Mate knocked off bike by van driver – side on impact (t-boned him) – van driver at fault – mate broke right leg and collar bone and had numerous cuts & bruises etc; his head impacted stone wall at whatever speed van accelerated him at it – helmet (in the words of the paramedic) exploded – but saved his life. Anecdotal but I will always wear one just in case!!

My brother had a car pull out in front of him on his road bike, he hit it, flew over the bonnet and landed on his head. He wouldn’t be here or would be in a bad way if he hadn’t been wearing a helmet.

So the FACT that across the whole population promoting helmets cost lives does not move you? No reduction in head injuries to cyclists, lots of deaths from ill health as a result of putting people off cycling by making it appear dangerous.

This effect has been shown all over the world everywhere that helmets have been made compulsory head injury rates have not fallen as a result, cycle usage has decreased dramatically.

So the FACT that across the whole population promoting helmets cost lives does not move you?

not in the slightest no.

my face would be a mess of scar tissue and missing skin if I didnt wear a helmet this year. (FACT)

the fact that I dont have any permenant scars or head injuries moves me a lot more than your facts.

thankyou..

Fullface? Or how did an open face protect your face?

Why take the risk with your life and potentially destroying your friends and family.

Wear a lid.

I try to ignore these debates on STW for obvious reasons but waiting for software update at the moment, so was tempted to have a look and read the articles.

From a brief skim – Helmets are a bad idea because:

1. They may discourage participation in cycling
2. They may make other road users less careful when passing

WTF/FFS/etc….is that the best arguments????? What convoluted claptrap is that??? Is this really why some argue that “promoting helmets costs lives?”

Three full on head smashes – two on mtb and one of a road bike, one smashed helmet, no personal damage. Enough for me.

Because cycling is safe, helmets are sweaty and uncomfortable and don’t offer any significant protection against major trauma.

When they scraped the remains of my uncle up from under the artic that failed to give way on that roundabout, it was pretty conclusive that a helmet made not an iota of difference. I’m confused where this highly emotive and entirely anecdotal helmet related evidence fits on the scale. Does either side want to claim it?

Teamhurtmore – there is a lot more to it that that. Some circumstances they can make trauma worse and there is no protective effect for serious injuries.

Cycling may be “safe” but bashing your head against concrete/tarmac/hard earth isn’t?

Helmets may be sweaty – but so is cycling

Buy a helmet that fits – no need to be uncomfortable

No damage after three hits = saving from trauma in my book

I see no reason to make helmets compulsory but have enough experience to make my own mind up!

If anyone is stupid enough to think wearing a helmet is a bad idea, go outside on and headbutt the road as hard as you can, then do it again with a helmet on.

TandemJeremy

Because cycling is safe (NO)
Helmets are sweaty and uncomfortable (Only if you don’t know how to fit them)
Don’t offer any significant protection against major trauma. (my local A&E would beg to differ after the 2 times I have been there with roadies)

TJ – I am sure that at a certain level of trauma/seriousness of accident a helmet may not make much/any difference. But in between, I am happy to remain convinced by my own evidence that there are plenty of other occassions where helmets have been a good idea.*

Having said that I do not wear one skiing – so where’s the logic in my argument?

I also wonder why I ride on a (road) bike in little more than some skimpy lycra????? How much protection is that? Zero!!

(* even trivial things such as protection from tree branches)

I’ve taken to wearing a parachute all the time now.
Ok, the odds on falling off a cliff are slim, but the rest of you are going to feel pretty foolish when you see the ground rapidly accelerating towards you and haven’t taken this simple precaution.

I will always advocate choice on the issue.

When I Barclays bike through London and its parks I would hate to be forced to wear a helmet. It would probably just not ride in London. For me it is the fact it is safe (statistically ) and I want that easy continental image of cycling and the simplicity and freedom of a bike.

When I am ‘going for a ride ‘ on either MTV or road bike there is no way I will leave the house without a helmet a I choose to ride with one for those just in case occurrences. On a bike ride it is not going to ruin my hair, be a pain to carry etc so to me there is no downside at that point.

So, wear a helmet but don’t get on your high horse about it and force it on others

Teamhurtmore – and there you see some of teh stupidity of the debate.

Dimmedam – I have an expensive perfectly fitting helmet – its still uncomfortable and sweaty. thgats an experience and opinion

cycling is safe with accident and death rates that are very low compared to other activities

Helmets do not offer significant protection against major trauma

Both these things are proven facts along with the fact that helmets do not reduce major trauma across populations.

Follow the links I gave and look at the real data.

a cycle helmet is a part of the uniform of a serious cyclist in the UK. Its a fashion item in large part. they are good at protecting from minor injuries – the sort of thing common when MTBing. They have very little effectiveness against serious injury. to say a helmets stopped me getting cuts and bruises is fine, to say it saved my life is laughable.

All helmets are hot sweaty and uncomfortable FACT!
some less so than others but they all are no matter how much of an expert ‘helmet fitter’ you are!

