?

It's a phrase which no longer carries any meaning, insert a words here: ______ or die.

It's the motto of men in war, dying rock stars, hijacked by cheesy Hollywood movies and also offered by dudes just before that oh-sh*t Mtv-moment where the ambulance comes to pick them up.

"Live free or die; Death is not the worst of evils." New Hampshire ought to put the entire quote on their license plates.

[Blue Jays]

"...BUT I still say - ride free or die..."Cool. I've always borrowed a few words from the great Judas Priest and said, "Rock hard, ride free!"

[BumbleBeeDave]

atmo: (Brittny Spears Pic)

You're scarin' the SH*T outta me! :eek: ;)

BBD

[johnnymossville]

I know it's a cliche at this point, but it works for me. :)

http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e194/xnodesign/ridetolive.jpg

[flydhest]

Fly,

All I'm saying is that its a heck of a lot easier to slap a helmet on your head than it is to get the idiot drivers out there to behave in a more cyclist-friendly matter. You're entitled to disagree if you like, but I stand by my statement.

Louis
Even easier is not riding. It is safer not to ride than to ride in traffic with a helmet.

It is safer and easier to ride slowly downhill than to bomb down at 45+.

Somehow, riding does not elicit ire from people as being irresponsible, despite being clearly more dangerous than the alternative.

People whoop about top speeds on descents, but that is clearly more dangerous than going slowly.

It's just so easy to get self-righteous about the helmet issue, so people do it. The general lack of understanding about risk and probability that people seem to exhibit (the thousands of dissertations in psychology about this have provided lots of interesting insight into the simple-minded "always wear a helmet" argument) makes a real discussion about the topic difficult, at best.

[Pete Serotta]

What would you expect from Mr. Fly :D :D

Even easier is not riding. It is safer not to ride than to ride in traffic with a helmet.

It is safer and easier to ride slowly downhill than to bomb down at 45+.

Somehow, riding does not elicit ire from people as being irresponsible, despite being clearly more dangerous than the alternative.

People whoop about top speeds on descents, but that is clearly more dangerous than going slowly.

It's just so easy to get self-righteous about the helmet issue, so people do it. The general lack of understanding about risk and probability that people seem to exhibit (the thousands of dissertations in psychology about this have provided lots of interesting insight into the simple-minded "always wear a helmet" argument) makes a real discussion about the topic difficult, at best.

[dsteady]

I thought this was a good enough reason to revive this thread:

http://www.serotta.com/EMAIL/121508CONS/main.jpg

Enjoy!
;)
Dn'l

[johnnymossville]

I thought this was a good enough reason to revive this thread:

http://www.serotta.com/EMAIL/121508CONS/main.jpg

Enjoy!
;)
Dn'l

Great Pic!

[roadie7]

It's clear that Rapha does not believe they have any safety responsibility; profit is their only goal. The company obviously is a follower of Milton Friedman, the Nobel prize winning econmist, who advocated a firm's only obligation to their shareholders is to make a profit. This may be due to their HQ being located in the UK and I don't know if helmets are a big deal there for riders so they may be going for their home market. Dr. Friedman's answer would be to urge consumers to show their disapproval by not buying their products.

Since Rapha products are ridiculously expensive, boycotting them is easy.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . except from reading Cycling+, but there are regularly items in there about resistance to any proposed regulation that would require helmets anywhere for any cyclists in the UK. They also seem to give quite prominent, serious news play to any research that shows helmets don't make cyclists any safer. From that I'd infer that either some upper level editor there doesn't like helmets, or that there is indeed great resistance ot their use in the UK.

BBD

[rwsaunders]

If Rapha came out with a helmet, it would retail around $895. Take 10% off at the annual sale and they'd be flying out the door.

[fourflys]

meh, as an adult, if you want to wear a helmet...wear one, if you don't feel the need (and have plenty of life insurance) go without. Now, if we're talking about under 18 not wearing a helmet here.... that's a whole different and harsher stance on "choice".

I don't really think a company has any moral responsibility to promote something that is not a law, that's why we have a brain to help up make those important decisions.

[velotel]

any thread about Rapha - minimum 5 pages of responses

any thread on helmet/no helmet - 3 page of responses

So... Ralpha and helmet/no helmet. Is the correct equation:

5 + 3 (8 pages)?

5 x 3 (15 pages)?

5 cubed/power of 3 (125 pages)?

