[Closed] Helmets - Again - I know

Well. This is anecdote, but let's do a little thought experiment about risk: Out of my circle of acquaintances in the past 2-3 years. I can think of 5 people who have injured themselves while cycling. 0 while walking, 0 while driving. 0 kicked to death by donkeys. The floor is open.

**** me this is tedious.

Before this trollfest gets locked, as I always used to say to TJ, if you really don't believe a helmet will protect your head, lets go outside and smash your head against a wall or the road at cycling speed, first with a helmet, then without, and lets see which one you prefer after 😉

If our roads were as safe as Copenhagen I'd happily cruise around without a helmet, sadly the reality isn't like that here.

[quote=imnotverygood ]Well. This is anecdote, but let's do a little thought experiment about risk: Out of my circle of acquaintances in the past 2-3 years. I can think of 5 people who have injured themselves while cycling. 0 while walking, 0 while driving. 0 kicked to death by donkeys. The floor is open.

How many of those were doing the sort of cycling where I choose not to wear a helmet (I'd be very confident the answer is zero)? Come to that, noting your wording, how many had head injuries or damaged their helmets?

I don't know of anybody who's ever had a head injury whilst doing any of the specific things I choose not to use a helmet for, though I've heard of people doing so whilst driving and walking.

[quote=bigjim ]Before this trollfest gets locked, as I always used to say to TJ, if you really don't believe a helmet will protect your head, lets go outside and smash your head against a wall or the road at cycling speed, first with a helmet, then without, and lets see which one you prefer after

I'm sure he was very impressed with that strawman.

I quite agree that you can distinguish between different types of cycling (albeit the only time I have hit my head was while commuting). The actual score was 1 mtbing and the rest road riding. However, the point I'm trying to make is that just using the raw numbers to 'prove' the risks involved is just as unconvincing as anecdote. My subjective feeling is that cycling is much more risky than walking, enough for it to be understandable why people feel the need to wear helmets. (Even though I think they over-estimate the protection provided and the absolute risk involved) I am aware that this means I sort of agree with molgrips 😳

Here is a good reason why I don't wear a helmet (and all based on 40+ years of cycling)

My risk assessment of cycling is very low and I have fallen over more when not cycling, i.e. I didn't wear a helmet when going out drinking (a lot in my twenties), I didn't wear a helmet yesterday when feeding the chickens but slipped over on a wet patio tile that had mud on it, I didn't wear a helmet when X, etc, etc,

I have never seen any scientific evidence that suggests they actually work. Even if they did work I have no more need for one cycling than anything else (as above)

I don't like wearing them

If I was worried about knocking my head I would wear a full face motorcycle helmet as that has much more evidence behind it but no-one is going to do that are they.

Do helmet threads always descend into a bunfight?

Do helmet threads always descend into a bunfight?

Yes. It is a bit like religion.

- The pro helmet are the religious zealots who believe everyone should live their life as they do

- The anti helmet are the atheists. Don't see many of these as most are agnostics waiting for a sign from god before deciding

Wonder if Jesus would have worn a helmet

You (and steviecapt amongst others) are being absolutist about wearing helmets on bikes

No, I'm not. Read back. I was talking about the relative risks of cycling, and how we don't seem to have any conclusive stats. In the absence of which I have made a subjective assessment.

The reason I always wear one, and make my kids do so, is to form a habit. I always put my keys on the rack, I always put my wallet on the stairs, so I alwys know where they are. I always wear a helmet when cycling so that when the unexpected happens I have some protection.

Most people on this thread seem happy to wear helmets off-road, but they think road is safer. I don't, at least for me. The accident I am most worried about with regards my head is being taken out by a vehichle and smacking my head on an A pillar or bouncing off the vehicle and hitting it on the hard tarmac or a concrete bollard or something.

I still put it on if I am going to the shops for the same reason I out my seatbelt on when driving a short distance. I want to have the habit, so that I never end up forgetting it or not having it when I end up needing it.

But as I said - there are no cars on the pavements. No-one to knock me off, and I won't fall over on my own.

