Mr agreeable. As regards the type of helmet – in wearing the pisspot I am accepting a tradeoff of decreased risk of rotational injury for a possible small decrease in shock absorbtion.

My choice based n the knowledge I have. Others may conclude differently

Rotational injury forces and stuff:
TRL research ” Overall, it was concluded that for the majority of cases considered, the helmet can provide life saving protection during typical linear impacts and, in addition, the typical level of rotational acceleration observed using a helmeted headform would generally be no more injurious than expected for a bare human head. However, in both low speed linear impacts and the most severe oblique cases, linear and rotational accelerations may increase to levels corresponding to injury severities as high as AIS 2 or 3, at which a marginal increase (up to 1 AIS interval) in injury outcome may be expected for a helmeted head.

The true response of the bare human head to oblique, glancing blows is not known and these observations could not be concluded with certainty, but may be indicative of possible trends. A greater understanding is therefore needed to allow an accurate assessment of injury tolerance in oblique impacts. Linear impact performance, head inertia and helmet fit were identified as important contributory factors to the level of induced rotational motion and injury potential. The design of helmets to include a broad range of sizes was also concluded to be detrimental to helmet safety, in terms of both reduced linear and rotational impact performance. The introduction into EN1078 of an oblique impact test could ensure that helmets do not provide an excessive risk of rotational head injury. “

From http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1182.html There is a lot more discussion on that page and references – makes for interesting reading.

At least one neurosurgeon will not wear one ever as he would rather have a focal brain injury and a laceration than a diffuse axon injury)

One of my friends is a gp and will not wear contact lenses because of possible blindness because of infection – does that mean that we should all give up contacts?

Folk wearing helmets take more risks and crash harder thus injuring themselves more.

I’d love to see the research on this. This is exactly the same poor argument put forward when mandatory seatbelt use in cars was introduced. I seem to remember buying my first helmet as a result of my first mtb crash. I don’t remember being any more able to get air, or ride any faster as a result. However, getting my first decent suspension or brakes did enable me to take more risks. Would this be tied in with the occasion of riders wearing their helmets? How do you prove that riders wearing helmets take more risks?

Across populations wearing helmets increase illhealth by the deterrant effect of wearing a helmet to people riding bikes.

Which populations have mandatory helmet use and associated ill-health?

Which populations have mandatory helmet use and associated ill-health?

All the ones which have mandatory helmet use. The ill health doesn’t have to be that obvious for it to have a greater impact than the slight decrease (assuming there is a real one) in injuries.

Shall I continue?

Risk compensation – a well known psychological phenomena. Try the reverse – go down your favourite trail without a helmet – you will go slower. Google risk compensation for evidence.

Australia – when helmet compulsion was introduced the amount of people riding decreased but the rate of head injuries did not. The extrapolation is that the lack of exercise will give more heart disease and strokes across the population – again much evidence on this. The BMA was until recently against helmet compulsion for this very reason and the policy was only changed in a very undemocratic way by the chair railroading it thru.

Hove a look on that cyclehelmets org site for studies. The site appears to be broadly anti helmet but it does discuss evidence and shortcomings on both sides of the argument with reasonable clarity.

A little test for you and your helmet. Do it up as you would normally. Can you get more than two fingers between your chinstrap and your chin? Bend your neck forward and try to pull it off forward – does it reach your nose? do the same backwards – does it hit the nape of your neck? If any can be done your helmet does not fit properly and will be a danger or will come off in many types of accidents. The vast majority of folk I see wearing helmets do not have the straps adjusted properly thus reducing the effectiveness and increasing the risk of wearing one.

Right – enough – we have covered this ground several times over. Its always a good debate but its a bit like religion. You believe or you are agnostic or you are atheist! Me I’m agnostic.

The research on rotational injuries you’re citing only concludes that more research is needed.

The research into risk compensation wasn’t carried out on cyclists – in fact there are disciplines of cycling which are a clear exceptions to this rule. You don’t see any BMXers wearing helmets except when it’s mandatory for competitions or races. In any case risk assessment is down to the individual, not what they’re wearing. If you rode the same trail without a helmet every day, pretty soon you’d be riding it as fast as if you were wearing one.

The cyclehelmets.org site was set up in direct response to Eric Martlew’s private members bill to have helmets made compulsory. So it’s clearly anti-helmet.