#
IanMunro – Member

I’ve taken to wearing a parachute all the time now.
Ok, the odds on falling off a cliff are slim, but the rest of you are going to feel pretty foolish when you see the ground rapidly accelerating towards you and haven’t taken this simple precaution.

But TJ – why polarise the debate over life threatening situations?

It does sound like you need to get a helmet that fits though!!

I think the “fashion item” thing is rather silly – you could say the same thing for seat belts, protective clothing for horse riders etc…

The problem with research in this area is how many “successful” events where helmets save someone from more serious injury are unreported.

Here’s some more room for thought:

http://triathlete-europe.competitor.com/2011/07/20/james-cracknell-use-your-head-use-your-helmet/

Then have a wee chat with Cracknell and tell him what a fool he was for wearing a helmet!!

I’ll take the helmet please Elf

Thought you might…. 😉

I believe helmet wearing should be down to personal choice. I ‘feel’ safer when wearing one, so for that alone it’s a good thing. I’ve also had 2 nasty crashes where I’m quite sure I’duv sustained more serious injury had I not bin wearing one.

I understand TJ’s argument, and think he has valid points to raise, and I certainly don’t think he’s trying to tell anyone not to wear a helmet.

Helmets do not offer significant protection against major trauma

I disagree with this though. What proof do you have to back this statement up?

Forget all the ANSI etc standards; I propose a new Elfinsafety testing procedure:

How it works, right, is I smack you over the head with a hammer, with you wearing a helmet and not wearing a helmet. That way, we will be able to obtain conclusive proof as to wether or not helmets help prevent serious injury.

For this I shall need some volunteers. TJ?

DFT have already been through all the data and concluded that *at best* helmets would save around 10% of deaths, i.e. around 8-16 lives per year.

This made a huge number of assumptions as well, such as:
– all helmets fitted and worn correctly
– everyones behaviour unchanged due to wearing a helmet
– no affect on numbers of people cycling

…which don’t hold up in the real world.

You’d save 100’s more lives making them compulsory for walking/drinking alcohol etc.

DFT have already been through all the data and concluded that *at best* helmets would save around 10% of deaths, i.e. around 8-16 lives per year.

And that’s a Good Thing, surely?

If a helmet only gives me a 10% increased chance of survival/avoiding serious head injury, I’ll take that 10% please, thanks.

378037_262133430510139_257340584322757_735453_858303545_n por kala y simon, en Flickr

If a helmet only gives me a 10% increased chance of survival/avoiding serious head injury, I’ll take that 10% please, thanks.

You’re ignoring the “risk of head injury” part of making a decision to wear a helmet. The risk is similar to many activities people consider safe, such as walking.

But Horatia – again you’re restricting this to deaths? Fine if you want to ignore non-fatal but still serious injuries. There are lots of things that are less dangerous statistically than alcohol (drugs) but that doesn’t stop people taking a sensible view about them?

Anway, each to there own…

But I think Elfin’s test is a sensible – form an orderly queue all those who would like to have a hammer hit them on the head hard without a helmet on? The imagine a sharp branch on your next bit of singletrack – err????

[this comes from someone who used to solo rock climb – a long, long time ago!!!]

http://btawa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/The-Potential-for-Cycle-Helmets-to-Prevent-Injury-Review-.-D.Hynd-UK-2009.pdf

Conclusions on page 39.

No evidence of rotational injuries being increased btw.

Want to volunteer for my new-type research into helmet wearing and head injuries, HoratioHufnagel?

TJ – why haven’t you taken up my headbutting the road with then without a helmet challenge yet?

The risk is similar to many activities people consider safe, such as walking.

LOL You think walking is as dangerous as riding a bike on the road, do be serious!

TandemJeremy – Member
Fullface? Or how did an open face protect your face?

I don’t doubt for one minute that you know more about my accident than I do 🙄

but just in case I am wrong…..

I skidded along the tarmac on my shoulder and back, using my helmet to keep my face/head off the road.

If I wasn’t wearing one, my head and face would be as scarred as my shoulder and back are (FACT)

My helmet was worn flat in two places.

Rather that than my face eh ?

so, for me, you can take your statistics, and studies, and shove ’em.

again….thankyou ….

Teamhurtmore – I have a helmet that fits perfectly – I spent a long time trying helmets on to find one that does. Cracknels appeal shows absolutly nothing about helmet wearing at all apart from how easy it is to make emotive appeals with no rational thought behind them

Elf – but its a millions to one chance. And when whole populations are looked at there is no protective benefit from helmets seen at all. NOne

No one knows why not but some possible reasons

Risk compensation – people wearing helmets take more risks
Rotational injuries – diffuse axon injury – caused by helmets in oblique impacts
Less capable / skilled riders wear helmets so more likely to crash
the significantly larger size of a helmeted head makes impacts more likely

What is needed is more research and better helmet designs. the one size fits all helmet is particularly useless with people with small heads

However this has been done to death on here and I really doubt anyone will change their minds

If you are interested follow the research links above on the CTC page – a decent dispassionate look at the debate and links to data from all sides

nealglover – Member.