- taz
Looks like you might be correct. I never would have believed it if someone had told me in advance that that ad would generate all these posts. And all because those guys aren't wearing helmets! Amazing. It's been 15 years or so since I've lived in the states and today I have to wonder if the country I knew has any relation with the one of today. Truly amazing. I mean some company decides to try to do something well beyond the norm in the world of cycling ads, decides to create and sell what they consider cutting edge clothing for high prices to an extremely limited market, and one result are all these posts. Amazing. I wonder if anyone here read the bios on the riders. They seem like pretty regular guys to me and avid cyclists and apparently good ones and I don't doubt at all that they don't wear helmets. Guys I'd love to ride with only I'm not in that speed league unfortunately. If they normally don't wear helmets, then obviously the lack of helmets wasn't by a Rapha directive; that' just who they are. What's wrong with that? I liked the pictures. Didn't make me want to buy Rapha products, didn't even make me look at their pricing (learned that here), but sure did make me want to know what road they were on and want to go ride it myself. Without a helmet of course since I don't wear one, never have, doubt if I ever will. And if they had been wearing helmets, I'd still have liked the ad and wanted to ride the road. But to be honest, I loved that they weren't wearing helmets.

[dsteady]

Does anyone else notice that big elephant standing over there?

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . If they normally don't wear helmets, then obviously the lack of helmets wasn't by a Rapha directive; that' just who they are. What's wrong with that?

Why has everyone turned this into a referendum on helmet use itself? I never saw that in the OP's comment. It seemed to be merely a question of what public relations judgment a company should make in advertising products. Portraying the riders with helmets would likely appeal to a certain demographic of viewers. Portraying them without helmets would likely appeal to a different demographic. I can't believe that a company as dependent on marketing savvy as Rapha seems to be would not consider this issue before producing the ads. Therefore I'm concluding that they did consider the issue and made a conscious decision to produce the ads as they did because they concluded it would appeal the most to the demographic they are targeting . . . mostly young, fashion conscious, non-conforming thrill seekers who have a lot of disposable cash and are determined to be different.

But their decision is not likely to sway me, because I don't really care if the Rapha guys wear helmets or not. The company's clothing is just too d@mn expensive and of questionably, allegedly superior quality.

Oh, and BTW, yeah, that IS a pretty big elephant over there! . . .

BBD

[Pete Serotta]

:cool: I always wonder why we can not live and let live - about helmets and many other things.....Who says we are always right. My wife sure does not say anything close to that.

As to this thread I am going to start the ride with the RALPHA guys...Within five minutes I will not know if they have helmets on or not - for they will be out of sight.!!! :D :D

Looks like you might be correct. I never would have believed it if someone had told me in advance that that ad would generate all these posts. And all because those guys aren't wearing helmets! Amazing. It's been 15 years or so since I've lived in the states and today I have to wonder if the country I knew has any relation with the one of today. Truly amazing. I mean some company decides to try to do something well beyond the norm in the world of cycling ads, decides to create and sell what they consider cutting edge clothing for high prices to an extremely limited market, and one result are all these posts. Amazing. I wonder if anyone here read the bios on the riders. They seem like pretty regular guys to me and avid cyclists and apparently good ones and I don't doubt at all that they don't wear helmets. Guys I'd love to ride with only I'm not in that speed league unfortunately. If they normally don't wear helmets, then obviously the lack of helmets wasn't by a Rapha directive; that' just who they are. What's wrong with that? I liked the pictures. Didn't make me want to buy Rapha products, didn't even make me look at their pricing (learned that here), but sure did make me want to know what road they were on and want to go ride it myself. Without a helmet of course since I don't wear one, never have, doubt if I ever will. And if they had been wearing helmets, I'd still have liked the ad and wanted to ride the road. But to be honest, I loved that they weren't wearing helmets.

[Viper]

Looks like you might be correct. I never would have believed it if someone had told me in advance that that ad would generate all these posts. And all because those guys aren't wearing helmets! Amazing. It's been 15 years or so since I've lived in the states and today I have to wonder if the country I knew has any relation with the one of today. Truly amazing. I mean some company decides to try to do something well beyond the norm in the world of cycling ads, decides to create and sell what they consider cutting edge clothing for high prices to an extremely limited market, and one result are all these posts. Amazing. I wonder if anyone here read the bios on the riders. They seem like pretty regular guys to me and avid cyclists and apparently good ones and I don't doubt at all that they don't wear helmets. Guys I'd love to ride with only I'm not in that speed league unfortunately. If they normally don't wear helmets, then obviously the lack of helmets wasn't by a Rapha directive; that' just who they are. What's wrong with that? I liked the pictures. Didn't make me want to buy Rapha products, didn't even make me look at their pricing (learned that here), but sure did make me want to know what road they were on and want to go ride it myself. Without a helmet of course since I don't wear one, never have, doubt if I ever will. And if they had been wearing helmets, I'd still have liked the ad and wanted to ride the road. But to be honest, I loved that they weren't wearing helmets.

