[Closed] Helmets - Again - I know

I think flying head first towards a tree and then picking bits of bark out my crash helmet swayed it for me

For those that do can I ask what actual evidence swayed you?

a) The quite obvious evidence that was my helmet lying in two pieces after a crash in 2012.

b) the 1" deep hole in my helmet structure after an accident which left me with concussion, whiplash and fractured nose three weeks ago.

Both of which I'm happy weren't my skull.

If you're happy not to, why not just leave it at that?

It's the law here, makes things simple. Just like seat belts.

Because I like to make my decisions based on the evidence TBH I am always happy to admit to being wrong and changing my behaviour. I get that Kryton I really do but it's not statistically significant is it.

the evidence is hard to get as it's really hard to do what would have happened analysis. Then there are some very limited studies on driver behaviour and lids, then there is some other stuff.

My evidence is that bones heal, brains don't.

A friend fell off at low speed without a helmet and ended up with a brain haemorrhage, emergency op and a good few months off work.

Because I like to make my decisions based on the evidence TBH I am always happy to admit to being wrong and changing my behaviour.

The quite obvious evidence that was my helmet lying in two pieces after a crash in 2012.

That wasn't enough for you? Do you have a wife & kids?

OK so here is my thought process, If nobody wore one as standard would London's cycling population [b]as a whole[/b] be safer or worse off? Just standing at the lights this morning I got thinking is it me or is cycling really that dangerous that we need helmets, the evidence seems lacking.

You may only need it if you fall off or get knocked off.
Don't fall off or get knocked off.

Is this a real thread or just a 'look at me' troll - really can't work it out.

Day to day cycling is such a generally safe activity that evidence other than anecdotal is very hard to come by as to whether helmets are essential safety device or a head ornament. Datasets of accidents are so sparsely and incompletely populated, that not much can be inferred from them either way.
All I can say is choose whatever evidence you like, and be thoughtful in your judgement of others who chose differently.

joolsburger - Member

For those that do can I ask what actual evidence swayed you, please can we not have the usual my friends, brothers, uncle's sister fell on her head and would have died without one?

First of all it feels 'wrong' when I don't wear one - similar to not wearing a seatbelt in the car - just because it is something that has become so 'normal' for me. If I don't wear a helmet when cycling it doesn't feel right.

Secondly, a friend used to always cycle to work without a helmet. He used to race, had ridden for years and was a careful rider. Driving to work one day, there was a commotion ahead with a woman guiding traffic (turned out to be another friend) with a mangled red steel road bike with green panniers crushed under a Ford Focus, which I immediately recognised as this friend's bike.
He'd been hit by the car at the roundabout - the driver basically crossed the roundabout without slowing enough to see if anything was coming from her right and t-boned him.
He smacked his head on the kerb by one of the roundabout bollards & split his head open near the temple. It all turned out OK, but he took a real whack to the head & now has a large scar. He now always rides with a helmet.

Third, a friend of my Wife's was cycling through her village without a helmet on. She doesn't remember what happened, but she fell off, hit her head on the pavement/road & is now virtually blind in one eye. The doctors don't really know why, but she lost sight straight away (I think she can just see murky grey shapes) and it has never come back.

Lastly, I crashed my bike into the back of a parked car while distractedly looking back at my rear mech to try & identify an irritating ticking noise - miraculously no damage to the car, but completely split my helmet in two.
Cycled home and had abrasion marks on my forehead from the foam inserts against my head during the impact but no other damage or effects (headache for a while). I can't be sure, but I don't think I would have got up & walked home after hitting a toughened glass window at about 16mph had I not been wearing a helmet.

EDIT - I meant to say "OOPS, I've not done that right 😆 " but forgot.....must have been that bang to the head.

Is this a real thread or just a 'look at me' troll - really can't work it out.

Yep, I'm giving up based on the fact there's enough content in here without my own contribution to convince me to wear one. He must be trolling, I'm busy hence I'm off.

Can I suggest that not looking where you're going and crashing is kind of a little bit your fault?