Donald, that’s a horrible story but it sounds like he would have come out of it badly whatever he was or wasn’t wearing.

The cyclehelmets.org site was set up in direct response to Eric Martlew’s private members bill to have helmets made compulsory. So it’s clearly anti-helmet.

Clearly anti-helmet-compulsion, which isn’t necessarily the same thing (I’m pro helmet, anti compulsion).

Mr Agreeable – numerous studies show the potential for rotational injury but yes more research is needed – half a dozen studies quoted on that page and I have seen others that show that sports helmets increase rotational acceleration in oblique impacts.

You confuse risk assessment with risk compensation.

risk compensation is a well known psychological phenomenon that affects everyone – except cyclists according to you? Try riding down your fave singeeltrack without a helmet – you will feel vulnerable and will go slower – thats risk compensation – it works both ways

Arrghhh – you got me debating further!

I had a crash as CyB a couple of years ago, don’t rememeber too much about it, I do remember the massive crack across the top of the helmet, I’d rather not think about what it would have been like had I not had it on.

Reason enough for me never to go riding without one…

If your car’s seatbelt was broken, would you drive more carefully on the way to the garage to get it fixed?

At least one neurosurgeon will not wear one ever as he would rather have a focal brain injury and a laceration than a diffuse axon injury)

I’ve seen a cardiologist warning someone of the dangers of taking too much of a cough/ cold medicine within a short space of time, while snorting lines of Bolivia’s finest so I’ll take a pinch of salt with any doctors advice in the future 😉

sports helmets increase rotational acceleration in oblique impacts.

To the point where it’s more dangerous to wear them than not?

you will feel vulnerable and will go slower

I probably would, at first. But I’d probably get faster with repetition, and take more risks as I acclimatised. It’s much more complex than you give it credit for. There are people out there who do more challenging riding than your average MTBer, with much higher consequences for mistakes, but would never wear a helmet. Skateboarding is another example.

Clearly anti-helmet-compulsion, which isn’t necessarily the same thing

It critiques the pro-helmet legislation pretty heavily, much more so than the anti-. And some of the anti-helmet material (like the stuff TJ cites above) is pretty flimsy really.

TJ, I’d always support your right to ride bareheaded wherever you want, however idiotic I personally think it is. I think a mandatory helmet bill would be ridiculous.

What I really hate though is the rubbish spouted for and against.

Risk compensation – a well known psychological phenomena. Try the reverse – go down your favourite trail without a helmet – you will go slower. Google risk compensation for evidence.

Complete rubbish. I agree that when I don’t wear a helmet I start off more slowly, but pretty soon I’m travelling at the same speed as usual. Interestingly one of the quotes that comes up on googling risk compenstion is .. Risk compensation is a premise based on a metaphor. Hardly proven then.

In terms of mandatory helmet use, using research from Australia – hardly a hot bed of cycling – again is not convincing. An extrapolation points at more heart disease? Well proven again. Is there any concrete research for this that proves that forcing helmet use leads to general health problems in the population? The only large cycling population that I can immediately think of that has compulsory helmet use is Spain (since 2000), and their literature does not seem to focus on ill-health.

It’s all smoke and mirrors really.

And I’m sorry TJ, but patronisingly telling people how to put their helmet on?

Problem of cyclehelmet.org is that it’s a website and like any web site anyone can put anything on it.

TJ’s arguement will probably have much more value if he could back them up with some proper peer-reviewed paper. But again you can always raise them with another:
Make helmet compulsory ======> Australian study saying less people ride======> Another journal saying that people without helmet are more likely to commit traffic offenses etc etc. As for the health benefit do people who stop cycling drive their cars or walk and take the bus that woudl made a huge impact on the health as well. PLus for such study to be valid you would need to have a ref sample of people.

As said above look at helmet such as the Xen more coverage, provides very good fit plus it’s rounder.

Like MrA says you can’t really compare motorbike helmets and bike helmets are you against motorbike helmet made compulsory then?

One of the problem is that in motorbike world it’s an accepted fact that you need to protect your skin. Hence even TJ I am sure wears helmet and gloves and boots etc etc…

It as not come down to cycling yet. But things are changing. A bit like the hi viz jacket not smart not legal but life saving.

