Interesting I always consider the Pootling around the cul de sac when my son is at him most vulnerable.I don't make my kids wear a helmet when they're just pootling round the cul de sac, but they would wear them if going on a proper ride somewhere with other people/rough ground/a decent amount of riding time.
When off road/ longer rides he is supervised more and tends to consecrate on what he is doing.
Most XC helmets dont fit small kids. Get him a small dirt jump "piss pot" lid or even better a kids Full face helmet. There's nothing more gansta than a 4 year old with a full face crash helmet on!
[quote=mjsmke ]
Would you comment if you saw someone driving with un-helmeted kids in their car?
Bit of a silly response. A 20mph crash can result in hitting the windscreen head first. The seatbelt helps prevent that.
Well no - the whole point is that equating seat belts with helmets is a silly thing to do (as you've identified), hence it's a response to a silly comment.
The more interesting question is would those who comment when seeing a kid cycling without a helmet also comment when seeing a kid in a car without a helmet?
One fall onto a hard tree root or rock is all it takes to be permanently brain damaged. It might be low risk, but…
The "it might be low risk, but…" qualifier only ever gets applied to very few activities, though, doesn't it?
I mean, as I recall the closest I've come to a serious head injury has been: hitting the window in a car crash, smacking my head on low ceilings and door frames, whacking my head firmly into the corner of a cupboard, being hit round the head by a yacht boom as we tacked, and falling down a flight of stone steps while drunk.
That's all uselessly anecdotal, of course, but actually it's not that unrepresentative of reality: two of my near-serious injury causes—car crashes and drunkenness—are the biggest contributors to traumatic brain injuries, the former alone representing around half of the total.
Yet no-one ever says "it might be low risk, but…" about either of those. They only say it about things that correlate with helmet marketing.
Bit of a silly response. A 20mph crash can result in hitting the windscreen head first. The seatbelt helps prevent that.
I was in a car crash where the impact was side-on and my head hit the side window. Seatbelt didn't help much there.
I [u]always[/u] wear a helmet. My son [u]always[/u] wears a helmet. He's on his second after denting it during a fall. I'm not sure how he could choke himself with it, perhaps I need a more vivid imagination.
Re: Chariot/Trailer - my wife and I had this discussion when I said I wouldn't be using a helmet for him when he was in it. She disagreed, so I ran a series of tests. Placed him in it, strapped in and inverted it. Even with a drop he didn't hit is head on the floor. I then (with his participation) did a rollover test using some speed and a curb (he was in a helmet for this) and his head didn't touch the road or the side. My wife was suitably happy with the results. There was additional foam around the edges of the Chariot structure which added about 10mm to the height and possibly lessened the impact, but I didn't want to damage the thing.
I was in a car crash where the impact was side-on and my head hit the side window. Seatbelt didn't help much there.
That's why many cars now have curtain airbags.
Good point Bez, my eldest has actually had several head injuries in his 9 years on the planet, one getting into bed, one (at least) swimming and several blue slips from school.
He's broken an arm on a scooter, and the worst he's done on his bike is whack himself in the balls.
Funny how you never see anyone at the swimming baths with a helmet on.
The more interesting question is would those who comment when seeing a kid cycling without a helmet also comment when seeing a kid in a car without a helmet?
No, because wearing a seatbelt will save your life in many situations, not all as suggested above with side impacts, but roads are dangerous. Wearing a helmet on a bike can also save your life in a lot of situations. Not all, but why take the risk?
[quote=Daffy ]I always wear a helmet.
Wow - pics of you wearing a helmet to eat breakfast please.
Eating breakfast is probably quite low risk, but I can understand your decision not to take any chances.
[quote=mjsmke ]No, because wearing a seatbelt will save your life in many situations, not all as suggested above with side impacts, but roads are dangerous. Wearing a helmet on a bike can also save your life in a lot of situations. Not all, but why take the risk?
Wearing a helmet in a car whilst wearing a seatbelt will save your life in a lot of situations (where just wearing a seatbelt won't). Not all, but why take the risk?
roads are dangerous. Wearing a helmet on a bike can also save your life in a lot of situations. Not all, but why take the risk?
Pedestrian head injuries are pretty common but I'm guessing you walk bare-headed. If a helmet can save your life in a lot of situations*, why take the risk?