Not certain of where you currently live, but America, in spite of recent economic recession, remains the cradle of freedom. Here, we have access to free thought, speech and hopefully utilize both in a deep, non-mouth-breathing fashion (there's lotsa mouth-breathers out there).

The OP asked the question, "Is Rapha compelled, with a sense of morality, to display cyclists sans helmet and then talk about how cool (kewl) it is to look fast (sans helmet)?" It was a question, a rather obvious and simple one, which are often the most complex and controversial.

It's about the advertising department, marketing department and the straightforwardquestion: is it smart, safe and responsible for Rapha to promote and glorify cycling without helmets. Sounds like it'd create a thread with much input from three parties, those who find Rapha irresponsible, cheesy and low-browed, those who enjoyed the ad as they don't care what marketing says and then a group with no opinion whatsoever.

What's not been asked is this, why, why don't villages, states or countries create and enforce helmet laws? Some do, not all. The interesting fact is that when helmet laws are created, the number of cyclists diminishes. From the British Medical Journal:

"Cyclists are advised to wear helmets but legislation to make them compulsory is likely to reduce the number of people choosing to cycle and would not be in the interests of health, concludes the BMA's Board of Education and Science. International evidence shows that the compulsory use of helmets results in a fall in the number of cyclists. The Australian state of Victoria made the use of helmets compulsory in 1990, and in the following year deaths and head injuries among cyclists fell between 37%and 51%However, 40%fewer adults and 60%fewer children continued to cycle after the introduction of the laws."

While there are some who even say helmets make cycling more dangerous as the helmet creates a larger surface area to hit objects or the straps entangle objects, the interesting question for me is, if helmet laws are created, why do we see a decrease in cycling, cyclists? Is it the financial impact of having to purchase one more thing, is it a social stigma of not wanting to conform to one more law or simply, they look uncool?

"The promotion of helmet wearing leads to some people being discouraged from cycling because of social pressures used by helmet advocates. Having a legal requirement has resulted in a sharp fall in the number cycling. Moderate exercise like cycling has many health benefits and also helps reduce pollution caused by vehicular traffic. Life years gained through cycling have been calculated to exceed life years lost in cycle fatalities by a factor of 20 to 1 (Hillman BMA report unpublished). Therefore, helmet promotion which has discouraged cycling has resulted in social harm. The evidence available suggests cyclists are generally safer not wearing a helmet if all aspects are considered."

Very interesting. The original question and the successive input, opinions and ideas. Any topic of depth requires three-dimensional thinking and requests three tools, a knife to cut into the issue, a spoon to dish it out and a fork to chew on it. The debate of mandatory cycling-helmet laws is a very interesting one atmo and it's not simply an American-thing, the links below provide hundreds of studies from around the globe.

I support helmet laws for motorcylists, bicyclists, construction workers and astronauts. American football, hockey and baseball didn't always utilize helmets, they do now. Track cyclists didn't always use helmets, they do now. Pro BMX didn't always use helmets, they do now. Pro skateboarding didn't always use helmets, they do now. F1 powerboat racers wear a helmet, so do F1 automobile racers. F1 is so hot in Europe, do fans actually boycott races due to helmets being used? A mind is a terrible thing to waste and a precious thing to protect. If it's technology is both smart and safe for the pros and astronauts to use, that technology should trickle down to the non-pro/wannabe astronaut. Since I don't wear Rapha, I'm already uncool, so by wearing a helmet, I'm totally uncool. I don't need marketing to tell me what's cool, or to close my mouth and think and I don't need Big Government to push common sense into my backyard. Wearing a helmet is logical.


Clicking on any of the highlighted words from this link will bring you a wealth of information on the very topics from this thread:

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/england_helmets.html

http://www.cycle-helmets.com/helmet_damage.html

http://64.233.169.132/search?q=cache:zbSYymshzxgJ:www.cycle-helmets.com/england_helmets.html+england+cycling+helmet+law&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

[fiamme red]

Not certain of where you currently live, but America, in spite of recent economic recession, remains the cradle of freedom.I support helmet laws for motorcylists, bicyclists, construction workers and astronauts.You don't see a contradiction here? I assume you're using the word "freedom" in the Orwellian (or Bushian) sense.

