[Closed] Sorry to do this again...but I just don`t get it!!

Sheffield - its interesting stuff. Cyclehelmets.org has links but there are more - if you have an athens password you can get a lot of info. Google scholar and wiki throw up some as well. There is a TRL paper that shows the effect

to me its a strong argument for improving cycle helmet design and testing. Cycle helmets test worse than other types of sports helmets when tested in oblique impacts

Please excuse the spelling I am dyslexic, I have used word.

Lol, double whammy then 🙂

TJ, you are doing very well for being rational, I apologise for being overly critical in my previous post.

I would still highlight that point though. Surely most accidents must be where the driver doesn't see you - so the absence of a helmet won't make any difference until your head hits something.

Cycle helmets test worse than other types of sports helmets when tested in oblique impacts

Sheffield - no testing known to me but I believe pisspots are better from that point of view because of the smoother shell. Just an opinion tho.

TandemJeremy - Member
Vu deja - the feeling you are going to be doing this again

Any thoughts on my last post TJ?

This is absolutely BARMY. I'd wager a large number of accidents are caused by motorists not seeing you at all. So how does not wearing a helmet help? One of the battiest arguments I've heard since WWI - "Let's attack in broad daylight, they wont' be expecting it!"

http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/releases/overtaking110906.html

There are far far better ways of asserting your road presence than removing safety equippment. The fact that you think drivers are surveying the scene, seeing you sans lid and thinking 'right, well he's not wearing a helmet so I'll pass 6" closer than if he was' is making me chuckle irl

Just in case you can't be bothered reading the link that's been posted (which is quite likely since you don't seem to have read it the half dozen other times it's been posted) it's only 3 1\2 inches on average.

Not to mention the conversations I had with some ****s in the states who thought it was OK to nudge cyclists off the road as a warning but it would be OK cause they were wearing helmets. (I mentioned that before but I'm guessing you haven't read the rest of the thread)

Why not undo your front brake cable too? Weave all over the road a bit too? You'll be safe as houses then!

I don't undo my front brake cable because I doubt drivers even notice the state of my bike, just what I'm wearing. I do sometimes give a wobble if I hear a car coming up fast behind me. Every little helps.

Like I said, I prefer to do everything to I can to avoid accidents rather than rely on a half inch of polystyrene which includes asserting my position on the road and even my appearance. I figure if I get in an accident with a vehicle I'm going to be seriously injured or killed anyway.

I've read it before. The thing is, I don't believe it has much significance. The fact that it's a printed study doesn't make it gospel. For a start, it was just him on his bike, so there's no way to tell if he himself rode slightly differently with a lid on than without, thereby affecting the results. As well all know (or should know), as drivers we respond to a whole array of subtle cues and movements without even realising it.

The question I have is this: How many accidents are caused by motorists passing too close, and how many are caused by people not seeing you and pulling out into you?

Like I said, I prefer to do everything to I can to avoid accidents rather than rely on a half inch of polystyrene

Very flawed logic. Why can't you do all those things [b]AND[/b] wear a helmet? It's what I do. No-one's suggesting you put a helmet on and then don't bother taking any other steps to keep safe, are they?

Is it possible for everbody to be correct then we can all discuss real problems like how big a back pack do I need,what tyres,10 speed set up etc etc

It's interesting to consider the whole attitude to safety. I'm talking the lights used, hi-vis/reflectives, road conduct (running reds, etc) as it's a whole issue.

You could have a helmet on and ride like a ****, or be super cautious with a hi-vis and lights without a helmet.

I am not saying we all need to hi-vis, but it's a moral argument about a component of behaviour. We can preach our plastic hats to the unwitting vain pedaler, but how safe is your own bonce-protected riding?

Oh, and riding like you're incapable is just inviting it to happen. I think the motorist will see you and think "bloody cyclists" regardless of your trousers, swerving, helmet or impeccable cadence. Ride confidently, with a strong presence in a safe manner.

