[Closed] Bike helmet for kids

Bell Fraction, it's tough and comes in some pretty cool designs. It's actually the same a size S Faction (the grown-ups version)

2nd the Fraction, kids love em .. just ordering another for No.2 son as a reward for getting pedalling.

No helmet. Teaches them to ride within their limits and how to fall off more carefully.
Helmets have been proven to be pointless. I'd also worry about rotational injury with a child of 5 with such a large head.

GW, you are just goading TJ now aren't you?

Specialised small Fry are pretty good. Plenty of protection round the back of the head

Mastiles, had you ever worn a cycle helmet at 5yr old? Other than on TV I'd only seen them on pro riders in the milk race.

Mastiles, had you ever worn a cycle helmet at 5yr old? Other than on TV I'd only seen them on pro riders in the milk race.

I've worn one from the age of ten, but thats not the point or the question. He was asking what helment to buy, not IF HE SHOULD BUY ONE. 🙄

[i]Mastiles, had you ever worn a cycle helmet at 5yr old? Other than on TV I'd only seen them on pro riders in the milk race.

[/i]

Crikey, is it still the 70s? 😆

my kids have the Giro Flume. They like it. I think it's very similar to the Bell one mentioned above, aren't Giro and Bell the same company now??

GW out for a blast yesterday

[img] [/img]

My boy has one that with cars on that he likes to wear, It also fits properly. I can't remember the brand, giro or bell I think.

We also have a rule - if he wears a helmet then so do I, and visa versa.

Nothing boils my wee more than
1) seeing parents riding sans helmet and kids with - it's either a good idea or it's not
2) Parents that absolutely insist their kids wear a helmet when they even touch a bike or scooter and then slap an ill fitting saucepan on their heads and don't even do the strap up properly.

I got evil stares from some parents a while back when my boy borrowed a go on a bike and I told him not to bother with a helmet as the only one available was too small and he'd be better off without. Their kids were happily riding around with helmets perched atop their heads feeling safe.

Sorry, I'll stop ranting now.

Crikey, is it still the 70s?

With a sausage lid 🙂

[img] [/img]

But GW if you are being serious - I would rather my kids didn't learn to ride within their limits WITH a helmet than learn without one.

Pictures of bikes get posted here all the time, and I'm not all that well up on bike models so mostly it all goes over my head as to what they are and what's special about them.

However, I'm reasonably sure that the pic Binners just posted is a Mk2 Raleigh Grifter in pale blue.

[i]With a sausage lid [/i]

Blimey - didn't save that bloke did it?!

Bell Fraction here too.

Thick pads in the summer and thinner ones to allow for a hat in the winter 🙂

No helmet. Teaches them to ride within their limits and how to fall off more carefully.
Helmets have been proven to be pointless. I'd also worry about rotational injury with a child of 5 with such a large head.

Go on then I will bite, there is an orifice you are talking out of and it's not your mouth.

Blimey - didn't save that bloke did it?!

LOL!

BY the way, one of my 2 yr olds (3 tomorrow 🙂 ) was on her scooter on Sunday, just going up and down granny's drive. Somehow she catapulted over the front and face planted, but she was wearing her (correctly fitting) helmet and the lip of it took the force of the blow. So in my considered opinion, helmets are a good idea. So there.

A mate had these for his kids, I've just got them too based on how great they seem to be.

[url= http://www.micro-scooters.co.uk/category/helmets/ ]lids on microscooters website[/url]

trb -
so, let me get this straight, you made up a pointless rule for YOUR family but it angers you that other families oblivious to YOUR rule don't adhere to it? Not only this but YOU can ignore your own rule when you feel like it? the icing on the cake seems to be that you actually do care how these other families view you and your crazy rules, have you thought of printing out a rule book and handing it out to keep them right? 😆

Bernard - everything I typed is factually true.

If you want to buy a helmet for your child, the exact same advice as buying one for yourself applies. ie. try on a few and get one that fits properly whilst giving adequate protection/coverage with little discomfort.. nothing wrong with getting an idea of what's out there to buy first but I wouldn't recommend blindly buying the helmet most praised by complete strangers on the internet without first trying it (whether for yourself or a child).

My little lad in his Trek Vapour.

...and it doing its job. 😐

😆 kid doesn't even take the fall on his head, he lands on his cheek before the helmet is pushed out the way.. possibly causing rotational injury? 😉

Bernard - everything I typed is [s]factually [/s]facetiously true.

kid doesn't even take the fall on his head, he lands on his cheek.

The peak of the lid took the hit, but the helmet didn't rotate on his head. The Vapour has a retention system at the back like an adult helmet.

The only mark on his face was a split lip.

