...well whether it is or not it up to you
This older article came up on my FB and I thought it was quite interesting.
...well whether it is or not it up to you
This older article came up on my FB and I thought it was quite interesting.
It's Friday afternoon, I simply can't be arsed covering old ground when I could be looking forward to the weekend.
Interesting take in a way. My position is that people can do whatever they'd like but wearing one has almost certainly saved my life at least twice so I shall continue to do so.
Want to live longer? Reduce your risk of cancer? And heart disease? Then cycle to work, say scientists.Anything that gets in the way of treating cycling as a routine, safe activity must be a bad thing. I suspect that includes helmets. So, why they might be effective at minimising death and injury for a very few accidents their overall effect will be negative.
The biggest study into the issue linked using two wheels with a halving of the risk of cancer and heart disease.
Kraken - point 2 on that link. An impact with enough energy to kill you unhelmeted would leave you with serious injuries helmeted. an impact that leaves you with no injuries helmeted would only have been minor injuries unhelmeted
Nothing new in that link
Scotroutes is right on that. Workings out here for anyone interested
tjagain - It is correct in that the force was high enough to leave me with serious injuries but thankfully I've recovered now, did take a bloody long time though :x.
I don't fully understand why wearing a helmet puts people off riding a bike enough to lower how many engage in it. When riding a horse it's generally accepted and granted you are higher up in that scenario however it's not all too difficult to find a place where you can fall off at a higher speed than a horse can reach.
I don't fully understand why wearing a helmet puts people off riding a bike enough to lower how many engage in it.
I suspect there are lots of reason but whatever they are it is a thing as compulsory helmet wearing does lead to a reduction in cycling. Personally I think its what scotroutes said. If you promote cycling as an activity that needs PPE then people will be put off. Are we (the UK) unique in our preoccupation with helmets, fluro vests, mega lights, etc, to pop to the shops? It seems on the continent people just ride bikes the same way they just drive cars.
some crazy, risk taking foreigners:
an impact that leaves you with no injuries helmeted would only have been minor injuries unhelmeted
I know the helmet debate is your speciality Mr Again, but you don't really think that statement is true do you? (unless you count having a chain ring inserted into the back of your skull as 'minor')
A laceration can easily be a minor injury.
I'm not surprised there's nothing new there, it was just nice to see some evidence debunking "well I crashed and my helmet definitely saved my life"....."my doctor said so"... etc.
kraken2345 » I don't fully understand why wearing a helmet puts people off riding a bike enough to lower how many engage in it.Popping down the road to the shop - helmet or not? Going to the office - helmet or not? For many people they're just cumbersome and unnecessary. TBH, I find modern helmets so light, comfortable and unobtrusive that it doesn't bother me, yet millions of Dutch cyclists seems to manage just fine without them.
kraken2345 » it's not all too difficult to find a place where you can fall off at a higher speed than a horse can reach.Which is exactly when helmets stop being effective in any case.
I don't fully understand why wearing a helmet puts people off riding a bike enough to lower how many engage in it.1. fancy a go on my bike?
2. Fancy a go on my bike? BUT YOU SHOULD WEAR A HELMET, IT COULD SAVE YOUR LIFE*!
which is more likely to answered yes?
replace "should" with "must" and you'll get an even bigger drop off.
Portraying cycling as dangerous will reduce numbers, it's no more dangerous than a lot of other activities the general public engage in and no ones shouts for helmet use for those, so why does cycling get singled out?
(I wear a helmet about 90% of the time I ride bikes)
Fair enough then kraken. I thought it the usual " helmet saved my life nonsense" I am glad you recovered well
Why do helmets put folk off?
1) it sends the message that cycling is a dangerous activity requiring PPE whereas in fact it is as safe as driving or walking neither of which you use PPE for.
2) helmets ( worn properly) are uncomfortable and hot
3) it makes you look like a dork
4) you need to carry the damn thing around with you all day / round the shops ec - its a bloody nuisance
All theses effects are small apart from maybe the first one - however across populations the health benefits of wearing helmets are so small that these small effects will put enough people off cycling that any health benefits from helmet wearing are dwarfed by the increase in diseases of inactivity.
Everywhere that has tried helmet compulsion has seen huge falls in cycling rates and most of this fall amongst the groups that would most benefit from the exercise
Helmet compulsion in the UK would cost around 60 lives a year increased mortality and save maybe 10 from reduced head injuries
Ero - depends how you define minor and major injuries. For me its life altering to be major. Nice laceration is not life changing
responses are well worth reading as well
If my local town had the love for cycling and the accompanying infrastructure that other European countries have, I'd be less bothered about wearing a helmet and telling my kids to wear a helmet when commuting and pottering around town and country. Unfortunately, we are a country where cyclists have to share the highways with anti-cyclist road users.
As for cycling as a sport rather than a means of transport, some of us are steady pootlers on relatively easy terrain whereas others push a bit closer to the limit and falling is part of the game. I'd be picking myself off the floor a lot more slowly - if at all - if it wasn't for helmets.