[Viper]

You don't see a contradiction here? I assume you're using the word "freedom" in the Orwellian (or Bushian) sense.

We were free to vote in a new guy this January. :beer:

William Wallace = # 1 :)

[Pete Serotta]

I liked the one liner also ...freedom, as long as you agree with me :banana: :banana:


You don't see a contradiction here? I assume you're using the word "freedom" in the Orwellian (or Bushian) sense.

[djg]

And that marketing is intended to maximize profits, right?

The seeming total deterioration of any recognition by corporations of "the common good" is more and more depressing. Nothing counts except making more money. The scenario is familiar . . . company (in this case, Rapha) uses advertising that seeks to make something inherently dangerous (screaming down the mountain road on a bike) look "cool" to attract viewers to the activity they sell products related to. . . . Impressionable but inexperienced new consumers fall for it and go out and pursue the activity as depicted in the ad (or movie) . . . New consumer effs up because of their inexperience and gets injured/paralyzed/killed/causes same to someone else . . . Advertiser get sued and defends itself by claiming that "it's only an ad" or "no reasonable person would believe we are condoning (name activity here)" . . .

The only question that remains for me is where the dividing line is between the common good and being a nanny to the lowest common denominator of potential customer. IMHO, companies have been excusing their behavior for years in this area, because by now it should be abundantly obvious to "any reasonable person" who thinks up these ads that there ARE plenty of stupid people out there who are going to fall for the ad and some of them are gonna get hurt. The common good as I see it would be taking the initiative to admit this and portraying your products being used in a responsible manner.

Like obscenity, I can't give you a precise definition, but I know it when I see it, and if the ads are described accurately here, then I'd avoid anything by Rapha. The ads make it obvious that the company values profits above people's safety. I'm sure that isn't going to cause them to go broke, but it's about the only thing I can do as an individual. Yeah, I know if you fly off the road on top of a mountain at 50 mph, then a helmet probably ain't gonna save you. And yeah, helmets may look dorky, but so does riding around in a motorized scooter and talking to people by blowing through a tube for the rest of your life.

BBD

BBD, honestly, I look at the ads and I think that these are folks who sell, what, like eleven hundred dollar socks to those remaining of the landed gentry who yearn for the days of Louison Bobet and George VI? How many such folks could there be? And aren't they all adults who should know well enough in any case, congenital idiocy amongst the upper classes notwithstanding?

Personally, I wear a helmet nearly every time I get on the bike, and I think it makes sense that I do so, but I really don't think it's necessarily stupid or irrational for experienced riders to choose to go without in certain circumstances, and I sort of suspect that the ad is not likely to get many helmet-wearing folks to abandon their lids.

I dunno . . . I could be wrong about all of this, but I just think it's different both from marketing to children and from, say, those old cig ads that showed a doc lighting up over some stinking lie about the health benefits of cancer sticks (while, perhaps, the purveyors knew better, but were not saying).

[ss-jimbo]

I'm with Ginger (as usual!), the tag lines are ridiculous and to me repulsive. I'd much rather be fast than look fast, and so to me it seems Rapha is making a rather pathetic ply

I actually like to look slow and ride fast.

[Louis]

those old cig ads that showed a doc lighting up over some stinking lie about the health benefits of cancer sticks

What are you talking about? They do help you loose weight - same thing as exercise.

[rspecker]

I liked the one liner also ...freedom, as long as you agree with me :banana: :banana:
Pete--

I don't get that Viper was saying anything against disagreements, or against voicing them softly or loudly. My hunch is that he would strongly object to the view that his version of freedom meant that everyone needs to agree (with him or with anyone else for that matter).

Also, if you are saying that laws by imposing restrictions are inconsistent with freedom then I suggest you reconsider. We are a nation of laws and it is intensely wrongheaded to view those laws as an imposition on freedom. We have them to thank for our freedom in large part. Yes, it is possible to envision laws that impose on our freedoms (and our brilliant Constitution (another law) (particularly through the Bill of Rights) has a lot to say about preventing that)--but helmet laws aren't even in the universe of bad laws of that type.

IF helmet laws are passed they are not diminishing your freedom--they are an expression of our common exercise of our freedoms. I don't know if I would vote for helmet laws or not (I would need more facts if I was in the legislature voting on that) but I can tell you with certainty that I wouldn't take it as an affront to my freedom if a law was passed that I had to wear a lid while riding a bike.