[i]...and it doing its job[/i]

£250 on You've Been Framed for that 🙂

I thought there was more risk of rotational injury from the helmet NOT rotating on the head. :/

my 2yr old faceplanted a few weeks back belting down a fairly steep hill in the wet, her only injury was a small graze above her lip, she didn't have a helmet on at all, never mind a life saving "peak" 😯

Blimey GW. I'm sensing you have some sort of issue here so I'll leave you to it.

Decathlon pisspot for our little one. At under 15 quid, it can't really be equalled.

Bernard - everything I typed is factually true

oh really

No helmet. Teaches them to ride within their limits and how to fall off more carefully.

How has that been proven? I would guess at no point during riding his bike does my son think, I know I can ride down this steep hill....it's ok if I fall I have a helmet on

Helmets have been proven to be pointless.

Proven beyond doubt has it, well prove it to me then I would be interested to hear the evidence

I'd also worry about rotational injury with a child of 5 with such a large head

Why? you have no idea how big the rest of him is, so what has his head size to do with it? (in actual fact he is in perfect proportion)so why is he at risk due to his head size?

In actual fact, you have not stated any facts just opinion .. please see my earlier post with regard my thoughts on your opinion and it's origin.

Buy them a decent helmet, in a colour they like. Make sure it fits and that they wear it. At this age they've no choice.

At some point they will decide that its 'uncool' to wear one, circa 13ish.

But, all my 3 sons' (13, 17 and 18) while won't wear them when just bumming around, they will whenever they are MTB/DJ/DH etc.

Teh answer is asalways ONE THAT FITS

GW - Member

I thought there was more risk of rotational injury from the helmet NOT rotating on the head. :/

correct

Proven beyond doubt has it, well prove it to me then I would be interested to hear the evidence

A little overstating it. what has been done is to show that the evidence for helmets is at best dubious at worst useless large scale whole population studies show little if any benefit

Why? you have no idea how big the rest of him is, so what has his head size to do with it? (in actual fact he is in perfect proportion)so why is he at risk due to his head size?

a helmet increases the size and weigh of a head - more so for a child as a % making it more likely they will hit their head. Children especially take more risks when wearing helmets

Make informed choices - but be informed and above all else if youa re going to use a helmet get one that fits properly( not using a "retention system" to take up slack) You should not be able to get a little finger between the shell and the head at any point. a helmet that is too big with a "retention system" to take up slack is virtually useless - TRL who are very pro helmet even say this.

Didn't read it, but was that some parental advice from someone without kids there? Useful 😆

A little overstating it. what has been done is to show that the evidence for helmets is at best dubious at worst useless large scale whole population studies show little if any benefit

what has been shown is that individually when you crash a helmet will protect you more than not wearing a helmet

What remains is whether wearing a helmet makes you take more risks [ more likely to crash [ probably some truth in that but not sure for kids as most of my kids crashes are just crap riding rather than risky], makes your head so heavy that you will hit it due to the helmet[not convinced] and the impact on a community of cyclists of the effects of compulsion as reduced numbers may offset then helmet wearing benefits[ probably true but needs further investigation and can be countered by driver education].

what has been shown is that individually when you crash a helmet will protect you more than not wearing a helmet

Wrong. this is has not been shown at all. Some evidence points that way, some does not.

anyone actually interested in learning about his rather than relying on their predjudices then
http://www.ctc.org.uk/desktopdefault.aspx?tabid=4688
Is a good unbiased source of info

CTC thinks that it should be up to you to decide whether you want to wear a helmet or not, and is opposed to making it compulsory.

Compulsion laws in other countries have reduced the number of people who cycle – and the more people who cycle, the safer cycling becomes. What's more, cycling is such a healthy activity that people are far more likely to gain from it than otherwise. It's therefore important not to put anyone off.

Several recent reports (including four papers in peer-reviewed medical journals) have found no link between changes in helmet wearing rates and cyclists' safety - and there are even cases where safety seems to have worsened as helmet-wearing increase

Does he really have a size 54cm head? That is the same as mine! I'm a 30yo (with a small head). I have just bought a Giro hex small for £30 from wiggle ( for 51-55cm). I really like it. It replaced my Giro Flume. I found the Hex cups my head better. Probably best if he can try them on

But before getting sidetracked please note FIT is all - do not get one big enough to grow into, do not get one with a one size fits all shell. do not rely on a cradle to take up slack a

Some people do make me chuckle, I do wonder if they actually believe the rubbish they type....anyway thanks all for any recommendations much appreciated

Wrong. this is has not been shown at all. Some evidence points that way, some does not.