As for the rotational injuries I remember reading that TJ’s motorbike helmet were all the wrong size because the bigger the better. As for rotational injuries there is nothign to protect you from that even in the motorbike world.
However laser are developing a soft skin/membrane to try to asses the problem.

As yo said each to their own TJ so you are anti helmet I am pro helmet I am sure even edimbourgh without tourist is big enough for the both of us.

Idle john – from what I see the vast majority of mtbers don’t wear their helmets properly. I did not mean to be patronising but I bet 50+
of folk who wear helmets would fail the above test. Of the dozen or so folk I ride with only a couple wear their nelmets properly.

I do enjoy the way folk on here rubbish the evidence that throws doubt on helmets efficiency without anything to back it up.

I at least try to back up my arguments in some sort of rational manner. It would be courteous if you could do the same.

Its always a good debate but its a bit like religion. You believe or you are agnostic or you are atheist! Me I’m agnostic.

Juan

I am not anti helmet, I am pro evidence based practice.
I have not claimed the things you say I have.

Have a few references
A case-control study of the effectiveness of bicycle safety helmets
Thompson, Rivara & Thompson. New England Journal of Medicine 1989, Vol 320 No 21 p1361-7.

A hospital led promotion campaign aimed to increase bicycle helmet wearing among children aged 11 – 15 living in West Berkshire 1992-98
Lee AJ, Mann NP, Takriti R. Injury Prevention: 2000; 6:151-153

Bicycle Helmets – A review of their effectiveness: A critical review of the literature
Towner, Dowswell, Burkes, Dickinson & Hayes. Department for Transport Road Safety Research Report 30, London, November 2002.

Bicycle helmet legislation for the uptake of helmet use and prevention of head injuries (Cochrane Review)
Macpherson A, Spinks A. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2007 issue 2 Art. No. CD005401.

Bicycle helmet prevalence two years after the introduction of mandatory use legislation for under 18 year olds in Alberta, Canada
Hagel BE, Rizkallah JW, Lamy A, Belton KL, Jhangri GS, Cherry N, Rowe BH. Injury Prevention, 2006;12:262-265.

Bicycle injuries: road trauma is not the only concern
Jacobson GA, Blizzard L, Dwyer T. Austr NZ J Public Health 1998 Jun;22(4):451-5.

Bicycle safety helmet legislation and bicycle-related non-fatal injuries in California
Lee BH, Schofer JL, Koppelman FS. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2005;37:93-102

Changes in traffic crash mortality rates attributed to use of alcohol, or lack of a seat belt, air bag, motorcycle helmet or bicycle helmet, United States, 1982 – 2001
Cummings P, Rivara FP, Olson CM, Smith KM. Injury Prevention, 2006; 12:148-154

Cochrane Review: Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists
Thompson, Rivara & Thompson. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, The Cochrane Library, 2001-2.

Cycle helmet effectiveness in New Zealand
Povey LJ, Frith WJ, Graham PG. Accident Analysis and Prevention 1999 Nov;31(6):763-70

Cycle helmets and road casualties in the UK
Hewson PJ. Traffic Injury Prevention, 2005;6(2):127-134

Cycle helmets – time for legislation
Lee AJ, Mann MP. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 2003;88:465-466

Cycling and children and young people: a review
Gill T. National Children’s Bureau, 2005. ISBN 1-904787-62-2

Do bicycle safety helmets reduce severity of head injury in real crashes?
Dorsch MM, Woodward AJ, Somers RL. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1987 Jun;19(3):183-90.

Economic disparity in bicycle helmet use by children six years after the introduction of legislation
Macpherson AK, Macarthur C, To TM, Chipman ML, Wright JG, Parkin PC. Injury Prevention, 2006;12:231-235

Effect of legislation on the use of bicycle helmets
LeBlanc JC, Beattie TL, Culligan C. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2002;166(5): p592-5

Effectiveness of bicycle safety helmets in preventing head injuries: a case-control study
Thompson DC, Rivara FP, Thompson RS. JAMA, 1996 Dec 25;276(24):1968-73.

Evaluation of the Bicycle Helmet Wearing Law in Victoria during its First Four Years
Carr D, Dyte D, Cameron M. Monash University Accident Research Centre Report 76, 1995.

Extent and severity of cycle accident casualties
Scottish Executive Social Research, 2005.

