Forum menu
molgrips - Member
My trailer is the same hight as my saddle.
Mine is much lower down than my brightly/lightly coloured torso. Around car bumper/lorry wheel height.
But you are still there. Is not like you are hiding behind the trailer. You are more visible with it.
Car bumpers are a lot lower then lorry wheel hight.
By the time you can't be seen as it's to low then it's to late any way.
Does this mean that cars like a lotus is dangerous to be in as it's lower than the bottom of the windows on my car.
Love it Mike 🙂
What age did you get the little uns on there?
Does this mean that cars like a lotus is dangerous to be in as it's lower than the bottom of the windows on my car.
They are certainly [i]more[/i] dangerous to be in than a car that sits higher in the road, but now I'm as guilty of going off-topic as some others 😆
[i]Mike_D - what the hell are you wearing helmets for, do you not know the stats, H&S gone mad.[/i]
🙂
[i]What age did you get the little uns on there?[/i]
We've only had it a few months. Stoker's five, front passenger was not quite two but he'd been using that seat for a little while already. And a Hamax seat or trailer before that. We took him out once in his car seat in the trailer at what must have been about four months but it all seemed a bit joggly. He stayed asleep the whole time so it presumably wasn't uncomfortable, but we weren't wildly keen and it was a faff to secure the seat.
The tandem's actually proving rather brilliant for getting them (well, her mainly) used to riding on roads - positioning, looking, signalling and all that. Generally we get three arms going out before a turn 🙂 Also she took to the gears on her new bike immediately, having got the idea from riding the tandem.
[b]We[/b] were fortunately in Canada whilst pregnant
The tandem's actually proving rather brilliant for getting them (well, her mainly) used to riding on roads
Brilliant idea
We were fortunately in Canada whilst pregnant
You know pregnant is a euphemism anyway? So don't get snippy about its usage 🙂
Lethal
[img] 
[/img]
Irresponsible
[img] 
[/img]
certain death
[img] 
[/img]
Call social services
[img] 
[/img]
The child WILL die
[img] 
[/img]
Ok I was bored
deliberate trolling? from uncle teej? i notice you didnt include a picture of my gaffa tape idea.... is this cos you agree with me that statistics prove my idea to be the safest? 
We need some peer review to be sure phil.
Anyone got a child or two spare we can borrow?
Dr J
Given the [b]very[/b] [b]very[/b] long road that [b]we[/b] travelled to get pregnant I feel very strongly about it being [b]we[/b] and not just Mrs B herself that was pregnant.
But hey, thanks for your contribution.
Anyhow, back on track. Mike D, that tandem is outstanding I salute you. I have a vision of something like that coming into [b]our[/b] lives at some point in the future.
If you are really worried about your children dying prematurly get them on a bike ASAP. A doctor in the Irish medical times demonstrated that not cycling would kill you quicker than cycling (even if you cycle without a helmet). Your kids will die of heart disease, bowel cancer or some other disease caused by sitting on your butt all day if they don't get into the habit of riding a bike.
Edukator - indeed its true - cyclist live longer than non cyclists because the increased risk of death from cycling is less than the increased risk of death form inactivity
hah look at those selfish ****s, some people
[i]Brilliant idea[/i]
I wouldn't claim the "road sense" thing as any sort of an idea, it just occurred to me that they were learning something from it. Happy side effect 🙂
Beamers: Do it, they're ace 🙂
cyclist live longer than non cyclists because the increased risk of death from cycling is less than the increased risk of death form inactivity
I'm sure you've rolled this out before and I've resisted the temptation to bite, but I can't resist any more. This is meaningless. Have you paraphrased it and missed something out? What is suggests is that all non-cyclists are inactive, which even you must concede is a ridiculous assumption that makes a mockery of the "conclusion"...
...or is this just a long-standing troll of yours?
No - Its distilled from mortality stats. cyclists live longer than non cyclists. The inference is the protection that cycling gives you from diseases of inactivity is greater than the risks of cycling. Its very simple. It does not suggest what you say at all.
