Did I miss it all kick off - or was TJ right....?

Bike Forum

[closed]

Did I miss it all kick off - or was TJ right....?

123 posts & 48 voices | Started 1 year ago by aP | Latest reply from hilldodger

Tags:

Pages: « Previous 1…34

mrh86 - Member

In all the arguments for not wearing helmets people keep referring to this rotational injury malarky. Ok, so in a major crash, helmets might not reduce overall mortality/serious morbidity, but they sure as hell reduce other morbidity to some extent. Now, if that approach was taken for instance in the NHS, what would actually be offered to us? The attitude would be if its not going to kill you then we may as well not bother.

If you were going to fall of your bike and had the choice of a scar across your face and concussion or wearing a helmet that might prevent this....which one would you choose? Seems like a bit of a dumb question. The overall risk/probability of you being involved in a minor crash like this is higher than being involved in a major crash (with lots of potential for rotational injuries). So therefore surely there is more potential to benefit in wearing a helmet than not? Though I suppose this brings up the question as to what is more important; life or quality of life?

Also, based on this rotational injury theory....would those who support that therefore advocate that motocross racers/downhillers do not wear helmets at all?

Posted 1 year ago #
5thElefant - Member

So therefore surely there is more potential to benefit in wearing a helmet than not?

Unless you take risk compensation into account.

I'd have thought it's pretty obvious a helmet will offer some protection. But when you look at the population as a whole risk compensation cancels out the protection offered.

I bet the split differs by age though. I know when I as young (before they'd invented helmets) risk didn't cross my mind. Now I'm old I modify my behaviour. So... helmets for youngsters may well offer a net benefit.

Posted 1 year ago #
TandemJeremy - Member

I don't know if that is really fair to say 5th elephant. there is some effect that means when you look at whole populations no benefit is seen from helmet wearing.

Risk compensation is one possibility but there are other possibilities as well and its probably multifactorial. Helmets causing some injuries thru rotational impacts or other causes, helmet wearers being more likely to crash for other reasons ( inexperience??) Faults in data collection /interpretation on both sides ( so benefits are small much lower than usually estimated and thus cannot be seen in large scale views with small % of injuries)

To my mind all you people who cry so loudly for helmets would be better off shouting for better road design, better quality research and better testing and design of helmets( cycle helmets test worse for rotation than helmets for other sports)

Posted 1 year ago #
deadkenny - Member

As I've said before, it all depends what we are talking about here. Road or off-road, or is this discussion being general and ignoring the actual use? Given the nature of this forum I would have thought there'd be more of an off-road bias, but maybe not.

Personally I'm of the opinion that on-road and off-road helmet benefits are entirely different. I have little interest in on-road cycling myself anyway, but I would assume that the actual number of incidents are relatively very low compared to off-road and likewise the benefits of a helmet in a road incident is perhaps lower.

Off-road is a very different situation, although it partly depends what kind of riding you do (saying that I've seen serious incidents on a tame trail as much as on serious trails). Personally I think you're mad to go doing things like downhill stuff without a helmet, and ideally full face.

I don't insist anyone has to wear one, it's up to you, but just about everyone I know wears a helmet for what they believe is a very good reason. Many as a result of having an accident or their wearing is reinforced by an accident they've had or witnessed

What I will say is if a particular location is private and demands a fee or membership to ride, and if they say helmets are required to ride there, then you wear a helmet. End of.

I have serious doubts that those who are fairly anti-helmet have ever actually had an accident or witnessed someone who has had one. I would seriously like to know the experience and opinions of those who have had one (mainly off-road) and whether they still believe in helmets. Personally I believe front line experience from those involved counts far greater than cold academic studies based on sources that aren't fairly comparable or accurate, or the studies are somewhat generalised. Just saying that a helmet has a certain percentage effect in reducing the risk of a head injury, doesn't paint the entire picture about the benefits or otherwise of a helmet itself. The way I look at it is you are very likely to sustain a head injury in a crash, helmet or not. That is not what I look at out of a helmet. I'm more concerned about whether I will survive and/or avoid ending up paralysed. If I get a head injury that is recoverable from and live another day, then the helmet is doing the job. In my opinion, and based on personal experience.

Posted 1 year ago #
TandemJeremy - Member

So you think anecdote counts for more than rigorous and valid peer reviewed studies? despite the conclusions?

Some neurosurgeons won't wear helmets at all because of the rotational injury issue causing greater trauma.

The way I look at it is you are very likely to sustain a head injury in a crash, helmet or not.

complete and utter rubbish. Head injuries are rare. This is one of the common bits of nonsense spouted by the helmet evangelists.

