Wiggo on helmets

Donk, you are arguing against helmets based on crush injuries yet the helmet is designed to help protect against impact injures. Most cycling accidents will be impact by their nature so having an helmet would help your chances of avoiding serious head injuries.

Definitely have the cycling bug…. (groan)

Well I am not sure spiders qualify as bug

I have three helmets in my cupboard all damaged because I had crashes. In one instance, my bike landed on my head when I went over the bars on a steep drop. The bike cracked my helmet in three places.

My helmets have saved my life and I am very grateful to them 😀

My helmets have saved my life and I am very grateful to them

No! Your lack of skills put you in danger.

Helmets save lives the same way seatbelts save lives … err … do they?

http://www.john-adams.co.uk/2009/09/16/seat-belts-again-2/%5B/url%5D

so not wearing a seatbelt in a car is dangerous? who knew?
Seriously tho do you have the stats for head injuries KSIs among seatbelt wearers?

What I was getting at is that motorists already have a compulsion which, if ignored, leads to the head injuries you referred to.

Been looking for the report I mentioned but the ABI have taken it down – they never leave stuff up too long. THIS is pretty informative though & does give quite a few stats that are relevant.

don – yep, i am a complete idiot on a bike, couldnt even bunnyhop a kerb, hence why I wear a helmet which saved my life.

Molgrips/craig, I’m arguing against helmet compulsion for cyclists. I’m also highlighting other areas where compulsion might help but there’s very very few people recommending it, why is that?

There’s other reason against compulsion we can switch to one of those is you want.

Again, I do wear a helmet whilst riding so no need to worry unduly about my safety.

Nobby yeah I’d had a look at that, poor people more likely to die was a strange one. (my point was that even wearing a seatbelt some car users still suffer fatal head injuries, but there’s no helmet compulsion argument for drivers)

I’m going to need some evidence for that, I’m afraid.

Obviously it’s difficult to get figures that will catagorically prove it one way or the other but this is what I’ve found so far

Plus a few other sources that would back up a similar assumption but all found on cyclehelmets.org so I know that won’t satisfy most folk.

What do you think a reasonable percentage would be?

Nobby yeah I’d had a look at that, poor people more likely to die was a strange one.

It’s almost Daily Mail! I’d have guessed the correlation would be the fatality rate in older vehicles rather than anything else but the inference in there is otherwise.

Click this link

Important link

I have no idea on the percentage, I’m not the one throwing 99% about.

That link says 10% of all CHILD cycling injuries, which appears to include cuts and scrapes, are on the head.

Doesn’t seem at all relevant to this debate about serious accidents involving adults in traffic.

Drivers of small cars, especially the superminis, are four times more at risk of death
in a collision with a larger car than drivers of the largest type of car. The increasing
divergence in mass is estimated to have increased the number of car occupants
killed by about 1%, or 30 extra deaths

😯 (matiz driver)

Whahhh, whhhhhaaaaaah, whail….whahhhhhahhhh..

Mummy I can stand it any more..

Please make the nasty men stop whining..

Please…

Whahhhah..whahhhh…

I have no idea on the percentage, I’m not the one throwing 99% about.

That link says 10% of all CHILD cycling injuries, which appears to include cuts and scrapes, are on the head.

Doesn’t seem at all relevant to this debate about serious accidents involving adults in traffic.

OK, do you agree that helmets are designed to protect you in a fall from standing while stationary?

Mods, please can you re-open SpecialKnees ‘out of my way, thoughtless roadies, I’m driving a motor car dontcherknow’ thread as a distraction from this oh so tired old debate?

Helmets do offer some protection obviously.
But none at all against cars/motorbikes/lorries/busses …

It would be a sad day if they ever made them compulsory.

I fear there is more chance of this government taxing cyclists though .. if it gets more popular, they will smell money to be made.

taxing cyclists

Even less enforceable than legalising helmet use.

The proportion of RTCs where a helmet would have helped is tiny. 99% of the time wearing a kitten would be just as effective.

I’m going to need some evidence for that, I’m afraid.

Control group volunteer prepares for molgrips new helmet testing research

Uneforcable, yes. But that wouldn’t stop Them from trying. First a bike registration plate/tag system. Then the annual renewal fee/tax…

Helmets do offer some protection obviously.
But none at all against cars/motorbikes/lorries/busses …

It would be a sad day if they ever made them compulsory

Nothing could protect you against being run over by a bus or lorry or motorbike….therefore we should not have brakes or lights ..its a pointless argument as no one is arguing that helmets will make it impossible to injure you.
The same argument was used about making motorbike helmets compulsory and still is in the US of A

But none at all against cars/motorbikes/lorries/busses …

Do all RTC with cars/motorbikes/lorries/ busses(sic) involve the cyclist having their head run over?

Junkyard – Member

Nothing could protect you against being run over by a bus or lorry or motorbike….therefore we should not have brakes or lights

You gotta explain this one to me …

How does not having brakes or lights compare??