Its has not been shown if you choose to ignore the Cochrane collaborations review of the evidence. Tj does not accept the peer reviewed report from the NGO WHO health organisation member who have the best reputation for world leading independent meta research. Instead you should cite an article from a cycling pressure group which only mentions the risks to us as a group, due to numbers, rather than mention what it does for an individual when they crash. Again there may be an effect in the group from helmet wearing due to

the more people who cycle, the safer cycling becomes.

However this will not affect whether a helmet works when I crash. TJ does not seem to get this distinction.

Completely wrong junkyard.

Its real peer reviewed evidence from good research and critiques of the now frankly outdated cochrane review for a variety of independent sources

Nor is it confusion about individual risk and group risk

You claiming this shows you haven't actually looked at at the papers or understood the issues

Anyone actually interested in learning about this please follow the CTC links above.

It took TJ a while, but as soon as he arrived this thread has descended into the usual TJ ****athon.

To the OP. I'm sure if you stick to the reputable brands, find one that fits well, and a design that your child likes and will wear happily, you've done everything you can to ensure their safety.

Completely wrong junkyard.

Yes we all know your views but why can it not be the case that a helmet can protect me as an individual and be harmful to a group due to participation numbers of that group. No matter how many times you say it is wrong without explanation it will remain unclear to me what you actual objection is tbh.

Its real peer reviewed evidence from good research and critiques of the now frankly outdated Cochrane review for a variety of independent sources

Cochrane 2009 is outdated...you have really stayed objective haven’t you :rolls eyes: ..you do realise none of the papers cited in the CTC response are newer than the outdated Cochrane report? You are pretty much alone in criticising the premier world organisation for independent review v you and some pressure groups. Take your pick I suspect this time you won’t make the mistake of citing a paper written before it as evidence of the critique 😆 I mean I don’t expect flaws like this in your understanding to alter your view after all it is I and not you who does not get it and i should open up etc as i dont read the papers yadda yadda

Nor is it confusion about individual risk and group risk

So you say but you don’t explain why. You are wrong they are separate things

You claiming this shows you haven't actually looked at the papers or understood the issues
Anyone actually interested in learning about this please follow the CTC links above.

yes he is right dont read the CTC critique of the papers after all if you want science dont read the articles, the comments from their peers and their replies read what a cycling pressure group thinks and there summary of the evidence or just listen to that nurse up there.
There is no other way to science and you will know you have got it when you agree with him.
PS
Most of the links from the CTC site to the actual research are broken all the ones to the BMJ and the Australian research so it’s quite hard to do read them. I would have assumed you knew this if you had read them - bit like arguing i should read a paper posting a link and then finding it out it cost $41 to read - you never did give me your copy of the article you implored me to read.

Junkyard - [b]the cochrane review was 1999.[/b] hence the critique of it I cited had a later date as I told you on the last thread even copying and pasting the title page

Yes I know you don't understand the science

Lets just be totally clear. The cochrane review ( not report) is 14 years old and is widely critised in peer reviewed journals for basic
methodolocal flaws,

Multiple studies since cast major doubt on its findings.

If you want to follow the science you read the scientific papers - I have done. you will find the evidence counterintuative, contradictory and of poor quality thus tehr is no way you can claim anything as proof.

http://cyclehelmets.org/1157.html for pages of links both supporting and not supporting helmets

BMJ published view from both sides

http://www.bmj.com/highwire/filestream/356627/field_highwire_article_pdf/0

[url= http://www.thecochranelibrary.com/userfiles/ccoch/file/Safety_on_the_road/CD001855.pdf ]Paper is current[/url]

Editorial group: Cochrane Injuries Group.
Publication status and date: Edited (no change to conclusions), published in Issue 1, 2009. Review content assessed as up-to-date: 7 November 2006.

TJ you are trolling and derailing the thread. Drop it now. The OP was not asking for this debate again.

Junkyard - the cochrane review was 1999.

Published 2009 -as the date is on the front page and some references are from 2006 I would have thought it was rather obvious from even a cursory glance,

I know you don't understand the science

still in good company then and please you are embarassing yourself now
re read your own critique and my response- if you think that shows you understand science and i dont then there is no persuading you.
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-helmet-debate-rumbles-on-in-the-mainstream-media/page/3#post-3854677

Lets just be totally clear. The cochrane review ( not report) is 14 years old and is widely critised in peer reviewed journals for basic
methodolocal flaws,

Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists
(Review)

Its still a review and still published in 2009. Hugor gave a link , you berate me for not reading links, and you did not read it , and you did a critique of it 😯 I would assume by now it is clear to all who does not read links nor understand what they are criticising never mind science.

Multiple studies since cast major doubt on its findings.

yes science would be nothing if it did not make unsubstantiated claims without evidence...I wish I understood it better. 😕