Posted 1 year ago #
GW - Member

I have serious doubts that those who are fairly anti-helmet have ever actually had an accident or witnessed someone who has had one. I would seriously like to know the experience and opinions of those who have had one (mainly off-road) and whether they still believe in helmets.
I have had literally thousands of crashes while mountainbiking.. I've ridden all my life (BMX/road then MTB) and didn't ever wear a helmet until I was around 21/22yrs old, and that was only because a friend entered me in an XC race so I borrowed a helmet for the event, I did quite well so I then went on to race XC and then DH regularly for around 15years so 'obviously' wore a helmet during that time. I haven't raced for around 5 years now and rarely wear a helmet these days.. probably ridden most days this year and have worn a helmet maybe 3 times, one of these times was at a DH event and because of the rules I had to wear spine protection and gloves too (I wouldn't have worn either if I didn't have to). FWIW I am neither pro or anti helmet but I am definately anti blinkered pro-helmet bores both in forums and real life.

The way I look at it is you are very likely to sustain a head injury in a crash, helmet or not. That is not what I look at out of a helmet. I'm more concerned about whether I will survive and/or avoid ending up paralysed. If I get a head injury that is recoverable from and live another day, then the helmet is doing the job. In my opinion, and based on personal experience.
so how many times have YOU crashed while biking?

and Paralysis? WTF?

Posted 1 year ago #
Blower - Member

cant be arsed reading all this.

other than two of my old mans mates died from head injury on the bikes,helmet may-would have saved them...

fell off bike on monday,banged my head on a rock,so glad i had helmet on.

Posted 1 year ago #
5thElefant - Member

I have serious doubts that those who are fairly anti-helmet have ever actually had an accident or witnessed someone who has had one. I would seriously like to know the experience and opinions of those who have had one (mainly off-road) and whether they still believe in helmets

I said early on in this thread that I had a big off last year without a helmet, and had I been wearing one I'm sure I'd have claimed it saved my life. But I wasn't and I was fine.

I'm neither for nor against helmets (I wear one occasionally). I do think that people vastly overestimate the protection they offer. I'm talking about the the bits of polystyrene that people have balanced on the top of their heads, not proper full face helmets. Risk compensation aside I imagine proper helmets are worth wearing. I've crashed enough MX bikes using my face to stop and I'm not dead (and still beautiful), so I must be right...

Posted 1 year ago #
deadkenny - Member

Some neurosurgeons won't wear helmets at all because of the rotational injury issue causing greater trauma.

So you'd rather trust a neurosurgeon who probably doesn't ride a mountain bike, over mountain bikers who have actually been in many accidents and know the real results.

complete and utter rubbish. Head injuries are rare. This is one of the common bits of nonsense spouted by the helmet evangelists.

Wow. I must be special then. I had a serious head injury just the other week. Someone else I know had a fairly serious head injury also a few months back. Came across a kid with a bit of a head injury some months back also. The folk over of MTB Britain that I sometimes ride with found someone with a head injury very recently in the same location I did mine.

Sure it's semi anecdotal. There are a lot of anecdotes in mountain biking. Most are factual also and aren't based on statistics generated from perhaps even more vaguely anecdotal information. I mean, from my own experience I have doubts that accurate information is actually recorded in accident situations. Ambulance crew & ICU staff are more interested in saving your life and ask limited questions about what happened. In my case they know it involved a mountain bike although I doubt that is actually recorded. They also know I had a helmet on. Is that recorded? It's not on the records they gave me. It all contains a basic summary and a long list of the drugs administered, CT scan, x-ray and so on they had to do.

Posted 1 year ago #
Elfinsafety - Member

So you think anecdote counts for more than rigorous and valid peer reviewed studies? despite the conclusions?

Erm, yeah. I'd rather use the actual evidence that helmets may well have saved the wearer from more serious injury, and my own experiences, than what's written in some 'study'.

See, what none of the studies have done, is taken a suitable test group, and hit the subjects heads in various places, with heavy objects, then repeated the exercise with the subjects wearing helmets, and compared the results. You can't do tests like that, it's not allowed. So, the findings of any studies, no matter how posh the people writing them, are little more than theory really, aren't they?

Does that not occur to you, that such studies aren't alt all conclusive, and the 'evidence' of many people who believe they've bin saved from further injury, not mean anything at all? My doctor believes I was spared serious injury due to me wearing a helmet. That's just as valid an onion as any other, and as it's my bonce, even more valid if you ask me.

My doctor is a lot more female and lovlier than you, TJ, so I'll listen to her instead of you. Oh, and she's a doctor. An actual real one; I've seen her stificates.

