[Closed] Would You...? [helmet nazi content]

I'm not that interested TBH 😉

haven't seen the thread but thought it was about nazi helmets - not helemt nazis.

there was a guy at afan riding in what looked like a nazi replica helmet on saturday!! 😯

It was instictive.

No it wasn't. Jumping when you get a fright is instinctive. Breathing is instinctive. I do not believe an uncontrolable desire to meddle is actually instinctive. 😀

Graham, you haven't factored in how relatively effective helmets are in preventing injury in car/cycling accidents...

True.

I am assuming that a proper crash helmet, as worn on motorcycles or by race car drivers, used in conjunction with the existing crumple zones, impacts bars, airbags etc, would be more effective than the bit of polystyrene and plastic worn by cyclists.

That may not be a valid assumption, but the figures are such that there is plenty of leeway:

Even if [u]all[/u] 2,644 of the cyclists admitted had not been wearing helmets [u]and[/u] bike helmets would have been 100% effective in preventing their injuries, then car helmets would still only need to 66% effective or better to prevent more injuries.

nope - it's their choice to wear or not to wear. Nature will take care of the rest

Nature will take care of the rest

ps not having a go at you personally m6ttf you were just the last commentor.

Indeed, no one seems particularly up in arms if you go scrambling without a helmet and yet when it comes to cycling anyone who even glances at a bike without a helmet is a cretin who will cause untold misery to family members and friends when they are inevitably killed or brain damaged in a seemingly benign fall.

Don't really understand why cyclist's heads are so much more delicate.

Cycling really is viewed as a dangerous pass time, even by cyclists seemingly.

And why would that be? Could it be perhaps that we have to thread our way through ignorant drivers all the time and suffer near misses..?

And there's a big difference between walking and cycling - when cycling, your safety is in OTHER PEOPLE's hands.

no it isn't Molgrips.

Genuinely don't care what other people do, it's entirely up to them

Cycling really is viewed as a dangerous pass time, even by cyclists seemingly.

Relatively dangerous. I've done a lot of sport/activities. Cycling is the only one where I've hit my head hard (on four IIRC separate occassions). Seems sensible to me to wear a helmet, particularly as I [b]think[/b] the helmet helped in those instances. I don't wear pads of spine protectors though so clearly I've taken a view on risk/hassle/etc

And there's a big difference between walking and cycling - when cycling, your safety is in OTHER PEOPLE's hands.

Plenty of peds killed or injured by cars, even on the pavement!

And there's a big difference between walking and cycling - when cycling, your safety is in OTHER PEOPLE's hands.

Besides I thought we were (mostly) talking offroad, it's just you vs the rocks there.

Clubber I don't have the stats but I thought football and rugby were worse than cycling - footy certainly is for me, especially if you factor time vs accidents.

Ah, well I've never played either of those 🙂

Cycling is not dangerous - relativity or absolutely.

Look to the links I posted that take you to discussions on relative risk.

Cycling is safe. Very small numbers of people killed in injured. its safer than gardening FFS!

Its so safe and so good for you that unhelmetd cyclists live longer than people who don't cycle - ie the risks of death from cycling are much lower than the health benefits.

If helmets were made compulsory there would be at least 200 extra deaths a year due to the people giving up cycling that would die premature deaths from inactivity.

Its a tiny number of people who get serious head injuries from cycling - far less than do so from drinking! drinking helmets would save far more lives, walking helmets would save far more lives, driving helmets would save far more lives.

All this talk of cycling being dangerous and that you must wear a helmet puts people off cycling which is really stupid as cycling is so good for individuals and for society

I go hashing - basically cross country on different trails every week often slippery & hilly in the Chilterns & in the dark for most of the year - no one wears a helmet.
Same group of people go bashing (same thing but on a bike) once a month on a Sunday in daylight, probably similar risks & everyone wears a helmet.
Think I'll wear a helmet on the next hash & see what comments I get 🙂

You can't say 'relatively' without stating relative to what. For me, it is relatively dangerous for the reasons I stated. That doesn't make it dangerous compared to all other activities.

I do like the idea of drinking helmets though 🙂

TJ: I agree with your anti-helmet-compulsion argument, but I've got to pull you up on [i]"its safer than gardening FFS!"[/i]

Really?

Based on absolute numbers or risk of injury per hour of activity type thing?