Kryton sorry you're off as this isn't a troll, I'd hoped for a logical discussion without too much emotion in fact.

In Holland no helmets yet no issues, here in London most people wear helmets yet 9 crushed fatalities this year. I simply wonder if helmets are giving some absolution for those who in fact should work to improve road safety through better means, addressing cause and not trying to mitigate effect? I'm not suggesting for a moment that helmet users are wrong but I genuinely feel safer and more engaged/connected to events without one.

sometimes i do, sometimes I don't, and if I'm being honest; logic or evidence rarely has anything to do with it.

Would you ride a bike across a playing field or down a medow type hill without a helmet.
I would.
Would you walk a logn a road without a helmet.
I would.
Helmets off some protection if you fall off a bike, then are not made to protect against impact with a fast movign car. A helmet would offer some small level of protection in this situation though, but it would offer the same protection if I was walking and hit by a car.
The risk of being involved in a accident if pretty darn small, so I don't ware a helmet commuting. Do what you feel comfortable with but jsut don't push it on to others. That is the biggest problem, people gettign so upset by other doing not the same thing that they do.

In Holland no helmets yet no issues, here in London most people wear helmets yet 9 crushed fatalities this year. I simply wonder if helmets are giving some absolution for those who in fact should work to improve road safety through better means, addressing cause and not trying to mitigate effect? I'm not suggesting for a moment that helmet users are wrong but I genuinely feel safer and more engaged without one.

In Holland no helmets yet no issues

Is this statement based on "actual evidence" too?

If you dont want to wear one it's your call, it's not law, but most people on here who cycle regularly will either know someone or have had a personal experience where they were bloomin glad they were wearing a helmet.

Day to day rides to local shops or bike path/canal pootles, no helmet
Anything I'd class as a "proper ride" either off/on road, helmet worn

Yes it is, Holland does have a lower fatality rate per 1000km ridden than any other EU state.

I see this is becoming adversarial and the evidence isn't actually evidence, so I'm out.

LFGSS.COM "http://www.lfgss.com/conversations/128549/"

Remember kids... always wear a helmet. (The almighty bikeradar helmet thread) | LFGSS

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleid=778EF0AB-E7F2-99DF-3594A60E4D9A76B2

Strange but True: Helmets Attract Cars to Cyclists

Although you might not want to leave your protective gear at home, just know that if you do, drivers will be a lot more scared of hitting you.

Spring is in full swing now, and a number of the straphangers (read: subway riders) in New York City, as well as citizens in other locales, are getting new tubes and tires and dragging their bikes out of storage. Bicycle riding is the skill you reportedly never forget, but there's a raging debate about whether or not you should forget your helmet when you hop on your two-wheeler.

Last September a plucky psychologist at the University of Bath in England announced the results of a study in which he played both researcher and guinea pig. An avid cyclist, Ian Walker had heard several complaints from fellow riders that wearing a helmet seemed to result in bike riders receiving far less room to maneuver—effectively increasing the chances of an accident. So, Walker attached ultrasonic sensors to his bike and rode around Bath, allowing 2,300 vehicles to overtake him while he was either helmeted or naked-headed. In the process, he was actually contacted by a truck and a bus, both while helmeted—though, miraculously, he did not fall off his bike either time.

His findings, published in the March 2007 issue of Accident Analysis & Prevention, state that when Walker wore a helmet drivers typically drove an average of 3.35 inches closer to his bike than when his noggin wasn't covered. But, if he wore a wig of long, brown locks—appearing to be a woman from behind—he was granted 2.2 inches more room to ride.

"The implication," Walker says, "is that any protection helmets give is canceled out by other mechanisms, such as riders possibly taking more risks and/or changes in how other road users behave towards cyclists." The extra leeway granted to him when he pretended to be a woman, he explains, could result from several factors, including drivers' perceptions that members of the fairer sex are less capable riders, more frail or just less frequent bikers than men.