Just to add that to the conversational soup

We just subscribe to two different theories, neither one has been proved conclusively unless you accept flawed studies (and I have never found a study on bicycle road safety that wasn't flawed) or anecdotal evidence.

I don't know how many accidents are caused by motorists passing too close and how many are caused by motorists not seeing you and pulling out. Do you?

For the way that I ride I feel more at risk from cars passing too close since all I can do to counter drivers passing too close is make sure that I'm far enough away from the kerb that I hopefully have room to manoeuvre.

For cars at junctions I feel like I have a bit more control. If I see a car at a junction I first try to make eye contact with the driver. If I don't then I just assume that they are going to pull out on me and slow down enough so that I can hopefully stop in time. If I do make eye contact then I watch the wheels of the car very carefully so that I can see the instant there is any movement, even if it's just the slight roll back as the driver comes off the brakes. Throughout the whole approach to the junction I am covering the brakes and looking for escape routes, something that was constantly drummed into me when I was learning to ride a motorbike. Constantly looking for escape routes is absolutely the best way to stay safe whether you're cycling, riding a motorbike, or driving a car IMO.

If I'm passing a row of parked cars and the worry is that one is going to pull out then I always try to stay as far away as possible and keep myself in the gaps between passing cars rather than in line with them (although hopefully they'll be giving me more space because I'm not wearing a helmet, anyway). This is absolutely the situation where I feel the most exposed and I try to avoid if at all possible.

I can do all those things and wear a helmet but like I said, my main worry is cars and especially buses and lorries passing too close to me and from the flawed studies and anecdotal evidence I've found I think the best way to do this is not wear a helmet.

I do admit that vanity comes into it though. If I was really serious about keeping cars as far away as possible and I'd wear not only a blond wig but a dress as well 😉

Molgrips - have you not grasped that research? - when you don't wear a helmet car drivers give you more room. You cannot get this effect while wearing a helmet. so its an either / or choice. You cannot "do all those things AND wear a helmet"

You may choose not to believe that piece of research - your choice. But to say someone who has modified their behaviour to attempt reduce their chances of an accident in line with research is "barmy" is insulting and offensive and ludicrous.

BruceWees position has logic and evidence behind it. he may be wrong he may be right but he is no "barmy"

Now that piece of research is very interesting - but it remains limited and a single survey but its another piece of the jigsaw and perhaps a part of the answer as to why when helmet wearing rates go up head injury rates do not fall.

A part of the thing is that people and you appear to be one of them don't understand the difference between preventing accidents and preventing the harm from accidents. They are not the same and they are occasionally mutually exclusive. Feel vulnerable you take less risks, appear vulnerable people give you more consideration. Totally unconscious behaviour but well recorded phenomenon. is it worth more than the protective effect of a helmet? Up to the individual to decide.

I know for a fact that I am more cautious riding offroad without a helmet.

Incidence and severity

Passive and active

Many ways to look at this.

[i]I am not saying we all need to hi-vis, but it's a moral argument about a component of behaviour.[/i]

this is the same as coppers handing stab vest out to weekend drinkers...If I'm obeying the law on the road and some tw*t in a car knocks me down, I'm not going to be best pleased if the cop tells me that no further action will be taken because I wasn't wearing an effing high viz vest...

Handing out a portion of the blame to cyclists in RTA's is sad indictment of the car dominated society we live in.

There is another guy I know, who was in a car crash and was very badly hurt and was attended to on seen by his mum who latterly held his head together with her own hands while she watched her son's life fade away. I know he was in a car but it could easily have been on a bike, and I wouldn’t have want to hold any of my friends or families heads together while they give there agonal breath and likewise I would have wanted the thought of them looking after me.

Molgrips - have you not grasped that research? - when you don't wear a helmet car drivers give you more room

You are not quite getting my point.

I am saying that that particular piece of research is flawed.

