We’re not wanting drivers to feel any safer are we now? I’d rather we went down the spike sticking out of the steering wheel approach.
If a parent doesn't wear a crash helmet to drive then they have no place lecturing their kids on bike safety. All of the same daft and reductive arguments apply.
If a parent doesn’t wear a crash helmet to drive then they have no place lecturing their kids on bike safety. All of the same daft and reductive arguments apply.
You might have to point me to the statistic that says a car journey is per mile or per journey as likely to end up with a head injury to the person in a car as a the equivalent cycle rider. A seat belt would be a better counterpoint. Yes, I know seatbelts are a legal requirement but they are providing an injury prevention in a similar way to the helmet is to the cyclist. I'd agree that a parent who elects not to wear a seatbelt has no place lecturing a minor on risk avoidance. Or smokes and lectures their kid not to.
And my first point?
And my first point?
"The commonest mechanisms of injury were falls in the elderly and road traffic collisions in the young, which were more likely to present in coma."
Source: National Library of Medicine
is that meant to be relevant? ....because it just look like you googled a word or two and pasted the first thing that dribbled out.
My First point was....
…just because it’s interesting to see how far that conviction goes…..not sure if you have kids or not but if you did/do would you be happy to ride with your 12yr old on a road or off road where you deemed it wise to have a lid on, with them riding next to you lidless because…..”it’s their head to do with what they want”? If they came home with a syringe at the ready, you’d be cool with that as it’s their arm to do with what they want? Where’s you limit to step in as a parent?
is that meant to be relevant?
I’ve put my own views further up
And they’re appreciated. We had a good, balanced, discussion about it at dinner tonight, as a family. Interesting perspectives shared and healthy debate. Still more to discuss but we’ve told him we trust him to make his own decisions, as long he tries to base those decisions on perceived risk rather than worrying what people might think.
We also talked at length about risk assessment, and shared some examples of lucky escapes from the extensive back catalogue of me and my mates.
If a parent doesn’t wear a crash helmet
Oh yeah, my 83 year old mum rides a bike everywhere. She doesn't even own a helmet.
Life is such a risky business!
Life is such a risky business!
Indeed, she’s obviously played fast and loose with her own safety over the years. 😂
Might it be time for that risk assessment chat?
My eldest is lucky enough to go on team rides with the current Canadian f-u19 XCO champ and she had a superb take on the boys attitude to taking helmets off to climb on a hot day.
She pulled her helmet off and said, "wow we look cool, when do we get those awesome concussions?"
Boys popped them straight back on as she'd crushed the perception that it's cool to ride without.
Just takes one leader either way.
Which is all fine if you're actually mountain biking or road riding. But just riding to the shop, or riding to the local park for a kick about. Does that really require a helmet?
I know I don't wear a helmet just to ride to the shop, so I'm not going to make my kids.
When I was a teenager, I came off my bike during school lunch break and managed to concuss myself somehow. I 'woke up' stood in the queue at the chippy, with no knowledge of any of the events of that day (including how I got there). Very odd experience.
My parents always insisted I wore a helmet but, being a teenager, I knew best so of course wasn't wearing one.
I'm not sure what the moral of this story is, other than he'll probably do what he wants and, if he comes off and bangs his noggin, learn the hard way...
My eldest is lucky enough to go on team rides with the current Canadian f-u19 XCO champ and she had a superb take on the boys attitude to taking helmets off to climb on a hot day.
She pulled her helmet off and said, “wow we look cool, when do we get those awesome concussions?”
Boys popped them straight back on as she’d crushed the perception that it’s cool to ride without.
Just takes one leader either way.
My take on that is that you have to take a holistic view. A helmet isn't a magic talisman that automatically makes you safe. You have to balance increasing the likelihood of crashing vs mitigating the damage if you do crash.
If I'm doing downhill, I always wear a full face helmet but whether I wear body armour or not depends on the temperature. Yes, it might help in a crash but it is also going to make it more likely that I crash if I'm overheating. 9 times out of 10 I'm going to take the option that makes it less likely that I'm going to crash.
