Busy spot, that; used to run down there when we stayed at Dean Village. Was that at rush-hour Kit? Lousy get-me-hame drivers...
Yup, 5:30 Rob. Of all the junctions in Edinburgh, that's the one I'd have voted most likely to be taken out at!
Peter poddy - find some science that shows I am wrong.
Not what people claim I have said - but what I actually have said.
No doubt it's been said already, paramedics aren't partuclarly well qualified to comment on this IMO and just because you break a helmet doesn't mean it saved your life at all. I've broken 4 or 5.
Glad you're OK though.
i could have puy my house on tj posting within the first posts about how it would not have been a life threatening injury.
tj honestly go back and read your first post its pure speculative bollox.
which is oddly exactly what you are moaning about.
really glad your all good though kit... have a few beers to get over the headache( or get a new one)... was the driver sorry aat all???
Peter poddy - find some science that shows I am wrong.
I don't need to, thanks. 🙂
EDIT
.... Because every time this crops up, you admit that you wera a lid when you think it's necessary. And even a fool like me can see the gaps in that argument: There's no way of telling when it's not necessary.
Glad your ok.
I always wear a helmet even if I just pop down the shops. I have mashed several and at least one has saved my life, I still had a fractured skull and broken jaw but I'm alive.
PeterPoddy - Member"Peter poddy - find some science that shows I am wrong."
I don't need to, thanks.
🙄
Hi Kit
Glad you are ok, hope the bike isn't bad either.
It's funny how you pick out junctions, I've developed a paranoia about a yellow box in Tollcross, i'm convinced someone is going to collect me going through it when everyone else is stationary!
If you find a use for smashed helmets let me know, I have one from earlier in the year in the pentlands. 🙂
cheers
Mark
TJ, I truly hope that you are never involved in the sort of accident where a helment [i]might[/i] either save yoru life or prevent you from having a serious injury. Really I do.
I do wonder sometimes if he already has. Either that or he's adopted a 'stance' on stw that he's prepared to defend to his dying breath rather than give any ground on at all.
My personal experience is that a helmet has saved my head on several occasions. If I meet an doccasion where it woudl excacerbate an injury I might re-evaluate my position but I haven't.
[i]the tide of opinion and experience rips his argumnets to shreds every time though..... [/i]
that's exactly the opposite of science though isn't it 😛
[i]There's no way of telling when it's not necessary.[/i]
ummmmm, that'd be experience wouldn't it 🙄
mug arguments abound yet again...........
CFH - I wear a helmet when the odds of crashing are moderate to high. I was wearing on yesterday on a red graded trail I didn't know. Odds of crashing high.
When the odds of crashing are low I don't wear one.
I understand the risks involved and am prepared to accept the millions to one risk of crashing and hitting my head in some forms of riding.
I also understand the limitations of cycle helmets which many on here seem incapable of doing. I have read all the science and evidence I can find and have made my mind up on the basis of the evidence. I believe in evidence based practice, not opinion an anecdote
people die from hitting their heads everyday. seemingly regular trips etc...you never know when the last impact will actually be your last.
I reckon a helmet woudl save you from death if you fell on a 2" steel spike coming from a flat back plane. For certain something that woudl kill you if you were not wearing the helmet, but would probably leave you fairly unscathed with one. 🙂
I wear a helmet all the time because it's easier to just wear one than to choose a) where I'm going to ride that day and b) remember to grab it if the last 10 rides were low-risk rides. Seen many people scalped and split on low-risk rides through apparently unlikely accidents, not worth the bother. It's not so much over-belief in helmets, more that humans are VERY poor at judging risk (scientifically proven) so it makes sense to take the safest option rather than grading your safety equip by your judgement.
some people i have met shouldn't be allowed out of bed without full body armour on! 🙂 🙂
Hmmm, seems like a well balanced article TJ…
Your points (the article you linked) seem to be:
1- Helmets don’t make you indestructable; they give people a false sense of security thus making them take greater risks,
2- they are slightly more uncomfortable than bare headed riding thus affecting concentration
3- they only absorb the force from any initial impact and can only absorb a certain amount of force.