Al the data is out there if you want to see it.
for example
All-Cause Mortality Associated With Physical Activity During Leisure Time, Work, Sports, and Cycling to Work
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/160/11/1621
Bicycling to work decreased risk of mortality in approximately 40% after multivariate adjustment, including leisure time physical activity.
Conclusions
Leisure time physical activity was inversely associated with all-cause mortality in both men and women in all age groups. Benefit was found from moderate leisure time physical activity, with further benefit from sports activity and bicycling as transportation.
Damo - however that is not what you claimed. You claimed50 times more child cyclist deaths than there are deaths to child car occupants
TJ, surely a bright fella like you would know that this only makes sense when you consider in the terms Damo damonstrated
Your kids will die of heart disease, bowel cancer or some other disease caused by sitting on your butt all day if they don't get into the habit of riding a bike
Jesus. Staying off busy roads when your kids are in a trailer is NOT going to lead to a life of inactivity and premature death.
For Christ's sake people LISTEN TO YOURSELVES! YOU'RE BEING UTTERLY IDIOTIC!
Given the very very long road that we travelled to get pregnant I feel very strongly about it being we and not just Mrs B herself that was pregnant.
Not wishing to belittle in any way your situation (about which I know nothing), but hard work does not change the laws of biology.
Very true. It did at times feel though that some of those laws were conspiring against us.
Whilst I can only guess what multivariate adjustments were used (maybe the study excluded cyclists knocked over in traffic accidents whilst cycling to work!) all that study says to me is that active people live longer than non-active people and active people who cycle to work live longer still. That's still not the same conclusion as this:
the increased risk of death from cycling is less than the increased risk of death form inactivity
If nothing else, this proves that these kind of studies can be ambigious and interpreted different ways depending on one's agenda.
Anyway, now I've been hooked into this tangled web I shall endeavour to extricate myself...
My kids. My choice.
Nice to see we disagree again Molgrips, I was feeling most uncomfortable after agreeing with you on the last thread. So you think I'm an idiot now, I feel much happier.
My son has gone everywhere with me on a bike from three months. He got on a kiddiback tandem at about three, Rode Paris to Berlin and beyond at seven, has ridden his own bike on and off-road supervised from four, an MTB off-road unsupervised from ten, and finally on his own on the road this year at thirteen. Fingers crossed, you can't keep them wrapped up in cotton wool forever.
Edukator do you really think that if you don't take your kids out on bikes when they are babies that will condemn them to a life of inactivity?
And I do not wrap my kid in cotton wool.
For Christ's sake people LISTEN TO YOURSELVES! YOU'RE BEING UTTERLY IDIOTIC!
Indeed. People on here have such a skewed idea of risk that they are denying themselves and their children a safe, pleasant and beneficial activity because of ridiculous fears.
*the sky is falling* Quick run inside!
Still tortoise - that is just one study - there are loads and its is clear that the health benefits of cycling out weight the risks as can be seen by the fact that cyclists live longer than non cyclists.
*the sky is falling* Quick run inside!
helmet or not though TJ? 😉
Indeed. People on here have such a skewed idea of risk that they are denying themselves and their children a safe, pleasant and beneficial activity because of ridiculous fears
No we're not. Exluding busy or dangerous roads doesn't stop us from going out in the trailer at all.
I think parents are an important role model. A child's personality is already forged by six if you believe the psychologists so getting used to and learning to enjoy cycling (or any other activity) should start young.
A kid that's out on skis at two finds being out in extreme conditions quite normal a revels in it. [i]insert stats for children dying in sledging or ski accident shere[/i]
A kid that's been taken swimming from six months takes easily to kayaking, surfing, sailing and was third out of the water in his last triathlon. [i]insert stats for children drowning here[/i]
A kid that's walked up Pyrenean peaks from the age of five considers the mountains his second back garden, and was recently seen climbing of the pebble finished wall of the swimming pool just for the fun of it. [i]insert stats for children killed in falls here[/i]
A kid that's ridden across a mountain range in the pouring rain doesn't think twice about going out and playing in the rain, walking to school in the rain or riding to the pool in the rain. [i]I think we've already done cycle acceident stats to death[/i]
You can bring your kids up operate confidently in a wide variety of conditions or you can transfer all your own fears and limits to them. We'll all be dead one day, better to live a bit even if it slightly increases the risk of dying youger as living a bit usually has the bonus of living healthier longer. I've raced in cars, on bikes, on MMTBs, on skis, done triathons, ski mountaineered, climbed, caved, wind surfed, kayaked ... and I'm still here. If one of those activities finishes me off next time out I'm onto a double win, I enjoyed all that and I won't die with dementure.