Fair play to your U-19 XCO champ but she doesn't have the same physiology as the rest of the people in the group. Some of those kids might have been better off keeping their helmets off for the climbs (without knowing anything about the people, the climb, and the temperature it's impossible to make a judgement) so I think pressuring other people into adopting your risk assessment is not the way to go.
I know that someone is now going to tell the story about the time they were on the easiest climb ever but still managed to fall off a cliff and would have certainly been dead if they haven't been wearing their helmet but we're talking about likelihoods here, not edge cases.
If it's a hot day and I can stay cooler (temperature, not style) by leaving my helmet off for the climb then I'll do that. There's no point in being super safe on the climb if I'm just going to crash on the downhill because I've overheated.
And they’re appreciated. We had a good, balanced, discussion about it at dinner tonight, as a family. Interesting perspectives shared and healthy debate. Still more to discuss but we’ve told him we trust him to make his own decisions, as long he tries to base those decisions on perceived risk rather than worrying what people might think.
We also talked at length about risk assessment, and shared some examples of lucky escapes from the extensive back catalogue of me and my mates.
Sounds like the best way of going about it.
If nothing else he'll get so sick of talking about risk assessments he'll just start wearing the helmet all the time to avoid having to do any more probability/severity matrices 😉
In my experience those rides to the shops would be more likely to result in hitting the ground more than my rides off road.
As a kid I had a car pull right out in front of me from a side road and I rolled over the bonnet and landed the other side and as an adult I had a car pull out into the side of me from a junction hitting my back wheel and I went over bars and broke my finger when putting my arms out. (no helmet, no head injuries though)
All of my off road falls these days are far less dangerous and most are just loss of balance when maneuvering too slowly on fixed gear and all my falls (BMX) in teens never ended in anything either.
So my assessment in 50 years of riding would be watch out on the way to the shops.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/cycle-helmets
A good summary of the evidence including a link to the fact that helmets in cars would save more head injuries
As ever the protective effects of magic plastic hats are so minimal and the risks so low along with such high health benefits from cycling that across populations there would be less deaths if we stopped obsessing about helmets
Evidence based practice follow the data
If nothing else he’ll get so sick of talking about risk assessments he’ll just start wearing the helmet all the time to avoid having to do any more probability/severity matrices 😉
Well, obviously we didn’t use “risk assessment” type language but you already knew that 😊
In my experience those rides to the shops would be more likely to result in hitting the ground more than my rides off road.
Good point, and one we raised - you don’t have to be doing anything wrong to get hurt. A friend who my kids know well broke his neck when a van pulled out on him while commuting to work. He hit the van head first, split helmet, very lucky to get away with 18 months rehab. That kind of story brings it home quite well without resorting to tales of horror and death.
So you insist on wearing a crash helmet whenever you drive a car?
No, as it's not really relevant to my discussion point and we're talking about cycling not driving. One can have different assessments for different activities, it's not a blanket thing. (Something a some H&S advisors have difficulty with too).
Some of the population don't see the need to be going everywhere at high speed or insist on "muh rights" when there's a 50/50 driving or riding decision. They will travel with due regard for their surroundings and consider everyone around them an idiot who wants to kill them if there's a no risk chance.
Now for the personal approach. I don't wear polystyrene when road commuting. I have demonstrated to me that for me the risk is lower without one. Off-road a hat is worn every time to prevent high level skull scenery interactions. I've also spent a fortune on said hat as I only have one brain and it's quite valuable to me.
Might it be time for that risk assessment chat?
The main risk is that it will mess up her hair.
No, as it’s not really relevant to my discussion point and we’re talking about cycling not driving. One can have different assessments for different activities,
But drlving carries a greater risk of head injury than cycling. If you deem a magic plastic hat essential for cycling then why not for driving?