Randy Swart, founder of the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (BHSI), says that studies such as Walker's run the risk of misleading cyclists as to the effectiveness of helmets. "The cars were giving him, on average, a very wide passing clearance already," he explains, noting that most vehicles typically stayed well over three feet from the bikes, rendering the 3.35-inch discrepancy to be insignificant. "If you really want the greatest passing distance, you should wobble down the road," looking as inept as possible, he adds.

Walker actually reanalyzed his data recently to counter this line of reasoning. "I assessed the number of vehicles coming within one meter [roughly 3.3 feet] of the rider, on the principle that these are the ones that pose a risk," he says. "There were 23 percent more vehicles within this one-meter danger zone when a helmet was worn, suggesting a real risk."

Dorothy Robinson, a patron of the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation and a senior statistician at the University of New England in Armidale, Australia, published a 2006 review article in the BMJ (British Medical Journal) about regions in Australia, New Zealand and Canada that introduced legislation that spurred an over 40 percent increase in bicycle helmet use among their populaces. The newly instituted laws, she found, did not have a significant effect on bicycle accidents resulting in head injuries, the primary purpose of the gear. Her conclusion was "helmets are not designed for forces often encountered in collisions with motor vehicles" as well as that they "may encourage cyclists to take more risks or motorists to take less care when they encounter cyclists."

Coincidentally, around the same time as Walker announced his results, New York City released a report on bicycle deaths and injuries: 225 cyclists died between 1996 and 2005 on New York streets; 97 percent of them were not wearing helmets. Of these deaths, 58 percent are known to involve head injury, but the actual number could be as high as 80 percent. Comparing the helmet to a seat belt in a car, Swart of the BHSI says, "When you do have that crash, you better have it on."

Walker, whose much-publicized report may inspire a new generation of bareheaded riders, won't make any specific recommendations to other cyclists (and neither will Scientific American), though he notes that when it comes to riding in traffic, motorists are the real problem. "If people read the research and decide a helmet makes them safer, they should wear one; if they read the research and decide it doesn't, perhaps they don't need to," Walker says, adding the caveat, "But they do need to read the research!" And watch out for cars.

come back when you have read it.

a) The quite obvious evidence that was my helmet lying in two pieces after a crash in 2012.

A thin piece of polystyrene snapped in two?

TheBrick - Member

Would you walk a logn a road without a helmet.
I would.

I'm less likely to fall over at 30mph when walking, probably less likely to fall full stop, and probably going to land better if I do.

That's not necessarily an argument for helmets- the risks are still so low. It just means it's not an argument for not wearing helmets, the risks aren't the same.

Me, I've smashed in a few helmets, perfectly happy to have been wearing them. But I've also been told by a doctor that my helmet saved my life, when I wasn't wearing one

joolsburger - Member
Yes it is, Holland does have a lower fatality rate per 1000km ridden than any other EU state.

Wearing a helmet makes me look like an idiot; they look utterly stupid.

But if in a 1 in a million accident happens and that helmet means I'll see my wife and kids that night, for £30 and looking like a plonker I am prepared to do it.

But if in a 1 in a million accident happens and that helmet means I'll see my wife and kids that night, for £30 and looking like a plonker I am prepared to do it

Why? Those look like pretty long odds. As I said in post one the chance of head injury walking or driving is higher so why no helmet then?

But if in a 1 in a million accident happens and that helmet means I'll see my wife and kids that night, for £30 and looking like a plonker I am prepared to do it.

Car or bike?

I never wear one for the majority of my cycling trips - though I suspect the evidence base I'm using for that isn't terribly relevant to you 😉

[quote=Kryton57 ]a) The quite obvious evidence that was my helmet lying in two pieces after a crash in 2012.

The plural of anecdote is not evidence.

I always wear one on the mtb. Over hanging branches provide enough reasons to wear one.
On the road bike - I very rarely wear one. It is so much more important to use whats in your head than whats on it.
I believe that wearing a helmet gives some people a false sense of security, that if they fall off, at any speed, the helmet will save them.