People on here have such a skewed idea of risk that they are denying themselves and their children a safe, pleasant and beneficial activity because of ridiculous fears.
Again, a totally different conclusion from what I get from this thread.
People on here have a very good idea of how they give their children access to a safe, pleasant and beneficial activity. Those that don't have that experience to draw on have asked quite reasonable questions to allow them to make those judgements themselves.
Thats not what you said earlier. 🙄
Isn't it? I take my kid out in the trailer - that's why I bought the bloody thing!
You can bring your kids up operate confidently in a wide variety of conditions or you can transfer all your own fears and limits to them
Are you forgetting this is an MTB forum, not a couch potato forum? Most of us have active lifestyles and want to include our kids in them. It's simply a case of risk assessment in one particular situation - that is, trailers on roads.
Thats not what you said earlier
Who, me or edukator?
I was brought up in an environment that gave me access to all manner of outdoor activities. From a young age I have skied, walked, climbed, cycled, canoed, caved (not too many times I might add) etc. I played on assaults courses years before H and S told me I needed to be roped on and wear a helmet. I'd like to give my kids the same opportunities from as young an age as possible. I am not risk-averse.
I'd happily have a trailer on the back of my bike with my kiddies on board and ride down easy trails and quiet roads. I wouldn't take them on a busy main road at rush hour.
Does that compute or is it simply not rational enough?
Molgrips.
Judging by the weights (and blood pressures) declared by contributors on various threads this is most definitely a coach potato forum. How tall are you and what do you weigh Molgrips? I'll then know whether to lump you in with the coach potato majority or add you to the svelt minority.
Ah sorry. Although to be fair to molgrips, at no point do I recall him saying he never took his kids in a bike trailer. I'm not going to re-read this all to find out tho' 😯
Haven't got time to discuss right now, so here's a piccy of me being completely irresponsible (OK so we're on a bike path here, but we used an A road to get there).
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
How tall are you and what do you weigh Molgrips? I'll then know whether to lump you in with the coach potato majority or add you to the svelt minority
How about asking me how much activity I actually do? Or are you joking...?
Shall I stop buy you in France on my way home and kick your arse on a bike? 🙂
Look at that poor mites expression! Call social services now!
Exluding busy or dangerous roads doesn't stop us from going out in the trailer at all.
It does appear to stop you going out on the road at all unless I've misinterpreted you (if so apologies) - I'm certainly getting the impression that you'd consider the riding I do on roads with kids (not on dangerous or busy roads) irresponsible.
Aerobars on a tandem with kiddicranks and a seat. Novel I'll agree, but irresponsible? surely not.
Righty - got a new baby who will be [b]12 weeks old[/b] when we pop off on holiday shortly in a campervan.Is there any safe way of moving around on a bike with a baby that young (thinking lanes etc)
I forgot what this was all about. Here's the OP. I'd post my own pics of my toddlers and small children on bikes if I thought it was relevant 😉
TJ
As usual, you have gone off at the deep end and had more arguements about statistics on here that bear no relation to parenting or the views of parents wishing to balance the protection of their children against the real world.
Your repeated use of the Netherlands as a like-for-like example against the UK for the basis of your point is so flawed as to be ridiculous. Their laws, culture and infrastructure are so different regarding cycling that we could only aspire to what they have to promote safer cycling.
Given the state of our roads and the general distain many motorists have for cyclists, it is not a risk most parents are prepared to take and just use a bike all the time. Your statistics mean nothing to a parent who wants to protect their dearest from the actions of others.
Kick my arse on a bike? You can try. Six people did a faster bike split than me in the triathon I did on Sunday so you might.
Edit: seven people