A part of the thing is that people and you appear to be one of them don't understand the difference between preventing accidents and preventing the harm from accidents. They are not the same and they are occasionally mutually exclusive.

Of course I bloody well understand it. And yes, there may well be cases where the two are mutually exclusive, but I do not believe this is one of them.

When riding with a helmet, I take precautions appropriate to what I am doing. Last week I forgot to bring my helmet down and I found myself quite paranoid about the possibility of cars hitting me. It was not enjoyable, and [b]I don't believe I was significantly safer[/b] because I am already hyper-aware of other road users as it is.

BTW I already apologised for the 'barmy' comment. I do however think the poster in question was applying very flawed logic.

I don't know how many accidents are caused by motorists passing too close and how many are caused by motorists not seeing you and pulling out. Do you?

No, that's my point.

We could do a quick poll on here though, I will start another thread as people are being turned off this one 🙂

Nearly as dull as the "How dare you carry a large backpack with you thread"

I am saying that that particular piece of research is flawed.

fine - you can say that if you want. What basis do you have for that conclusion? The findings are what they are.

CAN"T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG *Bangs head on wall* (whilst wearing a helmet)

Well I did say:

For a start, it was just him on his bike, so there's no way to tell if he himself rode slightly differently with a lid on than without, thereby affecting the results. As well all know (or should know), as drivers we respond to a whole array of subtle cues and movements without even realising it.

For a start. It's not a blinded study.

There are a few helmets on here, that's for sure.

A few months back, I went and picked up a concussed friend after she flew over the bars of her road bike in the wet and landed on her head. Her helmet was a write-off, but she got away with a bit of a head-ache and some cuts and bruises. I suspect that without a helmet, she'd still have landed on her head and at best, ended up with some sort of head wound.

I'm not sure how not wearing a helmet would have improved her situation or prevented her from having an accident.

That said, I'm all in favour of people having the right to choose to wear a lid or not. I guess you could probably produce a study showing that naked cycling reduced accidents because motorists regarded you as more vulnerable - probably true - but that wouldn't be much consolation when you were scrubbing gravel out of your arse.

[img] [/img]

Awww little fluffy kittens...... 😀

the singletrackworld corporate view seems to be that helmets are not essential, therefore all the sheep on here who are desperate to be part of the horrendous clique that surrounds these people all adopt the same view. This is also how people end up riding frankly **** bikes that ignore any improvements in mountain biking equipment that have occurred since 120mm purple stems, simply because it may gain them some kudos on an internet forum.

Listen, boys - as a selfless act to add some scientific evidence to these arguments and settle things once and for all, Mrs T and I have been conducting an experiment this afternoon. We randomised a number of objects to be struck against my head, both with and without a helmet. In order to avoid bias, both Mrs T (the "striker") and I (the "strikee") were both blindfolded. The objects were as follows: A scone dropped from approximately 6 inches above head, a snooker ball dropped approx 6 inches above head, a head strike with a piece of 3x4 baton, a head strike with an iron hammer, a strike with a spade. It should be noted that I have a number 1 shaved head so there should be little error introduced due to damping effect of hair. The results were as follows.
Scone with helmet - audible but not felt
Scone without helmet - noticeable but not painful
Snooker ball with helmet - audble but not felt
Snooker ball without helmet - smarted a little, but not too bad
3x4 baton with helmet - audible and you know you've been hit, because it makes the head wobble a bit, but not painful
3x4 baton without helmet - very painful. Impossible not to blurt out an obscenity upon being struck.
Iron hammer with helmet - Much the same as a strike with 3x4. I could take quite a few of these before I'd plead for the nonsense to stop.
Iron hammer without helmet - Hurt like *. Called Mrs T a * ******er and a comedy bump grew from my head within seconds of being struck.
Spade with helmet - The actual blow itself doesn't smart, but it did jar the neck enough to consider osteopathic intervention. I could bear a few more blows if I had to, though.
Spade without helmet - First swing missed and for a second, I thought that we may have an unexpected win for the "no helmet" argument. The second swing made contact but I have absolutely no recollection of what happened other than I was out for the count for at least half an hour, by which time Mrs T had mopped up all the blood and made me look vaguely normal again.
So there you have it.
Tomorrow, I might lie down in front of the car and get a blindfolded Mrs T to reverse back and fore over my head, both with and without helmet, to see if we can refine this study further. She's working out the p values and chi squared analysis (whatever that means) as we speak, but early indications are that the helmet brigade may have a point and maybe we can now end this thread for good.