* debatable**
** but let's not
I fell and hit my head many times as a child. Not one of those times was when falling off a bike.
From my anecdotal evidence I should have been wearing a helmet when running about, when playing on swings, when jumping down from walls etc,.
What assessment is leading the pro kids helmet wearers to only use a helmet when on a bike?
(Can't comment on the peer pressure aspect as I don't let it affect me)
Its the sanctimony i cant take. That somehow by not wearing, or forcing a child to wear, a helmet you are completely irresponsible and actively damaging your/their life.
The worst head injury i ever had was slipping on ice and smashing the back of my head into the tarmac, another couple on hills. Not once ever riding a bike, and i've fallen off a few times.
I was recently in minor injuries after a very minor off in which I damaged my thumb. First question from the nurse was ridiculously about whether or not i was wearing a helmet. What the **** does that have to do with the ailment i am presenting with?
As for my lad, i'd rather he learn that falling off isn't a great idea and learn to ride properly rather than presuming some magical protection from the polystyrene gods.
MY kids wear helmets, the older one is probably more hot on the whole thing than I am. But really they're just there for a bit of reassurance (yeah, so I'm a bad parent encouraging risk compensation).
Oh and when I have the kid on the bike I'm paranoid about dropping it so I am then keen on helmet use.
I have noticed though that when their mum puts them on they're often not adjusted right.
But I wouldn't judge anyone who didn't make the illogical choice I make, and I get super worried if we stop at a play park, making sure the kids take their helmets off there is far more important than having them wear them elsewhere.
And for others, the helmeted kid in car thing refers to the fact that far more head injuries could be saved with compulsory helmet use in cars than on bikes. Hence me referring to myself as illogical - although the youngest's seat does have impact protection beside his head and the oldest has some restraint.
To anyone for whom this is your first The Helmet Debate: Congratulations! You've now seen most of the major positions covered. Including but limited to passive-aggressive condemnation, science, pseudo science, anecdotal evidence, analogies of varying degrees of tenuousness and contradictory combinations of any or all of the above.
It's safe to move along now. What about those e-fatbikes eh?
aracer - MemberWow - pics of you wearing a helmet to eat breakfast please.
Eating breakfast is probably quite low risk, but I can understand your decision not to take any chances.
🙂
I meant to end my post with, but everyone's different and you make your own choices, but got distracted.
I just wrote a long post but then realised it was a load of stream of consiousness drivel.
Boy wears a helmet, always has. He likes going fast.
All crashes at high speed the helmet has saved his bonce from impact with a hard surface. That's reason enough for me.
Instead of getting in a pickle of a mini rant, why not just buy your child a decent helmet that fits them properly? You can't eliminate risk, only reduce it. Is it worth having your kid not wear a helmet so that you can be proven right in your anecdotally based mistrust of them? If they do get a head injury while not wearing one, you'll feel like a prize fud.
If something can reduce the chances of serious injury to your kids brain should they fall off their bike, why wouldn't you want to reduce that risk? It is your call. I feel no need to make helmet wearing compulsory. I wear one. Others not but that is ultimately their right to choose.
No helmet, no ride. That was the mantra in my house. Of course I always made sure the helmet fit correctly and Met Crackerjack were always good for us. I also enforced the rules taking other friends' children out. And to set an example, I always wore mine as well. Teen1 survived to adulthood. He can choose to wear his helmet whilst riding around Uni as he sees fit (but not on the track - as no helmet, no ride is the rules).
I'm also happy to adjust badly fitting kids helmets, when they show too much forehead. Cheap helmets can be an awful fit. And bad fit will lead to an unwillingness to wear one A well fitting helmet is soon forgotten about. I really wouldn't bother if they were in a trailer though.
To paraphrase, "I'm a helmet wearer, but I'm not a tw_@_t about it".
I coach with a youth Cycling Club. We strictly follow the 'no helmet no ride' rule. As coaches, we have to; not a choice with British Cycling. A good rule in my view, for all the points made by others.
Personally I always wear one when riding, as do my kids. We have found that Spesh lids go down to good small sizes. Fits is vital, and a preride helmet check, on both fit and condition is a good routine, takes just a few seconds.
We climb mountains, paddle white water, ride mountain bikes, climb rocks occasionally, drive on motorways etc - all the 'risky' things.