Helmets are only designed for impacts up to 15mph I read. The average road bike will be doing more than this. Then add in the oncoming vehicle...

Plenty of people I know remark when I don`t wear a helmet - yet ride like loons with theirs on.
Nope - Each to their own I say.

The docotor saying "waring a helmet saved your life" thingis really not based on anything. The doctor has no idea about how much energy was disapated by the helmet. Think there is a biaest toward thinging a bike helmet it like a motorbike helmet and assuming a greater level of protection. They offer protection no doubt the doctor guessing what saved you life if pretty much guess work of a high order.

@Northwind. I rearly get anywhere near 30mph commuting! My point was that if you would ride across a medow without a helmet on cycling is not considered too much of a danger. If you would walk along a road without a helmet then traffic is not considered too much of a danger. Now I know it not as simple adding thoese two dangers but my point is that the percption of the danger is sqewed. As I said do whatever is comfortable, but don't try and force something on to others and state that they are running a high risk. The risk is actually very low.

I wouldn't exactly class "a lower fatality rate" in Holland being the same as "no issues".

I look on it this way. If I am hit by a car or truck at speed then the helmet may not have much influence on my survival. When I fall off my bike and scrape your head along the floor, I would rather be wearing a helmet. At the end of the day it's your head and your choice.

TheBrick - Member

The docotor saying "waring a helmet saved your life" thingis really not based on anything. The doctor has no idea about how much energy was disapated by the helmet. T

If that was aimed at me, you misread- I wasn't wearing one and the doctor still told me it saved my life.

1 in a million is long odds. But I love my wife and kids.

Bike.

I play the lottery to win on longer odds

I know if I hit asphalt with my bone skull somethings going to happen.

With something inbetween the two I feel just alittle bit happier.

If its a long climb or a long flat bit off road I ALWAYS take my helmet off. It goes back on for dscents etc.

Dunno. I pretty much always wear one.

However, I managed to cycle into the back of a van in traffic a couple of months ago. My fault.

Left me with a broken nose and a cut to the bone on my nose - my helmet pushed my glasses into it and caused the injuries. I was pretty surprised as I know how to put it on properly, and it had retention system so didn't move much. Drs reckoned I would've been less injured if I wasn't wearing it.

Can't say it's made me more pro or anti helmet really.

colonel wax - Member
Dunno. I pretty much always wear one.

However, I managed to cycle into the back of a van in traffic a couple of months ago. My fault.

Left me with a broken nose and a cut to the bone on my nose - my helmet pushed my glasses into it and caused the injuries. I was pretty surprised as I know how to put it on properly, and it had retention system so didn't move much. Drs reckoned I would've been less injured if I wasn't wearing it.

Can't say it's made me more pro or anti helmet really.

Has it made you more pro or anti glasses? Since they were what injured you, and they didn't help you spot the van? 🙂

Wow. You are blaming the helmet?

Look at the bigger picture. Step away from the bike.

Strange,

Some people seem to think the only accidents that happen to cyclists must also involve a car, what a load of old shite.

Quick question, what exactly is so difficult or annoying about wearing a helmet? This thread is actually harder work than just popping one on.

My guess is that you have already had the accident and that the subsequent knock to the head has somehow caused you to start this wonderfully overdone thread, actually thinking it was a good idea. If a helmet stops me from making the same mistake then I might actually start wearing one whilst I walk down the street, cheers.

Sometimes I do,sometimes I don't.
Depends (on what I'm not sure.....wind direction probly).

@scandle42 Nothing is particualrly hard about wareing a helmet, but the same could be said for many other things. Knee and elbow pads e.t.c or someform of back protection. Or cyclign shorts, or cyclign spcific shoes. Its nice not to ware a helmet, just as its nice not to have to get dressed up to cycle. The risk is very small, really it is tiny, but a massive fuss it made about it for soem reason. It my choice. Why does it seem to upset you so much that others may not do the same as yourself.

@Northwind Appoligies. Missunderstood.