double post

Lets look at this from another angle.
We get a lot of accidents at the centre the majority of which are head and upper torso. I would much rather go pickup someone with a bust lid and some gravel rash rather than try to keep someone alive with severe head trauma while waiting for the medics to arrive, suddenly the forest isn't such an inviting place to be.

God theres a load of repetitive nonsense on this thread!

I wear a helmet all the time, my head feels cold if I don't and they look cool. They're also especially effective in the rain. I admit that a hat might be better suited to my needs, but I've got a helemet and it doesn't absorb water when it rains.

In my experience (12 years) as my experience has developed I've started to crash more often, my riding has developed, so I'm pushing the boundaries more often I guess. The analogy of not being able to drive as well as Lewis Hamilton even though you've watched him drive for a long time made me laugh, complete bollocks!

I agree with TJ to an extent, there is absolutely no way I would ever crash riding the trail pictured above and if I was doing trails like that I might consider not wearing a helmet on a hot day. But then I'd probably go for a different route as I quite enjoy rides with a relatively high probability of death.

What I find most interesting about this thread (Lets be honest the vast majority of whats been written above is utter crap thts already been said countless times on here and all over the internet) is all these accidents you're all having where you hit your head. I don't mean this in any sort of, 'I don't believe you' kind of way, but are you all a bit crap at crashing somehow? Now, over the years I've crashed a lot, pretty much every time I've had enough advanced warning to be able to effect an exit strategy that protects the most valuable bit of my body. I always cut my knees and arms, but rarely anything else, I've never broken any of the bones that get mentioned on here a lot, I've hit my head once. I hit my head earlier this year going over the bars down Chapel Gate, I hit the side bank of the deep gully. It's rare to ride down sometihng with a steep side like that, so I'm prepared to take that one as an anomaly.

I'm not saying don't wear a helmet, because I do, but has the art of crashing been lost over the years or do you all like to bleat on a bit and exaggerate to make a point?

robdob… what is actually wrong with assessing the risk of something before doing it, and then choosing whether to do it or not based on that assessment? You seem to have some problem with this…

Genisis – I have not advocated not wearing a helmet at a trail centre

Mr Agreebale – I simply have not said what you say I have and you need to have a look at the research

TJ, wasn't pointing fingers. Just a personal view 🙂

do you all like to bleat on a bit and exaggerate to make a point?

😆

It is, and has to be, all about free choice.

I made my choice in about 91 / 92. Wearing a lid was deeply unfashionable at the time – but a girl where I lived staggered sideways after being passed too close by a car. The car wasn't speeding (busy rush hour city centre traffic). The car didn't actually hit her – she panicked and in attempting to move sideways staggered and tripped, hit her head on a rough stone wall and died of her injuries…

Totally unscientific, but this otherwise inoccuous incident took someone's life. The lack of speed and lack of vehicle impact suggests to me that a helmet WOULD have made a life saving difference.

In another seemingly low risk incident, a colleague died cycling with his family – low speed, country lane, inocuous little tumble and head impact. Other freinds have had higher speed crashes, where they are convinced that a lid has saved them, and like most of us, I have had a few endos where head / rock / stump impact has left me dazed and confused, and thankful for wearing a lid…

SO, I wear a helmet – my choice. The risk management arguments about type of trail, speed, aggressive / cautious riding are fatuous – you believe that you control those factors, but like religion, it is BELIEF, not fact. You may be able to limit the risks, but as has been posted above, the seemingly stupid little low speed fall can do as much damage as a high speed stack

rkk – my point is that if you actually look at thee risks involved in some forms of riding they are so low as to be acceptable to me to take – yo really are talking millions to one chances.

I've no problem with that, it just seems very odd that someone would admit to a helmets usefullness by buying one, but thinks that they can predict the future with enough accuracy to be happy about not using it.

*bangs head on desk*

some mountainbiking is risky – then I wear an appropriate helmet. Some mountainbiking is not risky – then I don't wear a helmet.

Its not about predicting the future – its about assessing risk

rkk… if someone had tripped, fallen and hit their head while walking, would you now be wearing a helmet walking down the street? If not, why not if as you say all the risk management arguments are fatuous…

I've no problem with that, it just seems very odd that someone would admit to a helmets usefullness by buying one, but thinks that they can predict the future with enough accuracy to be happy about not using it.