(for comparison in 2010 there were 111 cyclists killed and 2,660 seriously injured).

relative to other sports.

Taking cycling as nominal risk of one.
Less safe Airsports 450
Climbing 137
Motor sports 81
Fishing 41
Horse riding 29
Swimming 7.0
Athletics 5.7
Football 4.9
Tennis 4.2
Cycling 1.0
Safer Golf 0.83
Rambling 0.06

Or in terms of fatalities / risk of dying

Deaths per year (GB)

Deaths per year

Cycling, road traffic accidents 138

Cycling, other 29

All transport 3,032

At home 3,974

Other accidents 5,026

Obesity (England only) 30,000

Heart disease due to inactivity 58,090

All heart disease 157,000

GrahamS - Member

TJ: I agree with your anti-helmet-compulsion argument, but I've got to pull you up on "its safer than gardening FFS!"

Clearly flippant but actually shown in a couple of studies 🙂

Risk in past 30 days

Researchers polled 5,238 subjects by telephone, simply asking if they'd done any of a predetermined set of activities in the past 30 days. Those who answered "yes" for a given activity were asked further questions about it, including whether they were injured "severely enough that you went for medical care or missed one-half day or more of work, housework, or school." Percentage injured results were: [1]
Aerobics 1.4%
Gardening 1.6%
Walking for exercise 1.4%
Weightlifting 2.4%
Cycling 0.9%

The relative risk between gardening and cycling has been examined in another study. 1,337 people were surveyed for a report on sport and recreation injuries. One in six respondents had required medical treatment in this period, with 5% of gardeners having suffered injury warranting attention compared with 3.9% of cyclists. [2]

[1] Powell, K.E., "Injury rates from walking, gardenint, weightlifting, outdoor bicycling, and aerobics," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 1998, V. 30 pp. 1246-1249.
[2] Study by Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia. Reported January 2003.

I don't do any of those relatively more dangerous sports. Therefore cycling, to me, is a relatively dangerous activity.

I got some nasty cuts from both brambles whilst gardening and also out on trails.

Have a look at this those who think it dangerous 🙂

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/SafetySkills/SafetyQuiz.htm

clubber - do you drink?

clubber - do you drink?

Indeed I do, however that's probably also one of my relatively dangerous activities. I have however never hit my head while drunk. Or for that matter, injured myself. Luck maybe but in the 20+ years I've been doing both (which is an acceptable statistical sample I reckon), cycling's coming out worse...

You balance me out nicely then. No head injury cycling at all, 3 from drinking, one leaving a permanent scar

Mind you cycling drunk? Never hurt myself. Maybe we have the answer - drink beer while cycling for safetys sake

I rather like this one as well

A review of 2,546 patients under age 19 seen by pediatric neurosurgeons at the Medical College of Georgia in Augusta between 1996 and 2002 revealed 64 sports-related injuries, 15 of which were golf-related and 17 of which were bicycle-related.

Funnily enough I've also never hurt myself mtbing drunk (though I've never gone beyond about 3 pints). Maybe you're onto something...

under 19s playing golf 😯 that's shocking!

Researchers polled 5,238 subjects by telephone

Hmmmm... couple of issues there (from [url= http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Abstract/1998/08000/Injury_rates_from_walking,_gardening,.10.aspx ]the abstract[/url] anyway): it only looks at whether they have been injured in the past 30 days, not at the frequency/duration of the activity or the severity of the injury.

If I say [i]"Yes, I cycled once in the past 30 days, and I was decapitated to death after just 2 minutes"[/i] then I score the same as someone who says [i]"Yes, I've gardened every day for the last 30 days and yesterday I sprained my wrist."[/i].

So it's not a great study of actual risk - just expected injury rates in the population.

drink beer while cycling for safetys sake

Now you're talking sense! 😀

Agreed Graham. I said it was flippant.

the second study is a little more meaningful - this is why you always need to follow the references to see what is actually being measured

the second study is a little more meaningful

Can't find it based on that citation, but your wording suggests it suffers the same problem. It looks at whether participants were injured over a certain period, not over a certain duration of activity.

I said it was flippant.

Fair enough 🙂

So - thru vigorous mass debateing we have reached a solution Ladies and Gentlemen I give you the TJ / STW safety helmet
[img] [/img]

I think that wearing a helmet whilst road riding is more important because the higher speeds and liklihood of being hit by something you're not expecting would be more likely to result in an uncontrolled flinging about rather than a controlled bail that you see coming.