I accept there is a fair bit of healthy debate about wearing a helmet on the road. I don't think the "you don't wear a helmet when walking down the stairs" argument stacks up at all though. The stairs in our house don't bring me in close proximity to cement trucks or London cabbies on a regular basis.

Surely it's down to individual choice based on the level of perceived risk? Personally I will always wear a helmet on busy roads or when commuting in town but I won't bother generally for a quick, largely traffic-free ride down to the local shops. Illogical maybe but there it is.

Riding off road is another matter. If you don't need a helmet mountain biking then you're obviously not doing it right. You're riding a pushbike at 30mph over an unstable surface in close proximity to nasty pointy rocks. And that's not even considering the odd low-hanging branch to contend with. Frankly you'd be an idiot not to wear a helmet offroad.

Ok if you don’t wear a helmet how do you fix your lights to your head?

More seriously having read through this and many other similar threats It occurs to me that in terms of actual and credible evidence there is insufficient research as to the level of protection offered or the behaviours of cyclists and drivers to form any conclusion on the benefits or otherwise of helmets – so it comes down to personal choice as to whether or not to wear on.
I suspect that the wider debate is a distraction from actually conducting quality research in to helmet design and construction so that they can definitively improve safety for cycles. Given the differing parameters required this is no mean feat
For myself I will continue to wear my helmet when riding – as I will continue to wear my gloves – both are part of the cycling ‘uniform’ and offer some level of protection

Sproketjockey - sometimes I go for a wander around the unpaved byways. Its perhaps not mountain biking but it it offroad. I call it ambient jeycore lite . Think more RSF less DH racer.

Breakneckspeed - I have an m6 bolt glued into my skull 🙂

actual and credible evidence there is insufficient research as to the level of protection offered or the behaviours of cyclists and drivers to form any conclusion on the benefits or otherwise of helmets – so it comes down to personal choice as to whether or not to wear on.

Seems reasonable enough

TandemJeremy - You're quite right, in my last comment I was thinking in terms of "proper" mountain biking ie involving actual mountains / rocks / roots / steep drop offs and especially at numpties riding black routes at trail centres without a helmet because they think it's 'core etc.

I'm happy to say that I've indulged in the robust and healthy pleasure of the odd low-velocity bridleway pootle sans lid myself on occasion.

The thing is, would you then play cricket without the armour plating to protect Bert and the twins? You would? Respect.

LHS believes the risk of rotational injury is so low that this is not needed. I am not so sure. Some estimates are as high as 30% of all head impacts the injury is worsened.

So TJ you are basically saying that by wearing a helmet should you crash you will WORSEN any potential injury ----?!?! Think about what you are saying here and ask yourself this - why do you bike at all??? I reckon you may have had a bump to the head before (without helmet) and this is my you say such silly things!!!! There is prob a lot of young riders (you sound as if you could be one of those 'kids o the street') who read and contribute to this forum - why do you feel you should make statements like wearing helmets worsen your head injuries???I bet their parents will thank you if they crash without a helmet coz some dude on singletrack said it was bad to wear one and end up f*cked up!!!

Think then type!

(motherly) Rant over!

Mimi - can you read? Or are you a troll?