4- (I like this one) [i]“Many falls result in arm and shoulder impacts that keep an unhelmeted head just clear of the ground. A helmeted head, being twice as big and a little heavier, is more likely to hit something.”[/i]
Is that more or less your argument?
The first two points are trying to lay the blame for an increased number of RTA’s at the feet of helmet wearing cyclists and is annalogus to arguing that drivers of cars with airbags fitted are X% more likely to seek out accidents
These arguments are really more to do with the individual and make a point I will grant you some people don’t understand that they are still vulnerable despite wearing a helmet.
If your helmet is that uncomfortable that it distracts you it is more than likely the wrong size and/or poorly adjusted, again this comes down to the individual, these are also pretty marginal arguments in my view, there is no legislating for individual stupidity…
The point about impact absorption is an interesting one, in all incidents where a helmet comes in to play, it will be expected to absorb some proportion of the initial impact to the head and thus mitigate injury and possibly reduce a potentially fatal impact to an injury causing impact…
I’m not really sure this constitutes a flaw in the argument for helmets, they are a device for reducing the severity of injuries caused by impacts to the head, they are not re-usable once they have done this, and they only function within a certain impact force range, which is of course greater than the impact/abrasion resistance range of the human skull and scalp, in fact they make no point about abrasive injuries to the head which helmets also reduce and can lead to major blood loss and disfigurement…
The final point about [i]“and shoulder impacts that keep an unhelmeted head just clear of the ground.” [/i] Is just scraping the bottom of bloody barrel…
Firstly it presumes to judge the geometry an inherently random event, an accident which by it’s very nature is unplanned and unexpected based on statistics, where they got the information to base the assertion that [i]“Many falls result in arm and shoulder impacts” [/i] I don’t know, perhaps A&E reports on cycle injuries? but to top it off by saying an un protected head not quite making contact with the tarmac is safer than a helmeted head grazing the ground is bloody childish, if we’re going to take it to that degree then I would assert that the helmeted rider is actually at marginally reduced risk of a whiplash type neck injury in a shoulder impact where the head in and neck are thrown towards the ground the light contact of a helmet will reduce the angle which their neck is forced to, thus reducing the likelihood of hyperextension causing intermediate to long term skeletal and Muscular injury…
You suggested we look at the “science”, all I could see was the use of statistics (Not actual science) to try and debunk a few bicycle helmet myths... hardly conclusive…
Out of interest TJ, do you own/use a helmet yourself?
i understand tj's point put his need to post it on every thread about helmets is beyond me.
people die from hitting their heads everyday. seemingly regular trips etc...you never know when the last impact will actually be your last.
That's why I wear a helmet all the time. It's difficult washing my heair, but so many people have died after slipping in the shower that it's not worth the risk.
TJPeter poddy - find some science that shows I am wrong.
http://www.helmets.org/stats.htm
No idea of their validity but the sources are there
the idea that science can decide either side of this is just nuts.
talk about blinded by science 🙄
Out of interest TJ, do you own/use a helmet yourself?
Cookeaa, have you read TJ's posts? He does state his preferences for use or not!
(note I am not showing solidarity, & wear one all the time myself, but I respect others right to their point of view)
Boarding bob
At a quick glance I can see loads of major flaws in that stuff.
Extrapolating from children to adults. Not valid
After the fact statistical analysis. this is flawed as it always produces false positives due to the self selecting sample
Its evidence to be considered but is far far from any standard of proof.
lifes a risk.
like driving without a seatbelt
2- they are slightly more uncomfortable than bare headed riding thus affecting concentration
I love this one.
Reminds me of the **** I used to work with that wouldn't weat his seatbelt when driving on company business as it would crease his shirt.
like driving without a seatbelt
There's evidence that the seatbelt laws have not saved nearly as many lives as claimed/thought.