I reckon the reverse. Off-road it's you against the ground at relatively low speeds and a helmet has a fair chance of doing something useful. On the road it's you against cars and trucks. If you get mashed by an artic doing 50mph then the presence or otherwise of a helmet is largely irrelevant.

I wear a helmet for all forms of cycling all the time, even though I've had far worse cracks to the head from sailing, mending the car and fitting kitchens. People can be daft 😉

Seeing that I do airsports, climbing and motorsports - it seems I might as well ride naked on that spikey bike :P.

However I rather suspect those statistics are a tad biased - if you compare downhill moutain biking to, say, gentle paragliding, it might be a bit different.

One of the real problems with all the stats on cycling is that mountainbiking and road biking are rarely separated out although one bit had 138 cycling deaths from RTA and 29 from "other" Dunno what they are tho.

Same as the risk of head injury when MTBing. common sense /logic says more injuries but less severe injuries offroad but I have found nothing to back this up and I know that one consultant neurosurgeon was concerned about the numbers of mountainbikers he was seeing with spinal injuries.

In all seriousness I think what we really need is more and better quality research both experimental and statistical analysis and a fresh look at helmet design in the light of modern knowledge.

really the knowledge base on this is not good enough

No, none of my business (unless it was something i'd organised).
I rode bmx street/park/trails for years without one so havent got a high horse to get on.
Used to be involved in a BMX race club and had to tell a few then, but that was more a club rule/insurance thing.
These days i'm more likely to just mutter to myself :-).

It feels pretty weird to not wear one now on the odd occasion i ride to work/drop the van at the garage and forget to bring one.

TJ - I am not closed minded, I just don't agree with you. Is that allowed? You're closed minded for not being able to accept that anyone disagrees with you. Very silly.

Anyway. I've never been nearly knocked down by a car walking, gardening, or anything else. Plus I've never seen people being injured except for either driving or cycling. Never feared for my safety apart from when cycling or climbing.

The sheer numbers of people who report being knocked off their bikes by cars on here tells you that there is a not insignificant risk. It's one I accept and would not discourage anyone from doing but I choose to mitigate the risk of the worst kind of injury.

I reckon the reverse. Off-road it's you against the ground at relatively low speeds and a helmet has a fair chance of doing something useful. On the road it's you against cars and trucks. If you get mashed by an artic doing 50mph then the presence or otherwise of a helmet is largely irrelevant

Ever seen a cyclist get taken out by a car? If you get smashed by an artic, then sure. What if you get knocked off by a car doing 20mph? The physics suggests that you'll hit the ground hard and your head might well smack into the ground despite your best efforts. Hard, and fast.

Molgrips. Its safe - very safe indeed. Thats an obvious truth. I have on this and many other occasions given you the real data. It is not unsafe, its safer than driving, its safer than most sports.

You prefer your prejudices and instincts to real data. Up to you but don't expect anyone to think its a sensible viewpoint. I am not closed minded - I look at the data and make my mind up.

TandemJeremy - Member
In all seriousness I think what we really need is more and better quality research both experimental and statistical analysis and a fresh look at helmet design in the light of modern knowledge.

really the knowledge base on this is not good enough

You prefer your prejudices and instincts to real data. Up to you but don't expect anyone to think its a sensible viewpoint. I am not closed minded - I look at the data and make my mind up.

Until we have robust and specific data isn't relying on your own judgement and instinct the best option ?

looking at the data would help. Not all of the data is poor - the data on relative risk is robust. The data on the efficacy of helmets is not robust.

For people to say its a dangerous pastime when the data clearly shows it is not is simply wrong

TandemJeremy - Member
For people to say its a dangerous pastime when the data clearly shows it is not is simply wrong

I prefer the thought process that says "mtb riding is a pastime with potential dangers, some situations will be significantly more dangerous than others, as I cannot accurately predict when one of these more dangerous situations may occur I wear a helmet all the time"

there's also 'sods law' to consider, which means the one time I'll be sure to head**** myself my helmet will be hung up at home mocking me 😉

hilldodger - Member

there's also 'sods law' to consider, which means the one time I'll be sure to head**** myself my helmet will be hung up at home mocking me

Aye... Not owning a helmet is clearly safer than owning one and not wearing it 😉

Molgrips. Its safe - very safe indeed

How do people get knocked off then?