Just a couple small points

A cycle helmet is not designed to provide protection in the case of a collision with another motor vehicle. Expecting any piece of safety equipment to perform outwith it's original design is at best unwise.

Pedestrians are killed by collisions with cars even though they (the cars) aren't supposed to be there.

I have fallen off and concussed myself a few times; I think it's much more likely when you're pushing your limits. And if your limits are the North Face trail at grizedale, or the Pleney run in Morzine; always make sure you wear a helmet.

Still your choice unless your racing or in an event in which case it's not.

When you walk on the road do you ware a helmet molgrips?

The point everyone who does not always ware a helemt is trying to make is that there is such a small risk of having a bad head injery when cycling on the road (not racing e.t.c) that it is not the massivly dangerous activity that people make it out to be. Simalar risks would be using a step ladder without a helmet, walking on wet rocks without a helmet. there are increased risks there I suspect grater than that of cycling but no one gets their knickers in a twist about people doing those activities sans helmet.

I wear one. Have done for 20+ years. Once hit a car at red lights, absolutely, sentient my fault but ended up on the parcel shelf of the poor unsuspecting motorist.

I cut my chin but didn't have so much as a bruised forehead. I can imagine it would have hurt note had I not been wearing a helmet. Everyone has lapses of concentration so to say you'll never have an ' at fault' accident when on the road is naive tui day the least.

Just a thought as well, haven't deaths and serious had injuries come down in cars since airbags have been fitted as standard? Suggests having something between you head and something hard is usually a good thing.

if our roads were as safe as Copenhagen I'd happily cruise around without a helmet, sadly the reality isn't like that here.

+

Just a couple small points

A cycle helmet is not designed to provide protection in the case of a collision with another motor vehicle.

And that's even more curious isn't it?

We accept that if it weren't for all those pesky cars that drive into us, we'd be fine without them, yet we also accept that they're not designed to protect against an impact from a car.

So the kind of impact they are designed for would surely be just as common in Copenhagen? ie: non vehicle-induced accident which results in a bump on the noggin.

Mostly people seem to accept that the risk of a head injury while just bimbling to the shops on the pavement or a cycle path is low enough that it doesn't require a helmet, in the same way that walking to the shops doesn't, in Aracers words 'acceptably low'. Yet the fear of being hit by a vehicle causes a lot of us to change the assessment.

As usual this isn't an discussion about 'helmets' in isolation, it's about the level of risk (perceived and actual) in riding a bike on British roads, and the bizarre notion that the most appropriate way to combat that is to start armouring the vulnerable instead of tackling the (external) source of the danger.

*ignoring sport, as pretty much everyone seems to be in agreement that they're no bad thing if you're going to be bouncing around off trees.

We all know that in Holland and the like they don't wear helmets but do you think some of this is to do with the types of bikes they ride. Whenever you see pictures they are always riding the classic dutch bike that doesn't have a top tube. This is not really a speed daemon and is far easier to mount and dismount without falling off. The majority of times I have come off my bike when commuting is mud, wet leaves, oil, going to fast, etc and not anything to do with cars. Just wondering if you ride a type of bike which you can't go as fast on, is a more sit up and beg design and is easier to jump off, does this reduce the amount of times you fall off and therefore need a helmet. In the UK you hardly ever see these types of bikes. Is the danger with cycling on the roads all to do with cars or is it the types of bikes we ride?

I should also say that I have completely smashed helmets both off road and on road with no fault of others and either as pure accident or my own fault. When I think back, if I didn't have a helmet on I think I would be in a sorry sorry state now. When I broke my collar bone at Cwn Carn my helmet was decimated. That would have proper smarted.

A cycle helmet is not designed to provide protection in the case of a collision with another motor vehicle. Expecting any piece of safety equipment to perform outwith it's original design is at best unwise.

That's just ridiculous. Just because it's not designed specifically to do it, doens't mean it won't.

Bottom line - I don't mind wearing one, and it I believe it will offer more protection than nothing. It's really very simple indeed. The antis are making a huge deal out of this. I wonder why? Is it being made into a personal issue perhaps?

it is not the massivly dangerous activity that people make it out to be.