Just a thought, how do people figure out all this guff about what helmets do and don’t do?

Presumably accident statistics are just that and only record what happens when someone has in fact hurt themselves. So how do they come upon all the info about when folk have clumped themselves severely and not hurt themselves? Is there a special number we need to ring or something? I’ve got about 20 or so head/solid object interface reports to file where my head has not in fact exploded or been damaged if that is the case.

..its a pointless argument as no one is arguing that helmets will make it impossible to injure you

And no one is saying that helmets are useless.

What we are trying to say is that helmets are such a tiny part of the safety debate that the amount of attention paid to them is ridiculous.

The debate should be about driver training, cyclist training, ad campaigns, infrastructure, etc and yet every single time it comes back to helmet legislation.

If we start to accept their limitations in RTCs maybe we can finally move the debate on.

mastiles_fanylion – Member

But none at all against cars/motorbikes/lorries/busses …

Do all RTC with cars/motorbikes/lorries/ busses(sic) involve the cyclist having their head run over?

Very doubtful.
But how does a helmet protect you if you go under the wheels of a 10ton lorry?
Would the helmet protect your neck any better than being struck at 60mph by an oncoming car?

BruceWee – Member

..its a pointless argument as no one is arguing that helmets will make it impossible to injure you

And no one is saying that helmets are useless.

What we are trying to say is that helmets are such a tiny part of the safety debate that the amount of attention paid to them is ridiculous.

BruceWee – Member

It’s pretty irresponsible to go around saying that helmets are going to do you any good in a collision.

BruceWee – Member

Seriously, if there’s one message that cyclists should be trying to get across to drivers it’s that bicycle helmets offer no protection in an RTC.

Make you mind up on which message your trying to say then

Make you mind up on which message your trying to say then

Stop telling drivers that helmets are going to save cyclists if the hit them. Move the debate on to training, advertising, awareness, infrastructure.

Those are the points I’ve been trying to get across all along.

Nothing could protect you against being run over by a bus or lorry or motorbike..

Move the debate on to training, advertising, awareness, infrastructure.

For drivers or cyclists? Best metaphor I’ve heard for this:

You’ve put us in a cage with lions and your offering us protective clothing and lion taming lessons.

FFS do something about the Lions:

– strict enforcement of traffic laws. You’re driving a two ton hunk of metal – you obey speed limits, you obey traffic signals, you drive at appropriate speeds for the conditions (which is often lower than the speed limit), you don’t use your mobile phone
– you **** up, you lose your licence and have to retake your test.
– we drop the speed limit to 20mph on all roads without segregated cycle infrastructure.
– we put in place segregated cycle infrastructure (with priority at junctions)

Stop the hurt, don’t give me a sticking plaster.

Is STW about to implode all the threads eem to be converging including lion analogies

nick1962 – Member

kcr – Member

More people cycling is the best way to improve safety for cyclists.

Safety in numbers ,like being in herd of wilderbeest so only the old ,sick and young get eaten by the lions

Drivers of small cars, especially the superminis, are four times more at risk of death
in a collision with a larger car than drivers of the largest type of car.

How likely is it that the drivers of the largest type of car will be in collision with a larger car?

Has there been any research done on helmet use in cases of grand pianos falling from the sky and landing on your head?

Or incidents involving Acme Rocket powered roller skates?

If not, its a glaring omission

Full Video…

One of the first things he says “I’m probably too tipsy to start talking about this now.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bradley-wiggins-calls-for-cycling-helmets-to-be-made-compulsory-following-olympic-games-bus-crash-8000839.html?afid=af

Yay, Boris has joined in now. National darling says helmets should be compulsory, village idiot says no they shouldn’t be. Theres only one way to settle it…….

FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!

but what weapons? I say spoons.

From Twitter a little while ago,

@bradwiggins

Just to confirm I haven’t called for helmets to be made the law as reports suggest

@bradwiggins

I suggested it may be the way to go to give cyclists more protection legally I involved In an accident

– strict enforcement of traffic laws. You’re driving a two ton hunk of metal – you obey speed limits, you obey traffic signals, you drive at appropriate speeds for the conditions (which is often lower than the speed limit), you don’t use your mobile phone
– you **** up, you lose your licence and have to retake your test.

I agree. Though at the same time you have to apply the same to the cyclists. Day in day out I see stupid dangerous actions by fellow cyclists (and occasionally myself!) which not only put themselves in danger but others too, and to then bring all the enforcement against the driver is a bit of hipocrisy. Everything should be applied equally, only then do you stand a chance of having equal respect of each other on the road.

@bradwiggins

Just to confirm I haven’t called for helmets to be made the law as reports suggestlooked in the video like he had but I’m guessing he had other things on his mind, was a little tipsy, got ambushed with the question and is a freaking awesome athlete so we’ll let him off eh?
🙂