Sorry I was busy constructing my diatribe... I have since read TJ's post and retract my question...
Interesting debate but glad you're well and relatively unharmed Kit! Try some Arnica for the neck ache! I've crashed once off-road at Afan and landed on my head, on a big rock. Lucky escape there - and was T-boned by a boy racer on a roundabout and luckily landed on my head again having bounced off the car - the helmet both times just gave me a second chance. The brain trauma may well be more of a risk that the fracture itself. Everything about us - our memories, personalities and those we love - is in our brain. Take that away, we're just meat. So I like to look after mine.
In summer I may stick my helmet in my backpack until after the first climb e.g. Llandegla or I'll remove it going up a long slog of any other climbs. Just makes it a bit more comfortable/bearable when the weather gets hot but obviously haven't done this since 2006.
I smashed a helmet last winter when I came off on the ice where I fell backwards and gave the back of my head a sickening crack, probaby similar to the shower injuries mentioned. I got mild whiplash but I hate to think what the injury would be without a helmet.
The other time I don't wear a helmet is if I take the dog to Delamere and I'm bimbling around looking for new tracks.
So as TJ says, wear one when you feel it's appropriate.
A helmeted head, being twice as big and a little heavier, is more likely to hit something.
WTF?
[img] 
[/img]
There's evidence that the seatbelt laws have not saved nearly as many lives as claimed/thought.
What evidence?
The reason TJ and to a lesser and less eloquent extent I, post on threads like these is because the original claim is probably wrong.
The idea that a polystyrene hat is the difference between life or death is one that flies in the face of common sense; it's an inch of polystyrene, not a magical force field.
The structures within your head that get damaged in impacts are protected to a [b]very minor degree[/b], over a [b]very small range of impact speed[/b], by helmets, and the idea that not wearing a helmet is an instant death sentence is simply silly.
[url] http://cyclehelmets.org/ [/url]
As for the 'medics said it saved me' line, again, it's rubbish. Medics outside of specialized neurology units have a very limited knowledge of the mechanics of head injury, and suffer from the same preconceptions as the general public; helmets save your life...
If helmets worked, the evidence would be clear and unequivocal. The evidence is not there, despite many attempts to demonstrate it. There would also be a determined commercial impact from helmet manufacturers if they could find evidence that was incontrovertable; again, they can't find it because it doesn't exist.
Helmets work to prevent minor injuries at low speeds. They do not and cannot prevent major head injury or death.
The constant drip of helmet related tales only serves to reinforce the idea that cycling in general and mountain biking in particular is dangerous. It's not.
In 20 years of Intensive care I've seen two cyclists.... and about 100 pedestrians and car occupants.
Like I said before TJ you've not posted any "Science" just a link to some statistically driven drivel...
I'd like to know what, in your judgement, constitutes High and Low "odds" of a crash... I presume there is some of this "science" you mentioned behind your decision making...
paramedics aren't partuclarly well qualified to comment on this
The doctor in A&E who checked me out reckoned he'd seen a number of accidents similar to mine, but where the cyclist hadn't worn a helmet and had died.
I think the helmet debate is a bit like Marmite. You're either convinced you need one and always will, or your not convinced and nothing you see will change your mind.
"In 20 years of Intensive care I've seen two cyclists.... and about 100 pedestrians and car occupants."
So that probably actually illustrates that in terms of patients you've seen vs miles covered by form of transport makes cyclists statistically far more likley to be in your care than car occupants and pedestrians?
As for the 'medics said it saved me' line, again, it's rubbish.
Whether they said it or not, that's what I would have believed anyway. And I did say "(probably)" in my thread title, and "likely" in my post, both of which aren't definites.
Besides, what do we mean by 'life' anyway. Sure, I may not have been killed without a helmet but maybe I could have ended up in a coma, or paralysed, or loss of memory which could have effectively ended my 'life' as I currently know it. It doesn't have to be about dying...
Cookeaa
I have said all this repeatedly but as Rob seems to have grasped many folk don't actually bother to read what I write.