Talk to them then, not me. I'm not making it out to be massively dangerous - if it was, I wouldn't be doing it!

Is the danger with cycling on the roads all to do with cars or is it the types of bikes we ride?

99% <-> 1%

Is my guess* but if you can find evidence that a significant portion of accidents are caused by having a top tube I'll gladly change my mind!

FWIW, dutch bikes may be easy to dismount, but they are not as easy to stop, they are mostly heavy old lumps with crappy crappy brakes.

* saying 'cars' is a little unfair, it's a combination of our crappy infrastructure and the attitude of [i]some [/i]people operating vehicles of various kinds.

Bottom line - I don't bother wearing one on the road, I believe it offers protection for something that's not going to happen so why bother. It's really very simple indeed. The pros are making a huge deal out of this. I wonder why? Is it being made into a personal issue perhaps?

Crushed my new Giro Atmos into the side of a 4x4 at 20 mph. Broke lots of things (15 fractures), but not my skull (Six facial fractures immediately below the helmet line. Not even a headache, nor concussion.

Helmets are not designed to smash apart, just crush and decelerate the brain slightly slower than a direct impact. Mine did just that and it is easy to see the crumpled zone (i'll post a photo later). A simple sum shows that this impact is the same as a fall from about 4m onto a flat surface. Helmets are tested for a drop of 2m. So it did its job#.

I bought another and always wear one, for the next @#*% that turns across me without warning.

#Saved me a likely skull fracture and some probable concussion but none of this "saved my life" nonsense, please.

I believe it offers protection for something that's not going to happen

You think you're never going to be knocked off?

molgrips - Member

I believe it offers protection for something that's not going to happen

You think you're never going to be knocked off?

I believe it offers protection for something that's not going to happen so why bother. It's really very simple indeed.

is this post genuine or am I seeing things? (possible head concussion??)

muddy9mtb - Member

is this post genuine or am I seeing things? (possible head concussion??)

Heaven forbid somebody has an opinion contrary to yours.

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_safety/specialist/knowledge/pedestrians/pedestrians_and_cyclists_unprotected_road_users/walking_and_cycling_as_transport_modes_en.htm#_1.2.2_Cycling_as

Per journey, using the deaths per km figures from earlier in the thread and the average journey lengths cited in the link above you are three times more likely to be be killed on every bicycle journey.

Kilo is NEVER going to be knocked off his bike on the road.

Why are you so confident?

Yup, but that's the crux of it, relative vs absolute risk. "3 times more likely" doesn't mean it's likely, it just means it's less unlikely. It's not in itself an argument for protection.

(I wear a helmet on the road; but I think the statistical/logical argument for it is pretty bloody weak frankly and not helped by the very low level of helmet standards. It's not been proved to my satisfaction that it's worthwhile but that's OK because I don't need it to be proven, most risk calls we make aren't based on proof. You'd feel a right arse if you woke up dead because of a 1-in-a-million preventable head injury.)

If you replace kilo's "not going to" with "vanuishingly unlikely to" then it makes perfect sense. Basically once a specific risk gets so small, it's not unreasonable to treat it as effectively absent.

I know, bad science. But everyone else is chipping in with not quite in context statistics and "facts" and I didn't want to feel left out.

[quote=molgrips ]Bottom line - I don't mind wearing one, and it I believe it will offer more protection than nothing.

Yet you presumably do mind wearing one for driving?

Molgrips I suggest you read my post properly. I ve crashed occasionally but not on road for many years, been hit by a ford Capri as a kid and never sustained any head injuries. So we're looking at a rare occurrence on top of another rare occurrence, better rush out and buy a lid now. Obviously there are my person opinions it's all down to free will not prescription

Heaven forbid somebody has an opinion contrary to yours

I ve crashed occasionally but not on road for many years, been hit by a ford Capri as a kid and never sustained any head injuries.

I've never been hit, nor sustained head injuries. However it happens quite a bit, just ask on here. I'm not going assume it won't happen just because it hasn't happened yet.