Yes, I know seatbelts are a legal requirement but they are providing an injury prevention in a similar way to the helmet is to the cyclist.
Except seatbelts actually work.
At least they've got hair at that age to add a bit of cushioning unlike my increasinly bald head. LOL.
FWIW, I think a helmet does very little to keep you safe on the roads especially anything involving vehicles. Even some of the actual helmet manufacturers say this:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/07/10/bicycle-helmets-not-designed-for-impacts-from-cars-stresses-leading-maker-giro/?sh=e2ee569cbd45
I feel almost like the odd one out in that my 12 year old instinctively grabs his helmet off the shelf when nipping around to his mates. Don't even have to mention it to him. Riding, even if its just to the shops, with a helmet on is as natural in this house as putting your pants on before your jeans (that said, the 9 year old is known to run around with pants on his head sometimes but still always wears a helmet too when on his bike).
Could it be down to location too? I live in York which is VERY "bikey". Most people you see out and about on bikes have a helmet on whether its an old girl on a shopper heading to Tesco or a group of yoots razzing around.
I live in York which is VERY “bikey”. Most people you see out and about on bikes have a helmet on whether its an old girl on a shopper heading to Tesco or a group of yoots razzing around.
I used to live in Cambridge which is also very bikey. The complete opposite. Footflaps is still there, perhaps he could give us a rough percentage?
Interesting discussion. I grew up in the 80s and didn’t wear a helmet until my mid 20s when I got my first mtb, despite owning a road bike all through uni etc.
I had at least one night in hospital falling off my bike knocked unconscious as a teenager, and another one being knocked over as a pedestrian as I stepped backwards off a kerb without looking just as my mate was screeching to a halt in his car. It shit him up when my head went through the windscreen.
My kids are adults now and neither of them complained about helmet wearing- perhaps seeing and hearing about my crashes increased their perception of the risk.
2 of my kids’ peers from school have had life changing head injuries falling out of windows/off a tall building whilst presumably drunk in their late teens. The risks kids encounter are often due to their behaviour and as a parent you can influence that but I think you stand more chance of doing so if you allow them to make decisions for them selves appropriately and don’t try to reduce all risk to zero. They have to learn from their mistakes.
Could it be down to location too? I live in York which is VERY “bikey”. Most people you see out and about on bikes have a helmet on whether its an old girl on a shopper heading to Tesco or a group of yoots razzing around.
Depends what you mean by bikey. Amsterdam and Denmark are what I would describe as very bikey but given the fact that a very small percentage of the people you see on bikes are self-described 'bike enthusiasts' maybe they are just the wrong type of bikey.
I used to live in Cambridge which is also very bikey. The complete opposite.
Brighton is "very bikey" too - most of em ride around with no helmets, all in black, no lights (at night).
Their mummies and daddies must be going spare
Amsterdam and Denmark are what I would describe as very bikey
Lot more off-road cycle lanes and a lower level of car bellend-ery though?
Lot more off-road cycle lanes and a lower level of car bellend-ery though?
Yeah, but the idea that a helmet is going to do you any good in a crash involving a car is more hope than anything backed up by data (or the design specs of the helmets themselves).
I realise I am going to sound like a complete moron when I change my mind as my son gets further into teenagerhood but it seems a bit like some here would be best trying to build a bit or resilience to peer pressure into their kids.
it seems a bit like some here would be best trying to build a bit or resilience to peer pressure into their kids.
Isn't a lot of that influenced by how their parents are? Must say, my son's resilience to peer pressure has fluctuated throughout his growing up time. He's now pretty much his own man. But I can see a lot of my influence in there (good & bad!)
I realise I am going to sound like a complete moron when I change my mind as my son gets further into teenagerhood but it seems a bit like some here would be best trying to build a bit or resilience to peer pressure into their kids.
Yes, caving to peer pressure is never a good thing.
some here would be best trying to build a bit or resilience to peer pressure into their kids.