What is the worst injury and where we have had as family? youngest_oab badly broke arm tripping over soft grass in the back field on his way in for tea...
We also had one slip into a fast running flooded river from the roadside by eldest_oab.
[url= http://i.imgur.com/MtqtVgJ.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://i.imgur.com/tVibtds.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://i.imgur.com/Or5U4Aa.jp g" target="_blank">
I wear a helmet, both of my boys wear one. No helmet, no ride. I've had too many offs not to take the risk. I may also need to learn to ride properly. Also gloves as mentioned earlier, that's through experience of growing skin back on grazed hands too many times as a kid.
OP and others. It's your choice. But you can make that choice yourself without caving into peer pressure, or having to explain your choice. Just be sure that you are making the choice for the right reasons, just not to be awkward or belligerent about it.
Replacing a helmet is cheaper and easier than replacing a head.
Just me that thinks obvious trolling from OP is obvious?
I've mostly taken the view that at that age there will either be visible damage to the helmet, the child (or bike/clothing) or at least tears from any impact enough to damage it whilst they are wearing it.Yeah, but I've had helmets that I know have had an impact but don't show any signs. I've replaced it anyway but I don't know how I would be able to tell with one of his helmets.
I don't always wear a helmet where inconvenience outweighs the perceived risk. My children are the same. I am sure some other parents judge me. Thats ok because I judge them for not having the brain power to perform a rational risk assessment or being so paranoid about tiny risks that they are couch potatoes.
I assumed kids still just take the helmet off when they ride around the corner - No! - what's changed?
Humans develop an excellent, instinctive risk awareness very early on in life. It usually takes between 15 and 20 years for society to destroy it and turn us all into mindless robotic vegetables.
*picks up helmet before heading off to the shops*
As a parent you obviously have a responsibility for providing a safe environment for your child.
You are doing that through risk assessment, whereas others via presumed injury mitigation.
When we were kids, helmets weren't used. But head injury studies were pretty much nil.. and available helmets were awful.
My first helmet was a Britax integra. It weighed the same as a small planet.
My kids wear helmets regardless, from day 1 on a run bike at a year old now hopefully through the rest of their cycling lives.
Did they need a helmet on a run bike.. my risk assesment said yes. My interpretation of duty of care to protect my kids said yes. Retrospectively after some of teh crashes wheyve had on run bikes and pedal bikes makes me believe it was the right descision. However, every helmet they wear fits properly, weigh next to nothing, can not rotate off the back of their head and has done a good job of protecting a 'small childs face' on mulitple occasions.
With that responsibility to keep your kid alive and in the best health for their entire and hopefully long life I choose to have min in helmets because:
If my kid crashed on their bikes at whatever age, whatever speed, however easy the ride I would NEVER want to say to myself "If only I'd made them wear a helmet"
I think the main weakness in the OP's reasoning is that he thinks is able to predict exactly how his child is going to crash. Whether or not helmet wearing generally is appropriate is another matter, but if you are basing not wearing a helmet just on the way you think a collision with a hard object might occur than I would suggest that you are being rather optimistic. Impacts happen in lots of unusual ways.
I think the main weakness in the OP's reasoning is that he thinks is able to predict exactly how his child is going to crash.
This is a good point. My daughters have both fallen off loads, and not hit their heads. They manage to save their faces every time, until one didn't.
Humans develop an excellent, instinctive risk awareness very early on in life.
You have to be frigging joking. Teenagers? Instinctive excellent risk awareness?!! HAHAHAHA! 😆
its quite hard to buy a decent weight, decent size, decent fitting kids helmet.
as will all protection - fit is everything.
[quote=imnotverygood ]Impacts happen in lots of unusual ways.
They do, doing all sorts of things. The most recent time I hit my head was last week at the indoor climbing wall (a hold on another route I wasn't paying attention to). I never wear a helmet at the indoor wall and I'm not starting now - though always to climb outside, where you'd have to pry it out of my cold dead hands, but then several times this year I've seen big lumps of falling rock fly past people I've been climbing with. I've also hit my head riding my unicycle and roller skating this year, yet I still do both without a helmet (my risk assessment may be slightly dodgy there, they're probably both more dangerous than some of the cycling I do wear a helmet for).
decent weight, decent size, decent fitting kids helmet.