Tj repeatedly says
There is good evidence that [b]in some circumstances [/b]helmets can make injuries worse. [b]How often[/b] this occurs is not known. To say this is [b]not the same[/b] as saying "helmets actually make accidents worse" There are people who do argue that you shouldn't wear helmets at all because of this - including neurosurgeons. [b]Myself I don't[/b] - or else I would never wear one. Even the TRL found this effect

mimi123

you sound as if you could be one of those 'kids o the street'

Ermm - are you sure you are not trolling. I am a 50 yr old man

e mail me and I'll send you links the the research and the rebuttal of it.

This is a forum for open debate i believe, is it not. Everybody is free to express thier own opinions in a polite fashion, PLEASE. Read the information provided and then make your own decision based on your preference and more importantly your own experiences. It would be nice if people avoid jumping on others posted comments in a rude aggressive manner.I keep saying it but we are all CYCLISTS. i.e same tribe.

For what it's worth, I sometimes see people in the supermarket wearing bike helmets. Even otherwise normal looking people, wandering around the shop wearing a helmet. I guess it just pays to be careful.

(Whether or not they then take off their helmet to cycle home I don't know)

The most amazing thing is the bravery of cyclists; you'll go out there, facing certain death, serious injury, disfigurement and worse, protected only by a polystyrene hat.

People who believe in helmets, I salute you.

yeah I am a troll - got pink fluffy hair and everything - def not the type for helmets- infact I dont even wear shoes when I go biking!

For what it's worth, I sometimes see people in the supermarket wearing bike helmets. Even otherwise normal looking people, wandering around the shop wearing a helmet. I guess it just pays to be careful.

(Whether or not they then take off their helmet to cycle home I don't know)

Lol! Seen it a lot - even folk who go to costa and keep their helmet on perhaps they think its for this purpose who knows?

For what it's worth, I sometimes see people in the supermarket wearing bike helmets.

Was that in Lidl? if so I'd say that's a sensible precaution.

Can't believe everyone is tap dancing around the big issue here, so I guess I should raise it. What tyres for riding without a helmet?

Big foamy ones.

Preferably with stabilisers.

a snooker ball dropped approx 6 inches above head

Why do you have a snooker ball in your house? You have a billiard room?

Blimey, some posh folk on here!

Back on topic - I *always* wear my helmet no matter what I am doing on a bike, because I want it to be habitual. That way, I won't be humming and hahing over whether I should or not because there's SOME road where I want to go and it might be a bit busy but not too bad etc etc etc.

After all, it only takes one car to take you out.

Underpants - check
Trouser - check
Shoes - check
Helmet - check

Just another item of clothing.

There is a Consultant neurosurgeon over on Scotlands west coast who has stated his concern about the number of serious high spinal injuries he is seeing from mountainbikers. 10 in one year quadriplegic.

Perhaps the halo neck brace might help reduce this or the airbag jacket.

Are you all going to go out and buy them? it would appear that serious neck injuries leading to lifelong paralysis are far more common than serious head injuries that lead to lifelong serious disability

[img] [/img]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/technology/newsid_7886000/7886427.stm

Dunno, if me and my mates wore those jackets we would never get any riding done because everyone would have yanked out everyone else's chord within 5 minutes 🙂

I must admit that watching the stormtropers disappearing into a big ball of airbag as they fall off would be amusing

I went over the handlebars of my bmx when I was a kid, I've got a small dent in my skull. If I had been wearing a helmet I would have been ok. I had to give up boxing and martial arts in my teens on my doctors advice, even with a head gaurd the risk to that area is too high. I would never ride a bike without a helmet again and regret the day that I did. It doesn't matter to me what % of accidents are avoided or the % of damage a helmet saves, it's about looking after yourself. Even if you just got a slight graze on your head surley it's better to graze a helmet??

Often the people who ride without helmets talk of 'more enjoyment' and act like some kind of hero. When/if you fall you won't ride bareback again trust me.

it would appear that serious neck injuries leading to lifelong paralysis are far more common than serious head injuries that lead to lifelong serious disability

Maybe it's cos the majority of MTBers already wear helmets? 🙂