Finite-element analysis of bicycle helmet oblique impacts
Mills NJ, Gilchrist A. Int Journal of Impact Engineering, 2008;35(9):1087-1101. 2008.

Head injuries to bicyclists and the New Zealand bicycle helmet law
Scuffham P, Alsop J, Cryer C, Langley JD. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2000;32,p565-573.

Impact of mandatory helmet legislation on bicycle-related head injuries in children: a population-based study.
Macpherson AK, To TM, Macarthur C, Chipman ML, Wright JG, Parkin PC. Pediatrics, 2002; 110(5):e60.

Injury patterns in cyclists attending an accident and emergency department: a comparison of helmet wearers and non-wearers
Maimaris C, Summers CL, Browning C, Palmer CR. BMJ: 1994 Jun 11;308(6943):1537-40

Investigating population level trends in head injuries amongst child cyclists in the UK
Hewson PJ. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2005;37(5):807-815.

Legislation for the compulsory wearing of cycle helmets
British Medical Association, Board of Science and Education, November 2004

Making cycle helmets compulsory: ethical arguments for legislation
Sheikh A, Cook A, Ashcroft R. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 2004;97:262-265

Mandatory helmet legislation and children’s exposure to cycling
Macpherson AK, Parkin PC, To TM. Injury Prevention 2001;7:228-230

Mind your head: The data and debate on bicycle helmet effectiveness
Cook A. Significance 2004;Vol 1 issue 4:162-3

New Zealand bicycle helmet law – do the costs outweigh the benefits?
Taylor M, Scuffham P. Injury Prevention 2002; 8:317-320.

Oblique impact testing of bicycle helmets
Mills NJ, Gilchrist A. Int Journal of Impact Engineering, 2008;35(9):1075-1086. 2008

Promoting safe cycling and helmet use
Curran A. BMA Board of Science, 2008

Risk-Compensation Behavior in Children – Myth or Reality?
Pless IB, Magdalinos H, Hagel B. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 2006;160(6):610-614.

The effectiveness of bicycle helmets: a study of 1710 casualties
McDermott FT, Lane JC, Brazenore GA, Debney EA. Journal of Trauma, 1993; 34(6):834-845.

Trends in head injury mortality among 0-14 year olds in Scotland (1986-95)
Williamson, Morrison & Stone. Journal of Epidemiological Community Health 2002;56:285-288

Trends in helmet use and head injuries in San Diego County: The effect of bicycle helmet legislation
Ming J, Gilchick RA, Bender SJ. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2006;38(1):128–134

Trends in serious head injuries among cyclists in England: analysis of routinely collected data
Cook A, Sheikh A. BMJ 2000 v321 p1055

Trends in serious head injuries among English cyclists and pedestrians
Cook A, Sheikh A. Injury Prevention 2003;9:266-267

IdleJon, I think you’ve got him rattled. 🙂

TJ, I know oblique impacts are one of your most used arguments against current cycle helmet design, so I had a quick look at the abstract of the 2008 study by Mills and Gilchrist:

http://perg.bham.ac.uk/pdf/IRCOBI03.pdf

Do you actually read these things? At all?

Mr agreeable – this is one of the issues – results from testing in various ways are often contradictory. I can quote you several experimental studies that show serious rotational injuries from oblique impacts taht without a helmet would result in lessor injury and also several statistical studies from a variety of sports that show helmet use decreases focal brain injury and increases neck injury and diffuse axon injury.

I think serious questions have been raised about this issue and more research is needed for sure.

IMO all that can be said with certainty is:

In some ( quantity unquantifiable) types of accident helmets reduce injury
In some ( quantity unquantifiable) types of accident helmets may exacerbate injury
In some ( quantity unquantifiable) types of accident helmets make little difference.

It is clear that they are good at protecting you from the majority of accidents that would result in minor injury. Evidence for protection from major injury is less certain.

Different types of helmet and different types of construction give different protection in different impacts

There is b*gger all research into MTBers and protection from injury.

Lots of questions and few solid answers. cycling reamins safe with accident rates that give rise to serious head trauma are very few and far between thankfully.