And I don't believe your data is unbiased or rigorous, so I don't believe it. You don't seem to understand how figures don't necessarily tell the whole story. I don't have a closed mind, I have an analytical one.

For people to say its a dangerous pastime when the data clearly shows it is not is simply wrong

I am not saying it's dangerous (I wouldn't do it if it was), I am saying that there are risks that can be easily mitigated. It's as simple as that.

molgrips
The sheer numbers of people who report being knocked off their bikes by cars on here tells you that there is a not insignificant risk.

to me a risk of millions to one of death from head injury is insignificant. Cycling is safe, the risks are small.

they are not my figures molgrips =- the figures on relative risk are robust and valid and beyond serious question by anyone who actually understands risk. Go look at the sources.

"[i]I am saying that there are risks that can be easily mitigated. It's as simple as that. [/i]"

Then why don't you wear your helmet to get out of the shower, or cross the road? These carry risks that can be easily mitigated. It's as simple as that.

Indeed. Bexz.

Hilldodger -I prefer the thought process that says "mtb riding is a pastime with potential dangers, some situations will be significantly more dangerous than others, as I cannot accurately predict when one of these more dangerous situations may occur I wear a helmet all the time"

Really? I can easily predict where the risks are higher and where they are lower. But then I understand risk assessment.

high risk - note the rock gardens, the huge drops, all the trees waiting to pounce
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3287/2533134153_2a0eba756d_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3287/2533134153_2a0eba756d_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/25846484@N04/2533134153/ ]05 Glen Dochart[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/25846484@N04/ ]TandemJeremy[/url], on Flickr

Low risk 🙂
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3203/2957469171_cf5674c13f_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3203/2957469171_cf5674c13f_z.jp g"/> ?zz=1[/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/25846484@N04/2957469171/ ]tandem jump[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/25846484@N04/ ]TandemJeremy[/url], on Flickr

I am saying that there are risks that can be easily mitigated. It's as simple as that.

As far as I'm aware, people still die wearing helmets, so that doesn't mitigate the risk. Are you suggesting we don't cycle? That's the only way to mitigate the risk associated with cycling.

Personal experience makes me wear a lid, but would I tell someone else to wear one? Not likely, none of my damned business. I [i]would[/i], and indeed do, tell other cyclist to [i]put a frackkin' light on![/i] The last time a couple of weeks ago turning onto a narrow country road I found three kids on BMX bikes riding abreast across the road, all in dark clothing, and not a single light between them. Retards.
My own experience coming off my bike has had me hitting my head on the ground pretty hard on a couple of occasions, once making my ears ring, and leaving me with a shoulder injury for a year, the last time at walking speed on a damp shared-use path, when both wheels went sideways on me. I smashed my left knee hard on the Tarmac, and grazed my left cheek pretty deeply, and the peak of my Xen was heavily scored. Without the lid I'm pretty damn sure I would, at the very least, have had a nasty scalp wound. My lid has also taken any number of heavy hits from low tree branches too. Wearing a lid is a personal choice, and generally affects the person concerned, whereas riding without lights could easily affect other people through a rider causing an accident with one or more other vehicles.

fourbanger - Member

As far as I'm aware, people still die wearing helmets, so that doesn't mitigate the risk. Are you suggesting we don't cycle? That's the only way to mitigate the risk associated with cycling.

I'm trying to put this in the least cock-like way, but, mitigate doesn't mean what you obviously think it means. Lessen, not eliminate.

TandemJeremy - Member
But then I understand risk assessment.

see, now you're going down the "dismiss the poster's intelligence/experience" route again, and so civil discussion once more descends into snidery 🙄

Hilldodger - not at all. However to say that

as I cannot accurately predict when one of these more dangerous situations may occur

Its odd to say that as its very easy to decide when risks are higher or lower. Some sorts of cycling carry significantly more risk than others.

do you wear body armour ever? or do you have the same protection on at all times?

Do you think a downhill racer has the same level of risk as a person pootling around the fells?
Do you think skill and experience make a difference to your risk?

We should be clear about the difference between (a) assessing the risk of a given situation and (b) predicting the occurrence of an event.

they are not my figures molgrips =- the figures on relative risk are robust and valid and beyond serious question by anyone who actually understands risk. Go look at the sources.