There are morons out there that think they should have the "freedom" to drive without wearing a seat belt. They need to get over themselves. I'm not saying you are saying that--but I will tell you that the "freedom" point gets you nowhere on this issue IMHO.

Cheers!

[sloji]

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/SafetySkills/SafetyQuiz.htm

Do vegetarians live longer?
The battle has long been waged, and will certainly continue in spite of this study. Are humans designed/evolved to eat everything and at risk of malnutrition as vegetarians? Or is vegetarianism the healthy and ethical choice? The most impressive data arises from a study of 1904 vegetarians over 21 years by the German Cancer Research Center (Deutsche Krebsforschungszentrum). The study's shocking results: vegetarian men reduced their risk of early death by 50%! Women vegetarians benefit from a 30% reduction in mortality.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/13/benefits-of-vegetarianism_n_112431.html


Should cheese come with a warning? Is it a moral responsibility to protect our brethren from cheese?
“Heart disease is the leading cause of death for American men and women,” said Dr. William E. Connor, professor of Medicine and Clinical Nutrition at the Oregon Health Sciences University. “Anything Americans can do to reduce their intake of saturated fat and cholesterol, such as cutting back on cheese, would lessen the risk of heart disease.”

How about bacon?
Houston, Texas - A researcher at the University of Texas at Houston says bacon can actually help save your life during a heart attack.

Dr. Nathan Bryan claims nitrates found in bacon form a gas, which can re-open blocked arteries.

Early research indicates the nitrates in bacon cause cancer, but Dr. Bryan says this research is false.

"You should not avoid eating bacon because of the nitrite content. If anything, the nitrite content is what protects our heart during a heart attack," he says.

This porks for you!!!

Helmet threads are like eating bacon.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Viper was RIGHT! Bacon IS the fountain of youth!

BBD

[93legendti]

And that marketing is intended to maximize profits, right?
That's the definition...



...company (in this case, Rapha) uses advertising that seeks to make something inherently dangerous (screaming down the mountain road on a bike) look "cool" to attract viewers to the activity they sell products related to. . . .Impressionable but inexperienced new consumers fall for it and go out and pursue the activity as depicted in the ad (or movie) . . . New consumer effs up because of their inexperience and gets injured/paralyzed/killed/causes same to someone else . . . Advertiser get sued and defends itself by claiming that "it's only an ad" or "no reasonable person would believe we are condoning (name activity here)" . . .

Descending is "inherently dangerous"? Someone better tell VS. not to show pros doing it in the TdF...



The only question that remains for me is where the dividing line is between the common good and being a nanny to the lowest common denominator of potential customer. IMHO, companies have been excusing their behavior for years in this area, because by now it should be abundantly obvious to "any reasonable person" who thinks up these ads that there ARE plenty of stupid people out there who are going to fall for the ad and some of them are gonna get hurt. The common good as I see it would be taking the initiative to admit this and portraying your products being used in a responsible manner.

People are so stupid that if they see an ad showing a high speed descent they will run out and do it with no experience?


Like obscenity, I can't give you a precise definition, but I know it when I see it, and if the ads are described accurately here, then I'd avoid anything by Rapha. The ads make it obvious that the company values profits above people's safety. I'm sure that isn't going to cause them to go broke, but it's about the only thing I can do as an individual. Yeah, I know if you fly off the road on top of a mountain at 50 mph, then a helmet probably ain't gonna save you. And yeah, helmets may look dorky, but so does riding around in a motorized scooter and talking to people by blowing through a tube for the rest of your life.

BBD

Maybe Rapha gives people more credit than you do?

[BumbleBeeDave]

Maybe Rapha gives people more credit than you do?

. . . you're grinding an axe?

BBD

[johnnymossville]

Safety is Relative. Who is it that judges what's safe and what is not, and do you want them in control of your life? I sure as hell don't.

[sloji]

All this Rapha talk made me order some new bibs and I must say they are like bacon, bacon for my bits!

[johnnymossville]

All this Rapha talk made me order some new bibs and I must say they are like bacon, bacon for my bits!

mmmmmm bacon. Tomorrow morning,... bacon it is.

[93legendti]

. . . you're grinding an axe?

BBD
You were the one ranting...were you grinding an axe?

I don't get bent out of shape by a bicycling ad.

I actually like this one:

http://www.serotta.com/hoopla/index.html

[Pete Serotta]

Please feel free to open another thread.....this one has bobbed and weaved on many topics./... THANKS :) Have a nice weekend.