[url=
[/url]
What do you think?
did he really have that accident he describes? (serious question)
TJ TO THE FORUM PLEASE!
REPEAT: TJ TO THE FORUM PLEASE!
Yes he did
Yes, he definitely did. Major, major head impact. Not good in any way shape or form.
Having seen a rider in our group "rabid anti-lid" fracture his skull and almost cop it. He just accidentally unclipped.
did he really have that accident he describes? (serious question)
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/7904182/James-Cracknell-fractures-skull-in-Arizona-truck-crash.html ]Yup.[/url]
We did this one already. IIRC, even TJ accepted that the type of injury sustained in this accident meant that a helmet was A VERY GOOD THING in this instance.
Is that Gordon Ramsey's son? 🙂
Watched his snow race docu on Discovery the other week, felt for the poor bloke 🙁
[url= http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5063/5619037564_f9459edcf5.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/bucklevision/5619037564/ ]tj-signal[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/bucklevision/ ]j.buckle[/url], on Flickr
"My short term memory was gone, I couldn't make decisions, I had no motiviation."
Blimey, he turned into ME!
Not quite druidh - but that is the sort of accident that may well be mitigated by a helmet - but its as ever is not clear cut. You simply do not know what the outcome would be otherwise - and it also clearly demonstrates the limitations of helmets - he still has a major head injury.
[i]it also clearly demonstrates the limitations of helmets - he still has a major head injury[/i]
Limitations? Without one he'd be dead! (doctors said that, not me)
it also clearly demonstrates the limitations
of helmets - he still has a major head injury.
Preferable to being dead, imho.
DezB - and no matter what anyone says you don't know that. Its a classic thing to say but completely unfounded.
What is certain is that as helmet wearing rates go up, head injury and death rates do not fall.
Some researchg shows in 30% of accidents helmets make head injury worse. ( but probably not in this case)
real good evidence for cycle helmets protecting from major injuries is simply not there. They simply are not designed to do so.
If you want to wear a lid wear one, if not don't.
There...done.
Preferable to being dead
You don't know that though do you? You're just making assumptions. Being dead may be great! The Islamists might be right for all we know. You might get 70-odd virgins to have a pop at etc etc
I'm just trying to get into the TJ mindset 😉
Some researchg shows in 30% of accidents helmets make head injury worse. ( but probably not in this case)
I'm not too sure what "researchg" is but would that not imply that therefore in 70% of accidents wearing a lid would lessen head injuries?
Some researchg shows in 30% of accidents helmets make head injury worse. ( but probably not in this case)
So in 70% of cases they made it better?
damit, beeten by a few seconds!
Not nessasarily - in some instances no difference, in some an improvement in outcomes. Never seen any numbers for that and I doubt the 30% figure.
However there is at least one neurosurgeon cyclist who will not wear a helmet as he believes the risks from wearing one are too high.
As a commuter/mtb rider that always wears a helmet…not only because it is the law here in Canberra, I am very happy to have been wearing one last week. Usual commute on a bike path (2m wide concrete) at the bottom of a hill going 45-50km/h I came off a couple of weeks ago - don't really know what happened but assume tyres skidded on damp/frosty/muddy/leafy section and I landed on my back and smacked my head into the ground. Helmet smashed and skin on the back of my head scraped off by inside of polystyrene of helmet. Dazed for a bit and had the day off work, but I would have had a fractured skull or worse had I not had a helmet on - of that I am sure. Happy to buy another one, very very happy.
Not nessasarily - in some instances no difference, in some an improvement in outcomes. Never seen any numbers for that and I doubt the 30% figure.However there is at least one neurosurgeon cyclist who will not wear a helmet as he believes the risks from wearing one are too high.
You expect us to believe that in over 40% of accidents a helmet makes no difference in the severity of a head injury?
However there is at least one neurosurgeon cyclist who will not wear a helmet as he believes the risks from wearing one are too high.
He's lying TJ. I spoke to him about it, and he said its because he can't stand having helmet hair in the pub afterwards, as he reckons its the only reason he can't get in with that bird behind the bar with the cracking norks.
Seriously. The whole risk thing is just a smoke-screen
You might get 70-odd virgins to have a pop at etc etc
Aye, but as Jo Caulfield put it, knowing my luck it wouldn't be 70 pliable nubile virgins, it'd be 70 maiden aunts on their zimmer frames.
I think Jeremy's laptop must flash red when someone posts a helmet topic.