I don't think people injuring their heads whilst doing things other than cycling is as common.. but I could be wrong.. perhaps we should have a poll?

If you replace kilo's "not going to" with "vanuishingly unlikely to"

I don't accept it's vanishingly unlikely. We get weekly threads on here about accidents involving cars. At least one story of head impacts due to cars on this very thread. I don't call that vanishingly.

i havent worn a helmet ever apart from racing, really dont like the sweat box aspect-also it feels wrong--,curiously some of the most experienced road cyclists i know -these are people who have raced at a high level ,also do not wear helmets on club runs etc---are we all idiots , or have we taken a risk assesment from years of experience and decided the trade off isnt worth it --as has been pointed out , they are not really designed to do much....

TiRed - Member
#Saved me a likely skull fracture and some probable concussion

I could have picked on many - how do you KNOW this?

I was taken out earlier this year in a hit and run! I went head first into the car that had pulled in front of me at over 25mph. On the road bike and on the drops so a pile drive head on into the side of a car.The force was strong enough to clean snap my carbon forks and bend the front skewer! I have a compression fracture in my back. 3 stitches in my face!

No concussion though and very thankful I had a lid on.

I would also add I'm coming up to ten years of almost daily commuting without any prior serious incident. I could have easily took the view that I don't need a lid!

nobody's gonna shout at the op for not wearing one

I think the problem is, that actually people [b]are[/b] starting to shout/tell people off for not wearing one.

It's certainly been used in some judgements and statements by law enforcement with regard to laying some of the blame on victims when they are seriously hurt and weren't wearing one, not to mention people on this very thread calling people 'moron' for not wearing one.

That is where it becomes unacceptable.

I think in this case anecdotal evidence is actually the best . Everybody can find studies to support their views both pro and anti . I know wearing a helmet over the years has at least saved me from a few cuts and bruises and possibly worse . I've heard a rider behind crashing without a helmet and a sound like throwing a water melon at the road which was her head into a wall , she developed a lisp and was drooling from one side of her mouth for a few weeks but did eventually heal and continued to ride without a helmet . Bottom line is you do what you think best I just can't understand why people are so against something that you really don't even notice that you are wearing when you have it on and it could save you from a serious injury , or even save you from a minor injury .

molgrips - Member

I don't accept it's vanishingly unlikely.

3 casualties per billion miles says it is. Or if you prefer, 553 KSIs per billion kilometers. And that's casualties/KSIs full stop, not preventable head injuries that a helmet would have helped.

I think in this case anecdotal evidence is actually the best

Ah well, in that case I've never damaged a helmet whilst riding on the road, and I've never witnessed anybody doing so. Therefore clearly my position is correct.

I just can't understand why people are so against something that you really don't even notice that you are wearing when you have it on and it could save you from a serious injury , or even save you from a minor injury

So you wear one whilst driving?

You mean three deaths?

The number of anecdotes on here about people hitting their heads suggests that head impacts are not that rare, even if deaths are.

If I'm going to hit my head on something I'd rather it was protected even a bit. Not unreasonable, is it?

So you wear one whilst driving?

🙄 good stats or stfu about that.

So you wear one whilst driving?

This.

Sorry Mol, I did a wee edit to add better stats.

As I say, I wear a helmet but I don't think you can browbeat people with the stats here, or really make a convincing argument that the risks of a- very specific this- serious head injury which could reasonably be prevented or significantly reduced by a helmet- are anything but miniscule.

That doesn't equate to an argument against helmets either though.

So you wear one whilst driving?

Been driving for nearly 40 years and never been in an accident where wearing a helmet would have made any difference so based on my anecdotal evidence I consider it safe to trust my driving skills + a seatbelt + an airbag to keep me safe .

As I say, I wear a helmet but I don't think you can browbeat people with the stats here

Thankyou!

or really make a convincing argument that the risks of a- very specific this- serious head injury which could reasonably be prevented or significantly reduced by a helmet- are anything but miniscule.

Not sure about that. The addition of two inches of crumple zone would seem to me to reduce deceleration on the brain. You'd have to come up with a very good argument why it *wouldn't* help to convince me.