I skidded along the tarmac on my shoulder and back, using my helmet to keep my face/head off the road.

So an open face helmet protected your face when you were on your back.

right. Magic helmets eh?

So are you volunteering then TJ?

It’ll be conducted very scientifically, with Peer Reviews and everyfink. Might even get a Member of the Institute of Physics to act as an Impartial Observer.

And the report summarises the conclusions as follows:

Assuming that they are a good fit and worn correctly, cycle helmets should be effective
at reducing the risk of head injury, in particular cranium fracture, scalp injury and
intracranial (brain) injury.
• Cycle helmets would be expected to be effective in a range of accident conditions,
particularly:
o the most common accidents that do not involve a collision with another
vehicle, often simple falls or tumbles over the handlebars; and also
o when the mechanism of injury involves another vehicle glancing the cyclist or
tipping them over causing their head to strike the ground.
• A specialist biomechanical assessment of over 100 police forensic cyclist fatality
reports, predicted that between 10 and 16% of the fatalities could have been
prevented if they had worn an appropriate cycle helmet.
• Of the on-road serious cyclist casualties admitted to hospital in England (HES
database):
o 10% suffered injuries of a type and to a part of the head that a cycle helmet
may have mitigated or prevented; and a further
o 20% suffered ‘open wounds to the head’, some of which are likely to have
been to a part of the head that a cycle helmet may have mitigated or
prevented.
• Cycle helmets would be expected to be particularly effective for children,
because:
o the European Standard (EN 1078) impact tests and requirements are the
same for adult and child cycle helmets, both use a 1.5 m drop height test;
and so
o given that younger children are shorter than older children and adults, their head
height would be within the drop height used in impact tests so a greater
proportion of single-vehicle accidents are likely to be covered by the Standard for
children.
• No evidence was found for an increased risk of rotational head injury with a
helmet compared to without a helmet.

Versus – puts people off and makes others less thoughtful. Hmm, not to hard to think what a sensible person would do!!

TJ – if I may, I would suggest that your own words are going against you. There is no need for a helmet to be uncomfortable.

Cracknell – alive or dead, your choice?

Risk compensation/poor riders arguments – shouldn’t detract from a sensible persons decision.

Horatio quoted a rational piece of research and conclusions seem pretty clear

The size of a helmeted head argument could be taken to ludicrous lengths eg, wearing a sub aqua tank makes it more likely that you could get stuck underwater….wearing a rope climbing makes it more likely that the rope could snag on a loose piece of rock causing it to fall and injure climbers below…

A sensible person would think that it doesn’t make much sense to drive an hour or two to a trail centre, put on a helmet to cycle around a bit, then take the helmet off again for the drive home.

People can be put off cycling, and that’s bad for their health – putting people off driving would be a good thing, so make helmets compulsory for car occupants. Simple. It’ll save hundreds of lives every year.

Teamhurtmore – those conclusion are badly flawed based on some very poor science and the TRL itself found evidence for rotational injury but decided to ignore it.

There is plenty of good evidence for the rotional injury / diffuse axon injury being caused by cycle helmets – and indeed cycle helmets are worse for this that other types of helmets.

It does not suit the helmet promoters position to accept there may be such a significant flaw in the design of cycle helmets

It was observed that the percentage of fatal head injuries was much lower for those cyclists wearing a helmet than those who were not wearing a helmet. A chi squared test was performed in order to test whether there was an interaction between the two variables ‘whether head injury was the main cause of fatality’ and ‘whether a helmet was worn’ , in other words whether there was a statistical significance to this difference. The test showed that it is highly likely(p=0.01) that there is an interaction between the two variables, ie whether a head injury is the cyclist’s most severe injury is dependent on whether the cyclist was wearing a helmet or not.

Taeamhurtmore

TJ – if I may, I would suggest that your own words are going against you. There is no need for a helmet to be uncomfortable.

Every helmet is uncomfortable compared to wearing no helmet. Most people don’t have them fitted properly because of this with shells that are too larege and straps that are too loose. correctly fitted helmetsa re seen on a tiny minority of riders

Cracknell – alive or dead, your choice?

there is no and can be no evidence that his helmet made any difference. infact most researchers would accept it did not as the forces involved in his accident exceed the helmets capabilities by orders of magnitude

Horatio quoted a rational piece of research and conclusions seem pretty clear

Actually mainly a summery of research and some badly flawed and discredited stuff.

Well – I am only quoting an article that Horatio chose to post. But I am sure than any article/research that argues against your point is “very poor science” and “badly flawed.” 😉

[accept that you are the medic though and can imagine how the rotational injury may be involved]

Anyway, software updated, so I will leave this to its inevitable conclusion and merely wish everyone safe cycling in 2012 whatever there choice of head gear!!

[FWIW my helmet is not uncomfortable – a little sweaty perhaps but otherwise hardly noticeable – trouble is it is now cracked after a Whinlatter mishap – but thank goodness that wasn’t my head!!]

there is no and can be no evidence that his helmet made any difference.

which proves my earlier point exactly!!!