You are constantly making judgements about risk, whether you are aware of it or not. It's not predicting the future, it's having common sense and making your own judgement about acceptable levels of risk vs levels of precaution. It's a constant trade-off and there are no absolutes.

Do you wear a helmet sat up there on that high horse?*

*Did anyone use this one yet in this thread? 😛

TandemJeremy – Member
rkk – my point is that if you actually look at thee risks involved in some forms of riding they are so low as to be acceptable to me to take – yo really are talking millions to one chances.

I absolutely agree – individually, the chances of being on the recieving end of one of these freak accidents is incredibly low, but us humans are very bad a risk perception, and it is probably risk perception rather than risk itself, that drives the majority on their decisions to waer / not to wear a helmet.

*bangs head on desk*

So you don't wear your helmet even though you are clearly prone to hitting your bonce on the neareast hard surface?

All we need is kaese to chip in.

funkynick – Member
rkk… if someone had tripped, fallen and hit their head while walking, would you now be wearing a helmet walking down the street? If not, why not if as you say all the risk management arguments are fatuous…

Ordinarily, no… although that scenario may well be far more common than the mtb one being discussed, especially if alchohol / Friday / Saturday nights are included…. However, if at work, then yes, I might well be wearing a helmet.

ETA – and I don't mean ALL risk management arguments are fatuous – just those that are being put forward about high risk / low risk trails. Yes for a "high risk" fast rocky descent the injury rate will probably be higher than for a flat cycle track. The risk of injury is present for both, but our preparedness might be significantly different

I went for a potter around Rutland water with a mate yesterday and didn't bother with a helmet – although I did initially consider it.

Normally though I wear a helmet – I would rather there was some polystyrene between my head and a rock, as rocks are way harder than my delicate noggin.
There was a comment earlier about polystyrene in modern helmets being harder than in older ones. I assume this is because manufacturers have tested various types of polystyrene and found one that is soft enough to slow down the deceleration of your head in a 'typical' collision, but is hard enough that your head doesn't just plough straight through it.

I find in wooded singletrack I will occasionally whack my helmet on a low branch. Now there is the arguement that had the helmet not been there, my head would have cleared the branch – perhaps true. But I would still rather have a helmet to whack branches out of the way with.

And – what the hell would I mount my helmet mounted torch on, if I didn't wear a helmet?!

Ho do people do it?
They go on like they have a jedi power to know whether wearing a helmet is going to be worth it or not. I wish i had that. Ahh well like all the other mere humans im just going to have to wear one all the time 😉

Stumpy – actually the harder polystyrene is because modern vented helmets have so many holes in them that to meet the testing they have had to make the poly harder which is arguably not so good in an actual crash. Its a flaw in the testing regeime

Its a flaw in the testing regeime

In that by making them nicer to wear you're more likely to wear one? 😉

No PP – in that by making the poly harder they have removed some of its impact reducing properties. the manufacturers know this is not good but they have to meet the testing standards

rkk… so the fatuous ones are just those you disagree with then! 😉

Just out of interest, does anyone know the helmet wearing rates for places like Holland and Denmark? Last time I was in Denmark there were bikes everywhere and no-one wearing helmets… has this changed at all?

to be honest with you TJ i am amazed you can be bothered to asses the risk
before each ride. Personly i just wack me lid on and get out the door.
half the time i dont know where im going anyway.

As nonk says ^^. To me, it's just part of going out on a bike – I always wear a helmet. Not wearing one feels wrong in the same way that driving a car while not wearing a seatbelt feels wrong

There is a scientific test for this. Smack TJ round the head with a piece of 2×4 while he's wearing a helmet. Then do the same when he's not wearing one.
Then see which has caused the most damage…

I wonder if there's anything that TJ hasn't been trained in. I admire him, I really do.
Anyway, here's a risk assessment scenario. You're out with your mate & riding in say, Wark Forest & mainly riding forest roads with little or no intention of riding anything technical at all. You need to be back at the car by X Oclock cos it's an hour to get home & your'e taking the missus out at Y Oclock & if your'e late she'll kill you.
Helmet or not? (for the ride, not protection from the missus)

When we did our north sea cycle trip 400km up the west coast of Denmark we saw very few people with helmets on, probably less than 5 percent.