Some neurosurgeons won't wear helmets at all because of the rotational injury issue causing greater trauma.

I need to see proof of this statement please. Now.

Posted 1 year ago #
hilldodger - Member

TandemJeremy
So you think anecdote counts for more than rigorous and valid peer reviewed studies? despite the conclusions?

OK, but.....

TandemJeremy
One of the things that is clear the more you read up on this is how poor, biased and limited much of the research is

....that would be those rigorous and valid peer reviewed studies then

TandemJeremy
I am sure risk compensation is a factor. You feel more vulnerable without a helmet and ride more carefully

Nice anecdote

TandemJeremy
all helmets are uncomfortable sweaty and unpleasant to wear.

Based on what, your own experiences, again nice anecdote

So, in summary:
The research is flawed, except that which TJ decides isn't
Anecdotes are invalid, except for those of TJ

Posted 1 year ago #
TandemJeremy - Member

Hilldodger - nice selective quoting. I thought you had flounced off months ago after getting fed up of stalking and attacking me but now you are back to do the same.

You really are a tiresome bore and your continual attacks on me show this

Posted 1 year ago #
Peyote - Member

Erm, yeah. I'd rather use the actual evidence that helmets may well have saved the wearer from more serious injury, and my own experiences, than what's written in some 'study'.

Surely they're both actual evidence, it's just one is more personal to you and therefore you ascribe more emotion to it than a larger evidence base collated from a wider variety of more distant sources? Not a particularly scientific approach, but a very human one!

See, what none of the studies have done, is taken a suitable test group, and hit the subjects heads in various places, with heavy objects, then repeated the exercise with the subjects wearing helmets, and compared the results. You can't do tests like that, it's not allowed. So, the findings of any studies, no matter how posh the people writing them, are little more than theory really, aren't they?

Well, that test ignores all factors prior to the impact occuring. i.e. behaviour preventing the accident in the first place (the risk compensation alluded to earlier). It also ignores behaviour while the accident is occuring, i.e. impact preparation, moving your head so it is protected by your body/limbs. This is a lot more difficult when you've got a couple of inches of polystyrene increasing the diameter of it. Then one has to consider the impact itself, whether the presence of additional material increases certain injuries over others, but also the relative seriousness of those injuries over ones sustained sans helmet!

It's all a bit more complicated than it first appears, a bit like all accident prevention and investigation really!

Posted 1 year ago #
TandemJeremy - Member

Hilldodger 9 months ago. I have been ignoring you and given my own tantrums didn't feel like bringing this back up. However lets just let daylight disinfect your poisonous attitude.

hilldodger - Member

TJ, this is my last post ever here so I don't need to 'fear the Mods' so I can say that your internet persona is the most annoying I have ever encountered, you have never added anything constructive to any discussion, and are a negtaive and disruptive influence to any attempts at serious discussion with your huff'n'puff attitude.

I sincerely hope that one day you talk IRL to someone in this manner and they inflict heavy, disfiguring and permanent damage upon your smug, middle class pseudo intellectual McAss............

...over and definitely out

Posted 1 year ago #
hilldodger - Member

TandemJeremy - Member

Hilldodger - nice selective quoting. I thought you had flounced off months ago after getting fed up of stalking and attacking me but now you are back to do the same.

You really are a tiresome bore and your continual attacks on me show this

But you still won't answer the questions you old fraud, and as soon as you start being shown up as inconsistent you pull the old 'personal attack' card

Are most of the studies flawed, and if so how did you arrive at this conclusion ?

Is you 'being sure' of something anecdotal or not ?

Posted 1 year ago #
hilldodger - Member

TandemJeremy - Member

Hilldodger 9 months ago. I have been ignoring you and given my own tantrums didn't feel like bringing this back up. However lets just let daylight disinfect your poisonous attitude.

Yup, I lost my temper with you and posted inappropriately - that's not a poisonous attitude, it's a moment of irrationality.

You now seem to be keen to make the arguments personal, but I'm not taking the bait anymore - if you don't want to answer perfectly reasonable questions on the basis of a 9 month old e-strop then fine, don't answer them.

Posted 1 year ago #
TandemJeremy - Member

Hilldodger - you have a repeated pattern of personal attacks on me as anyone can see. Its dull and tiresome.

I am not making the argument personal - you have done that with your consistent spiteful and personal attacks. I have mainly been ignoring you.

I will now go back to ignoring you as you are beneath contempt

Posted 1 year ago #
hilldodger - Member

TandemJeremy
I will now go back to ignoring you as you are beneath contempt

Posted 1 year ago #