Absolutely. For both my kids, the Lazer p'nut and Lazer nutz helmets were superb in all aspects.
Before those the tiny giro scamp was great.
the argument against helmets is moot with a well fitting model.
The argument against poorly fitting helmets is equally valid.
Thats ok because I judge them for not having the brain power to perform a rational risk assessment
So can I see your risk assessment poly?
Talking to the Mrs about this - on the local facebook page for our area there is a nurse who works in the neurology dept. She estimates that 90% of the head injuries she sees are people falling off (or being knocked off) bikes, many with life-altering consequences.
I strongly suspect all the anti-helmeters are retrospectively rationalising their dislike of helmet wearing.
Re kids' helmets - Spesh for ours until the eldest has a big enough bonce for an adult one. The Small Fry was great, and the pokey bit at the front was what saved her face from the Afan gravel. She's now on a Shuffle which looks pretty damn good to me in terms of fit and protection.
Thinking about it - I've washed the front out tons of times on loose gravel, and I've never hit my head. But I've always done it as an adult, and my instincts are quite fine tuned - I sense when something bad is starting to happen and I make arrangements.
She hit the face-planted because she was a kid, was inexperienced, and assumed she was going to be fine so it was a surprise when it went wrong. Also she is a lot closer to the floor so had less time to instinctively pull back I suppose.
[quote=molgrips ]She estimates that 90% of the head injuries she sees are people falling off (or being knocked off) bikes, many with life-altering consequences.
I find that incredibly hard to believe - either she's in a specialist unit which caters mainly for cyclists or there's some other statistical blip involved.
The anecdote does not come with any warranty or backup.
That's most unreasonable - I want a refund as it's not fit for purpose.
Not going to validate your opinion OP. Seems like you fishing for STW to back you up.
Sample size not big enough for you to draw conclusions.
Amateur napkin physics and bio mechanics are not a legit method for basing assumptions about method and extent of injury.
Children have been strangled by drawstrings on hoods - have you removed all the drawstrings from their clothes?
You've failed to account for one of the largest factors in accidents - other people (especially dribbling shit weasels in cars).
I'm glad the helmet I cracked in half was on my head and it wasn't my skull that hit a rock. That was falling off forwards and landing on my arms first just to balance your the anecdotal evidence.
[quote=sr0093193 ]Sample size not big enough for you to draw conclusions.
...
I'm glad the helmet I cracked in half was on my head and it wasn't my skull that hit a rock. That was falling off forwards and landing on my arms first just to balance your the anecdotal evidence.
😆
🙄
Are we laughing about how my point about a sample size of 1 not being big enough to draw an accurate conclusion is proven by illustrating that my sample size of 1 has a totally different outcome.
Hence 'balance your anecdotal evidence?' (yes I'm aware I left an extra word).
Or are you just trying to be edgy and cool whilst demonstrating poor reading comprehension?
When my son was six he turned sharply to avoid a dead squirrel, twisted bars, fell sideways an bounced his head off a kerb. His Bell Sidetrack helmet cracked. His skull did not crack. He walked away.
Anyone who has broken a helmet knows how much impact is needed to do so. I would rather that impact went into a helmet than a skull.
My kids have always had, and will always have, a no helmet - no ride rule. I do not consider myself expert enough to come to any other conclusion than helmets are a good thing.
When my daughter was just learning to ride, she went down the hill into the park and forgot how to use her brakes. She had a high speed head first dive into a rockery. Her helmet broke, her head didn't. My kids will never ride without them.
Same park, different day, son still had his bike helmet on when he fell backwards off the top of the slide (the big one, that he shouldn't have been on). Helmet broke, kid didn't.
I hate that park.
Almost always wear one but it depends where we are
There are a couple of traffic free flat routes we do without helmets. Its always great to get advice from folk out on their BSO squeaking along explain why its madness to not wear a helmet. THat said I reckon 99% of mine and their riding involves a helmet
The only thing i find strange is when parents make their kids wear a helmet and then dont themselves.
Same park, different day, son still had his bike helmet on when he fell backwards off the top of the slide (the big one, that he shouldn't have been on). Helmet broke, kid didn't.
Thanks for that anecdote. I'm definitely having a go at anybody who lets their child use a slide without a helmet now.
you keep missing out the winks