We don't have to wear helmets for driving our cars, but we do have to wear helmets when racing our cars around a race track. One is a means of transport and the other is a sport, with different levels of acceptable risk. Similar differences exist with cycling, but we constantly bundle all types of cycling together as one.
Regardless of all that, I use this photo and my (hazy) memory of this crash to remind me why I prefer to wear a helmet.
I crashed and smashed a helmet a couple of years back. Honestly I can't say whether I'd have died or even suffered lasting injury but I'd have almost certainly needed medical treatment with the way the back of my head hit the ground.
yes but no one is telling you not to wear a helmet are they?
admittedly TJ told you why he finds them annoying but even he didn't suggest you don't wear one.
helmet use is fine (obviously), helmet compulsion or scaring off potential new cyclists by suggesting it's necessary, or that you're an idiot for not wearing one, is a bad thing
Don't wanna agree with TJ too much, but in addition to his list:
5) Helmets are not provided free of charge, and to get one that fits properly can be a significant cost even for a "serious" rider, let alone when compared with a typical bike.
I've had a crash, helmetted, that left me with some brain injuries (cleared up after about 6 months). I may have been killed without a helmet, but I haven't had the same happen again as I learnt from the experience. I'll ride to the shops without a helmet, just as I'll drive and walk without one.
Edit - Stilltortoise makes a good point about sport vs leisure/transport though. Racing a car? Chuck on a helmet, fireproof suit, put a roll cage, emergency cut off and fire extinguisher system in. Racing a bike? Wear a helmet and be prepared to get some road rash. Otherwise, keep it nice and convenient.
Indeed phil - the number of folk I see at glentress with poorly fitting helmets with the straps not done up properly is astonishing. around 50% IMO / IME
One size fits all helmets with the adjustable cradle are not very effective - see TRL research for this one.
If you wear a helmet make sure its one that comes in multiple shel sizes - if you can get a finger between the shell and the head at any point its poorly fitting. the chinstrap should be done up tight so you cannot eat while wearing it
My helmet was over £100 retail, it comes in multiple shell sizes and fits properly not relying on a cradle and passes the finger test
I wear mine, my kids all wear theirs, my wife wears hers. They see a picture of someone on TV riding without a helmet, they point it out in astonishment.
All of use get our health benefits from cycling, and as a double whammy we reduce (albeit perhaps in a very small way) our risk of some head injuries in some situations.
To me, that's the best outcome - making cycling with PPE the norm for a generation, just as wearing a seatbelt in the back seat of a car is completely the norm for my kids.
Ultimately it has to be personal choice. It's no skin off my nose if a cyclist chooses not to wear a helmet and ends up being the outlier in the stats as the one fatality that would have been prevented by helmet wearing.
It's no skin off my nose if a cyclist chooses not to wear a helmet and ends up being the outlier in the stats as the one fatality that would have been prevented by helmet wearing.
This reasoning is completely absurd. People die from head injuries doing all sorts of stuff, you'd need helmets for everything.
Well for me, lying in a hospital bed whilst typing this, I'm glad I was wearing my helmet on Wednesday when I had a head, face, hands and shoulder impact with a Welsh forest floor.
I will always wear one, my kids too, even though one is old enough to make his own choice. But we have all been in a financial position to buy well fitting, quality helmets for all of our cycling life.
Now, how to convince The Wife? I think my latest episode of being carried off the hill at Bike Park Wales by the Mountain Rescue and 2 days in hospital might swing it.
But it's all your own choice.
They see a picture of someone on TV riding without a helmet, they point it out in astonishment.
I only do that when you see presenters doing the 'right' thing by wearing a helmet, yet the strap will be something like 1 inch below the chin and the helmet will be pointing towards the sky i.e. Not on their forehead.
Helmets are fragile things, and generally look a mess when you hit them against something, in that way they do their own marketing for themselves. Oh look at the state of my helmet, it must have saved my life !
bigblackshed - tried the finger test? give it a go - you might be very unpleasantly surprised. If you can fit a finger between the shell and your head at any point the helmet is badly compromised
To me, that's the best outcome - making driving with PPE the norm for a generation,replace "driving" with walking, showering, jogging, walking home form the pub, anything you want really. Lot's of daily activities have the risk of head injuries, only pootling about on bikes has got this ridiculous "but you'll crash and die" rhetoric about it.
As bigblackshed highlights thrashing around the countryside on your gnarpoon is a different matter, yes I even recommend wearing a helmet for that, bimbling down the shops, give it a rest.
Your seatbelt comparison doesn't work, lots of evidence and research showing these are objectively a great leap forward, research and evidence on efficacy of cycle helmets is very much lacking. However research shows that helmet use for driving would be a further , maybe you should start a campaign.
Aus research shows 380 billion aus dollars could be saved in head injury costs if all motorists wore helmets
the chinstrap should be done up tight so you cannot eat while wearing it
Try telling that to the pro tour
You must log in to post.