Easier said than done IME. I started this thread because my eldest was feeling peer pressure, up until yesterday he’s been completely immune to it. Turns out that it was all in his own head anyway - he was off to meet up with some school mates, first time he’s met up with them outside of school, none of them wear helmets and he was worried what they’d say when he turned up in his. Turns out they didn’t bat an eyelid, added bonus that they told him his bike was really cool so he now wants to ride it more. Happy days.
Yeah, but the idea that a helmet is going to do you any good in a crash involving a car is more hope than anything backed up by data (or the design specs of the helmets themselves).
I get it, I really do - but then I don't!
It's such a shame we can't sometimes run life twice and see how the outcome changes. Lids may not be designed and specced to take high speed crashes, but it's a leap to say they won't do you any good in such a scenario. Is it designed for you to walk away with zero consequence - no. Could it mitigate the consequence - quite possibly. i.e. it would not meet that standard but that does not mean it will no have an influence.
I have a friend who bullseyed a windscreen (busy urban road, he was in a bike lane filtering past stopped traffic at road cycling pace. Driver coming the other way turned right into a junction directly in front of him). Ambulance arrived (complete with camera crew doing one of the those accident 999 documentary bobbins- he was on the telly and everything) and off he was carted to hospital. Helmet in bits from a head first full impact with the windscreen but he walked out of hospital that night, his brains (such as they as) no less scrambled than they were before. Now, as entertaining as it would be to lob the buffoon at the car again, this time without his helmet - I'm thinking he might not let me do it. Energy exploded that lid - energy that would have otherwise be in addition to the rest of the energy that impacted his body - because physics. Put yourself in his position 0.1sec before impact...imagine you could stop time and either add or remove a helmet before you hit. Would you be taking it off because "they don't do you any good"?
Bike helmets are not great - they are a massive compromise product, and then there is the whole increased risk phenomena too, but let's not overplay the hand - to say they are not going to do you any good in a crash is just a bit daft.
but it’s a leap to say they won’t do you any good in such a scenario.
I didn't say they wouldn't do any good. I said the idea that they will do any good is more of a hope than something you can back up with data.
Since we're doing anecdotes now, here's mine. I was out drinking with a group of friends. While we were crossing a road one of my friends decides he wants a piggy back. Jumps on his mate's back. Said mate loses his balance and stumbles forwards. He manages to avoid falling immediately but he does this by stepping forward. Given the extra weight he can't get his balance so has to step forward again and again and again until he's running at a fair pelt.
At this point he can't run any faster and he tumbles forward, his friend still on his back. The guy who fancied a piggy back ended up going straight into the edge of a kerb with his forehead. Absolutely sickening thud.
Gets up, rubs his head, continues to the bar, and continues to get shit faced.
Had he been wearing a helmet (as we all should when we go out drinking) I can absolutely guarantee he would be singing the praises of his destroyed helmet and waxing lyrical about how it saved his life.
The point is, you're right. Until we start making all these people recreate their crashes we are going to continue to be bombarded with stories about how the helmet saved their life so I say, if you're going to claim a helmet saved your life, from now on you're going to have to prove it!
say they are not going to do you any good in a crash is just a bit daft.
They will certainly do some good, especially if piledriving into a windscreen.
But, think about how much force they reduce being transfered from obstacle to brain. Whether thats a set amount, or a percentage reduction in force. Reality is probably somewhere inbetween.
There is a very low amount of force (A) that will cause no injury, and an amount of force (B) that will cause death. Any amount of force over this (>B), still causes death.
There is a very fine window of potential accidents where the impact reduction of the helmet will take you from category B back to category A.
And yet, apparently a very large proportion of cyclists have survived this very scenario, regaling people of the time a helmet saved their life.
(I'm still very much a helmet fan for off roading, in case anyone gets the wrong end of the stick. For another example of bizzarre herd-think, go find the old motocross hemet vs DH helmet argument from a few years back)
This was a surprisingly pleasant and well-argued thread.