I own two different helmets and wear them as appropriate. Pisspot helmet for jumping and some days at trail centres where I will take it off for the climb ( its too hot to ride uphill in) and a vented XC type when I am wearing it all day. The pisspot type would appear to give greater protection from my understanding of the evidence and have less of the risks of helmet wearing.
[b]The science on both sides of the argument is weak at best and biased at worst.[/b]
For the very last time I will try to sum up my position.
Cycling is a safe activity. Some forms of cycling are riskier than others. When the risks are low I don't wear a helmet as I am prepared to accept the level of risk - it is millions to one in some circumstances I simply don't like wearing a helmet so would rather not do so as I find them uncomfortable, sweaty and restrictive. I come from a generation that was cycling before cycle helmets were developed.
The protection that helmets give is often overstated as you seem to agree. They are good at protection from minor injuries - bumps scrapes and so on. They are not good at protection from major injuries. They might mitigate some major injuries but also exacerbate some and there is some good real experimental evidence to show this. This is my understanding of the evidence. The mechanism whereby helmets can make injury worse are thru increase in rotational forces. This has been shown experimentally. The result can be either broken necks or what is known as a diffuse axon injury. Cycle helmets are worse for the increase in rotational injury than many other sports helmets.
So when wandering around the countryside on low risk trails I don't wear a helmet as I am prepared to accept the very small risk of injury
When the risk of crashing is high I wear one as I want the protection from minor injuries.
Across the whole population there situation is slightly different. Helmet wearing puts people off riding bike. The health benefits from riding bikes outweighs the risk from riding bikes without helmets. To oversimplify more people will avoid heart attacks form the exercise of riding bikes than will die from head injuries. This is why the "you must wear a helmet" evangelicals annoy me so much. There is much evidence to support this.
There is also evidence to support that individuals who wear helmets are more likely to crash and that populations who have high rates of helmet wearing have higher rates of crashing and of head injuries and death
I like evidence based practice so I try to look at the evidence and to make valid assessments from following the evidence. Other people can
read the same evidence and reach other conclusions.
What we as cyclists should be agitating for IMO is:
Better research into what actually happens when people crash
Root cause analysis for crashing
Better testing and design for cycle helmets
Nonk - you are correct in that science can never prove this - all you can do is consider the evidence and make your own mind up. And you are absolutely right in that it was foolish of me to get involved in this again.
Tj - we are all entitled to our opinions but do us all a favour and STFU!
Ps..glad your ok kit
For the very last time I will try to sum up my position.
Can we hold you to that on this forever if so we have done some good today STW
Junkyard - Member"For the very last time I will try to sum up my position."
Can we hold you to that on this forever if so we have done some good today STW
Yup.
There's evidence that the seatbelt laws have not saved nearly as many lives as claimed/thought.
What evidence?
Lots on seat belts here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_laws
Not going to argue about it though, and I always wear a seatbelt.
Does anyone actually care whether TJ wears a helmet or not? Ultimately, it's his decision. There is no compulsion for him to wear one nor should he if he doesn't want to. However, it would be a cruel irony were he to suffer a serious head injury when out on the bike on a low risk ride.
While it may be easy for TJ to take comfort from the science and statistics to justify not wearing a helmet, I'll continue to stick to wearing one in the event that the statictics end up not being in my favour and a perceived low risk ride ends up going wrong. I'd rather place my faith in a helmet to protect me than the science! Tree stumps and rocks are a lot less pointy and sore when there is something between you and them! 😀
Oh and Kit
Get well soon mate! Glad your helmet did the job!
I love the bit in TJ's article that says that a helmeted head is twice as big as a non-helmeted head....and hence is more likely to hit something..
who, ever, in the history of anything has had a bike helmet which makes your head twice the size?!!
glad you're OK though
From cyclehelmet.org's policy statement:
In particular we seek to provide access to a wider range of information than is commonly made available by some governments and other bodies that take a strong helmet promotion stance.
So its fairly clear where they stand then...