All you can do is read the eidence and make your own mind up. Given that for simplew just cycling along for all ridere in all circumstances when I am riding trail like this
the risks are so low I don’t wear one
Butr when I am doing this
I will wear one

The sun is over the yardarm, the G&Ts are flowing and I can’t be arsed spellchecking so I hope you get the essence of my argument above

Poorly conceived biased ranting != lots of useful info

Yeah, I think it sums up as “wear a helmet, or don’t wear a helmet, but bear in mind that they may kill you unless you’re as clever as I am”. 😛

Not quite Mr Agreeable 🙂

Ambient jeycore lite stylee riding – risks are so low it really dont matter
Freerideradcore stylee – wear a freaking helmet unless / even if you left your brain at home.

Some of the riding I do you are more likely to drown in a bog than splatter your brains – should I wear a life jacket?

Trail mincing and maturity – its the future I tell you

I’m confused, could someone sensible PLEASE confirm what is the best helmet for a baby robin?

I do enjoy the way folk on here rubbish the evidence that throws doubt on helmets efficiency without anything to back it up.

I at least try to back up my arguments in some sort of rational manner. It would be courteous if you could do the same.

I’ll only rubbish evidence if it is in fact total rubbish. Your evidence mainly seems aimed at beating the reader into submission with sheer volume of verbage (is that a word?), rather than being conclusive.

Sorry if I gave that impression Idlejohn. I just never know when to let go I suppose. Not supposed to be conclusive by any means – merely to raise doubts and ask questions. I do feel rather backed into a corner on this issue. Feels leke one against the world altho I have had a we bit of support

Verbiage is the word you are looking for I guess. Or verbosity

Mrs TJ helped me to spell it and she says “guilty as charged”

Ambient jeycore lite stylee riding – risks are so low it really dont matter
Freerideradcore stylee – wear a freaking helmet unless / even if you left your brain at home.

Doesn’t that completely conflict with your view that helmets are only useful in gentle, low-speed accidents?

I do feel rather backed into a corner on this issue.

Well I think most people on here are in agreement that helmets shouldn’t be compulsory, me included. If you have to go a step further and bleat about how dangerous helmets are, while citing research that doesn’t even back up your claims, you should expect people to call you out on it. Sorry.

Mr agreeable – I have never that helmets are only useful in low speed gentle accidents nor that they are dangerous. Your interpretation not mine. Perhaps I didn’t explain well or perhaps you were pursuing your line of argument without listening.

IMO all that can be said with certainty is:

In some ( quantity unquantifiable) types of accident helmets reduce injury
In some ( quantity unquantifiable) types of accident helmets may exacerbate injury
In some ( quantity unquantifiable) types of accident helmets make little difference.

I wear one when the risk of crashing is high – I don’t when the risk of crashing is low

That helmets are “useless in high speed high impact incidents” is an argument used by many but not by me – for example If I was doing a lot of urban rush hour commuting I would wear a helmet for that. It would alleviate impact inmost of those situations.

My argument is that the design is flawed so it is not certainly a good thing ( rotational impact and such)in all situations and that some types of riding the risks are so low it is pointless wearing one for the one in a million chance. When the risk is high I wear one.

I’m pretty sure that “above a certain speed helmets are useless” was one of the arguments you came out with last time this subject came up. What happened in the meantime? Did a bit of common sense intrude? 😛

Nope – thats not my point, never has been , never will be. Sorry old chap. I may be argumentative but I am trying to be consistent. that argument is often used but never by me

I try to follow the evidence and a logical train of thought

gravel rash on your helmet is a right pain.

oh wait…

Darwin says “Wear one if you want boys and girls. It really is up to you, but then so are the consequences”

Except of course it bumps up the taxes I pay to the NHS – wear one you fools.

Oh and I put my self in hospital for a week with concussion as a kid coming off a bike – not enjoyable and if you haven’t tried it yourself I wouldn’t recommend it. Would a helmet have helped? Maybe not but it is unlikely to hurt in most of the crashes I’ve see / executed and it ain’t much of a hardship to wear one.

I like helmets and armour because it allows me to ride more dangerously without increasing my personal risk, which is fun!

I like risks and dangers; the H&S obsessives have lost the plot IMO.

A helmet has saved me from injury both off road at relatively low speed, and on road at fairley high speed, both accidents would have been worse without. But I wouldtnt maake anyone wear a helmet. But all the argument that its worse to wear one- thats just bollocks-same as the pikey/chav I cant wear a seatbelt argument