I would suggest that anyone who understands risk would appreciate that no figures are robust or particularly valid.
Here's a good starting point for finding out why.
[url] http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1857280687 [/url]

For details of the author
[url] http://www.john-adams.co.uk/about/ [/url]

But yep, as a generalisation, I'd certainly agree the cycling is on the whole is safer than many people think.

Ian - yes people modify their behaviour in line with perceived risk - however you can still have very robust historical figures as this is what has actually happened. 130 odd cyclists killed in however many miles it was. Is robust as it is something that can be counted

TJ, read the book.

TandemJeremy - Member
shows that you do not understand risk assessemnt

......but I can spell it 😉

Assessing the risk is not the same as being able to predict when the situation will arise, which is what I was saying.

Then why don't you wear your helmet to get out of the shower, or cross the road? These carry risks that can be easily mitigated. It's as simple as that

I can't believe I'm having to spell this stuff out (actually yes I am, you are being deliberately obtuse to try and win an argument - well it's not going to work, I'm much more intelligent than that) but the choice of helmet or not (or any other safety equippment) is about risk versus inconvenience.

Wearing a helmet whilst cycling is not particularly inconvenient for me, wearing one around the house is.

As for statistics - I'm not a statistic. There are no stats for the risk of head injury for ME doing MY riding vs ME getting out of MY shower.

Do the stats of shower injuries state how many of the injured are weak old people and how many are fit young (ish) people?

I don't put my foot on the edge of the bath if I use the downstairs shower mind. Why? Risk of slipping.

As for body armour - I can break, smash and even lose limbs, and it'd still be nowhere near as bad as losing parts of my brain. It being the most precious thing, I'm more inclined to protect it. I'm considering some armour though for certain riding.

Wearing a helmet whilst cycling is not particularly inconvenient for me, wearing one around the house is.

"[i]I don't put my foot on the edge of the bath if I use the downstairs shower mind. Why? Risk of slipping.[/i]"

So you're saying that you prefer not to wear a helmet, but instead to moderate your behaviour in such a way as to not require a helmet in the first place.

You prefer not to mitigate the [i]consequences[/i] of a negative outcome but instead choose to actively reduce the [i]likelihood[/i] of a negative outcome.

Interesting 😉

Of course [i]"risk compensation"[/i] means that if molgrips did start wearing a helmet in the shower, he'd soon find himself balancing on the edge of the bath, with soapy feet, juggling bottles of shampoo and a hairdryer.

I once wore socks in the bath. Is that risky?

I correct children and their parents if they are fitted badly or on back to front. But I don't go around preaching either case.

Use of bicycle lights and vehicle Fog lights however...

GrahamS - Member

Of course "risk compensation" means that if molgrips did start wearing a helmet in the shower, he'd soon find himself balancing on the edge of the bath, with soapy feet, juggling bottles of shampoo and a hairdryer.

Tee hee

Ever seen a cyclist get taken out by a car?

Define "taken out". I've seen cyclists get bumped by cars, I know people who've been doored, I've been over the bonnet of one myself. I'm not sure what relevance my personal experiences have, though 🙂

If you get smashed by an artic, then sure. What if you get knocked off by a car doing 20mph? The physics suggests that you'll hit the ground hard and your head might well smack into the ground despite your best efforts. Hard, and fast.

Might. Might not. If it's a glancing blow I might bail and hit the ground running. Or I might roll over the bonnet/roof and land in a heap the other side. Or I might indeed pile headfirst into the Tarmac without managing to get my arms there first. If it's hard and fast enough it might envegetabilise me anyway. Who can say? I wear a helmet anyway, because like you say, they're not that inconvenient and they might possibly help. I wouldn't presume to tell everyone they must wear one, though. Although obviously I'm a raging hypocrite so my kids have to 😉

Although obviously I'm a raging hypocrite so my kids have to

I only lid up when I'm going on my Sunday morning ride. I don't really use my bike at any other time. If I was commuting I'd wear it though. However for a Pootle in the park I wouldn't bother. Low speed and no rocks. Depends where you ride I guess, it's rocky oop norf!

well I didn't expect it to run to 4 pages but there is some very interesting stuff being posted.

My better half ordered me a new helmet last night for Christmas... still of the pisspot variety but this one has lots of lovely vents.

So its decided then... most people would just mind their own business.

All helmet posts must run to at least four pages. FACT.

At least this one was relatively civil. Well done all. 😀