No - did I say that? I did not. I said there are three types of outcome -
1) the helmet reduces injury
2) the helmet makes no difference to injury
3) the helmet makes injury worse
The first 2 I have never seen quantified, the third I have see a reputable bit of research give a 30% figure to that I personally believe is too high
the neurosurgeon argument is he would rather have a focal injury that a Diffuse one.
i smacked my head off low branches 3 times on wednesday. for that reason, i will continue to wear a helmet off road. and possibly look into ducking.
i have no illusions of it stopping my brain mushing under a truck though
The whole neurosurgeon thing is just about norks TJ. I can see his point though.
[i]I can see his point though[/i]
You shouldn't have been looking.
I appreciate as long as it is not a legal requirement to wear a helmet, each individual should be free to make their own decision on the issue.
However, I think that actively discouraging others from wearing a helmet is taking it too far.
Claiming that wearing a helmet makes the injury worse in 30% of accidents sounds like the kind of stuff a Flat Earth Believer/Creationist would come up with.
Touch paper lit. I'll retire to a safe distance.
No - did I say that? I did not. I said there are three types of outcome -
1) the helmet reduces injury
2) the helmet makes no difference to injury
3) the helmet makes injury worse
Yes you did. You said that in 30% of cases a lid makes things worse but the figure of 70% making things better isn't correct as in some crashes the lid makes no difference. Looking at the maths if your position of not wearing one is better than wearing one the then those crashes where the helmet makes no difference must be over 40% in order to make wearing one more of a hazard than not.
Last weekend I went to the park with the kids on their bikes, nothing spectacular about that but my son fell backwards from the top of the slide onto his head.
Fortunately he still had his helmet on which is now cracked in four places.
No injuries were sustained other than a sore neck.
Helmets work!
The first 2 I have never seen quantified, the third I have see a reputable bit of research give a 30% figure to that I personally believe is too high
OH Goodness me. where is the test data for the 90-odd percent of crashes that turn out to be 'minor' because the helmet simply works?
no one reports it, only the cases where 2 and 3 happen are reported of course. for example, i've had at least 5 crashes this year where i bumped my melon a bit and the helmet reduced the pain i would have inevitably suffered due to skull slowly scraping sharp rock.
those (and all me previous crashes) are not in anybody's test data.
do the mathhhhhh...........
Maybe it's all a conspiracy by the worlds helmet manufacturers. They have the worlds politicians and doctors in their pockets. Evil helmetmakers.
Matt - Who is actively discouraging people from wearing helmets?
The 30% figure came from a well written piece of experimental and analytical work.
All I want is for the debate to follow the research. Rather than berating anyone who questions the efficiency of cycle helmets you should be arguing for better helmets and better research
JonR - I did not say that - re read my post
your position of not wearing one is better than wearing one
I have never said that. I do not in any post on here.
My position is clear.
1) helmets are good at protecting form minor injury. this is not disputed
2) helmets efficiency at protecting from major injury is often overstated.
3) in some circumstances helmets can exacerbate injuries
4) cycling is a safe activity. In some instances the risks are so low that I am prepared to accept teh millions to one risk of having a head injury that would be mitigated by a helmet.
Time and time again it is shown that as helmet wearing rates rise head injury rates do not fall.
TandemJeremy - Memberyou should be arguing for better helmets and better research
agreed. i want better researd before people start scaremongering with figures like 30%quoted above.
I want all cyclists who've worn a helmet that's worked in a crash to be included in the data. its gonna be a long research period.
I wonder if the neurologist ever did get his hands on those norks?
I wonder if they were, ultimately a disappointment?
Imagine putting your life at risk and finding out there were padded bra's involved?
So many questions
Even though I've lost a tooth whilst wearing a full face helmet, apart from a lust for controversy or a streak of self loathing, I can't see any reason why anyone wouldn't wear a helmet.
[url= http://www.pinkbike.com/video/212936/ ]Use your melon[/url]
Time and time again it is shown that as helmet wearing rates rise head injury rates do not fall.
NO.
head injury rates IN CRASHES WHERE A HELMET WOULD HAVE MADE NO DIFFERENCE DUE TO THE IHERENT LIMITATIONS OF A BIT OF PLASTIC AND STYROFOAM ...............
[i]I want all cyclists who've worn a helmet that's worked in a crash to be included in the data[/i]
If you want the research to be scientific, would you not need to repeat the crash exactly without the helmet to confirm that it had worked?
Anyway, carry on.
DenDennis - Wrong
several different studies have show that as helmet wearing rates increase across whole populations the head injury rate does not fall.
Thats double the number of folk wearing helmets, no fall in head injuries once all other factors are eliminated.
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4689
this is an interesting analysis as well
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=5339
Another worthwhile point is that many of the figures showing no difference or worse injury whilst wearing a helmet don't take into account fit and fastening of helmets... rather than any tangible research, but plucked from my sweaty crack, 48% of helmet wearers don't have a correctly fitting lid.