Hasn't changed my mind, which is that I'm happy to cycle utility trips myself with no helmet; I hypocritically make my 9 and 12 year old boys wear theirs; and that I won't be fussed if/when they decide not to wear them in the future.
The point is, you’re right. Until we start making all these people recreate their crashes we are going to continue to be bombarded with stories about how the helmet saved their life so I say, if you’re going to claim a helmet saved your life, from now on you’re going to have to prove it!
I get this too! We do have lots of anecdotes of the 'saved by my lid, if you don't wear one you must be a knob' variety. And as you say, without them doing the same thing again who really knows.....
If we can't damage claimants by rerunning incidents sans lid to confirm it was the deciding factor, what might help are an equivalent number of stories by people who had a serious head impact in a crash and are still cogent enough to type!
This was ...
What? you think it's over?! 😆
There is a very low amount of force (A) that will cause no injury, and an amount of force (B) that will cause death. Any amount of force over this (>B), still causes death.
There is a very fine window of potential accidents where the impact reduction of the helmet will take you from category B back to category A.
That's a bit binary. Uninjured and Dead are the two polar points - there is a whole raft between the two. If I was about to have a B grade impact, and the lid made it an A/B impact - i.e. injured but not dead, I'd be taking that as a win (as long as I wasn't being spoon fed for the rest of my days). Similarly If I was about the have an A/B impact and the lid reduced that to an A or even a bit less B I'd also be happy.
That’s a bit binary. Uninjured and Dead are the two polar points – there is a whole raft between the two. If I was about to have a B grade impact, and the lid made it an A/B impact – i.e. injured but not dead, I’d be taking that as a win
Fair point, but from my (not a doctor) viewpoint, that whole raft in between is actually a pretty small window.
The number of people who emerge entirely unscathed but with a scratched or dented helmet claiming they avoided certain death, I think leads me to the "unreliable witness" accusation.
Fair point, but from my (not a doctor) viewpoint, that whole raft in between is actually a pretty small window.
Hmmmmm - also not a doctor but not sure I'd agree. In different (non biking) incidents I've managed to monumentally concuss myself and also fracture my skull (which was also a bit hurty). Humans are pretty good at not always dying. Those are very much in your small window. Either the window is not so small, or I'm a very good shot!
The number of people who emerge entirely unscathed but with a scratched or dented helmet claiming they avoided certain death, I think leads me to the “unreliable witness” accusation.
I'll give you that. Certain death may well be quite a leap of imagination.
Easier said than done IME.
I don't doubt that for a minute!
Interesting points made. I completely understand the thinking that helmets are a placebo at best and potentially dangerous at worst (as they might make the wearer assume invincibility), and I agree that it is laughable to expect a helmet to protect you from a full on impact with a motorised vehicle. However, the points made about whether or not a helmet might reduce the impact from, say, catB to catA, or ouchy to a bit less ouchy are good ones I think.
The one and only thing that sticks with me from a speed awareness course a few years ago is how the human body (and skull particularly) has evolved to provide protection to the brain. Apparently the skull is the right density and thickness to protect the brain during a collision with something hard at speeds of about 20mph, which is about as fast as a person can run. If a cycling helmet can provide additional protection to increase that 20mph to 22, 23, 25mph surely that's a good thing? Sure, it won't help in a head on with a closing speed of 40mph but it might mean cuts and bruises instead of a concussion, or a concussion instead of a cracked skull.
If a cycling helmet can provide additional protection to increase that 20mph to 22, 23, 25mph surely that’s a good thing? Sure, it won’t help in a head on with a closing speed of 40mph but it might mean cuts and bruises instead of a concussion, or a concussion instead of a cracked skull.
The energy in a crash increases by the square of the speed, and a helmet is designed for very low speed/energy crashes. (Pretty much falling over at a gentle pottering speed on the bike.)
You are more likely to increase the threshold from 20, to 20.1mph. Give or take.
Helmets main use seems to be to minimise any scraping when you misjudge the height of that branch across the trail.