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/helmet_research.html

http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/helmets25.pdf

That chart tells me that the more people who cycle, the less of them die irrespective of whether they wear a helmet or not.

Much as I hate to say it, TJ is right. Sort of.

We all constantly make decisions on risk and how to mitigate them. Most of us at some point in our mtbing have seen a trail and decided not to ride it because it's too steep/difficult/sketchy and we think there's a good chance we'll crash/get injured (obviously this being STW, there will be a disproportionate number of riding gods who've ridden down vertical cliffs but the point still stands in general). TJ is simply saying the same thing and is clearly willing to take more of a risk with his head than most of the rest of us – that's not inherently right or wrong but just his choice.

Now, I don't agree with his decision for myself, simply because while I think the risk of head injury is relatively low (notwithstanding PP's RA which uses a different scale on risk than most of us would use outside of work) the potential impact is very high (eg potential brain damage). Wearing a helmet is not an issue for me – I don't find them uncomfortable and it seems like common sense to me that in general (again not always but on balance) they will prevent/reduce far more injuries than they will cause – so on the basis that I can mitigate (not eliminate) the risk of head injury, I always wear a helmet.

TJ's choice is his own. Sanctimonious posts about people looking after you for the rest of your life and so on are BS since we all choose to do a sport that does have risks of injury with similar consequences that don't require a head injury (eg spinal injuries).

That chart tells me in which countries drivers are more respectful and aware of cyclists on the road.

It is difficult to draw conclusions from that chart and other data – one common theme is that all the data on helmets is of rather poor quality.

However it is clear that in countries where they don't wear helmets head injury rates are lower. Why this is is hard to say but it is a real effect

Is there any basis in fact for any cycling statistics though???

Motorcycle forums bemoan the comparison of cycling and motorcycling injury / fatality statistics, becasue the data collection is so very different…

For motor vehicles:

– annual mileages are fairly well understood (important for the per mile / km statistics). All vehicles have an odometer, and disclosure of vehicle mileage is compulsory at MoT and is normally stated for insurance purposes.

– all injury incidents are legally reportable, so if you are a car / motorcyclist (or cyclist invloved in an incident with a motor vehicle), your injury will be counted in the stats.

– all motor vehicles require compulsory insurance – even those incidents that are not reported as injury incidents still get captured as most / many will be notofied to the insuranbce companies.

– Councils / Highways Agency / developers spend a lot of money on transport surveys / modelling to evaluate routes / improvements. provides more data on vehicle miles for each mode of transport.

For cycling:
– No requirement to record bike mileage, register bikes, know the number of bikes in use etc – so very little basis to state bike miles / km for comparison of injury / incident rates.

– No legal requirement to report injuries (except as above with motor vehicle), so many cylcle injuries are either unreported or based on A&E admissions stats.

– No universal insurance requirement.

Surely the No of incidents / mile for cycling must surely be highly conjectured, and even if it has been established, still based on very different data set and population to similar data for motor vehicles.

and that doesn't even account for getting off the public highway!!!!

Does it really matter,if people choose to ride a MTB without a helmet then on their HEAD be it……

So as Ian Munro asked earlier – do all you "must wear a helmet" types wear spine protectors? You are increasing your risk of spinal injury you realise and spinal injuries appear to be more common than serious head injuries

Just out of interest, to those who only wear a helemt on certain occations, what is it that makes you NOT want to wear a helmet?
Are they uncomfortable?
Do you feel that they limit your riding abilities(more freedom)?
Do you feel they are too heavy?

Stuart – I find them sweaty and uncomfortable. They get in the way of my sunglasses ( can't just push 'em on my forehead) The helmet is a ruddy pest when going into pubs and stuff. The straps irritate. I simply don't like riding one thus only wear one when risks are high

Thats fair enough. Mine doesnt bother me so i wear it all the time. Each to their own, just try not to die!

I had an accident at leith hill recently on a bit of trail I've ridden at least 50 times without incident.

The resultant crash was hard enough to split the expanded foam of a Bell Triton in half down the middle and I had a very sharp rock lodged in one of the vents above my temple.

My head was badly bruised and I was concussed for a day or so.

I'm sure I would have been significantly more damaged had I not been wearing it and would suggest based on my expereince that helmets are a good idea.

That's my take on it anyway.

I still dont wear one on the road or local towpaths etc as I assess the risk as lower but for any serious riding I always do.