Helmet or not

Prowetod

Just wondering do fellow boardsies wear a helmet?

RobFowl

Strong views on this one, I would probably have died if I wasn't wearing on. At best I would have had brain damage but am ok (ish!!)

xz

Personally, I always wear one.
This poll could open a can of worms, as there are strong views for and against helmets.
But at the end of the day it's a personal choice

FrankGrimes

RobFowl wrote: »

Strong views on this one, I would probably have died if I wasn't wearing on. At best I would have had brain damage but am ok (ish!!)

+1

scottreynolds

IMHO -- To not wear one is stupidity... I grew up in NZ and its an enforced law. Forget about being cool if you head hits the pavement, or a car, at 30mph you'd really wished you were wearing one.

RobFowl

BTW medical evidence is a bit equivical. Some research showed compulsary helmet wearing decreased the numbers of people cycling. It certainly prevents death/serious injury if you fall off or crash but makes feck all difference if a car hits you.
PS Have a bit of experitse here and can provide evidence if anyone wants.

xz

xz wrote: »

Personally, I always wear one.
This poll could open a can of worms, as there are strong views for and against helmets.
But at the end of the day it's a personal choice

It's started...............

Gavin

RobFowl wrote: »

BTW medical evidence is a bit equivical. Some research showed compulsary helmet wearing decreased the numbers of people cycling. It certainly prevents death/serious injury if you fall off or crash but makes feck all difference if a car hits you.
PS Have a bit of experitse here and can provide evidence if anyone wants.

What is your expertise ?

blorg

I sometimes wear one but don't normally commuting or on general on-road spins.

I would wear one racing/in tight groups/mountain biking.

A lot of people reckon "it saved my life" but I would be skeptical on this TBH, I have had my fair share of crashes including some major head impact with ambulance, A&E and blood pouring down my face but the skull is actually pretty tough.

Having said that I certainly don't see any negative in wearing one, if you are comfortable wearing one it is a very good idea. Should not be compulsory though.

Lumen

I tried on a Bell Sweep R today, and it was like my scalp was being gently hugged by an angel.

I understand the theory that wearing a helmet makes a person take more risks, thus evening out the odds, but if that means I can ride a bit harder without making the odds worse, it seems like a cheap performance tweak.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

I understand the theory that wearing a helmet makes a person take more risks

I don't buy into that one at all!

Lumen

Having suffered bad whiplash in a car accident I am quite put off by reported increase in "rotational injuries" in helmeted bike accidents.

I'd be quite interested some kind of minimally-padded armoured skull-cap rather than a large sticky-out piece of foam. I don't like the idea of my head being impaled by something sharp (which bike helmets probably don't help, especially with all the vents), and can't afford to look any uglier (so would appreciate some abrasion resistance).

My Giro is now about 15 years old, and is therefore probably offering little of anything at this stage, if the manfacturers are to be believed.

Kinetic^

I always wear one when I'm on the bike. A helmet probably saved my dad's life a couple of years back.

kirving

I should really buy a helmet.... I hit a football going at least 35 kmph and did a nice front flip, I was really luck no cars were around and I didn't hit my head! Another time I came off going around a corner covered in ice, luckily I hit my head off the ice, so no grazes.

I don't wear a helmet cycling normally, or even think about one, but a few times I've really thought that I should have one on. I'll buy one if I get into a routine of cycling into college.

I'd like to think that I'd be safe on the bike, not cutting through traffic, taking road conditions into account, and keeping lit up all the time, but I realise accidents will happen.

I think helmets definatly save lives on occasion, but in an accident I'd say a car would do alot of damage a helmet could not protect against.

rubadub

scottreynolds wrote: »

IMHO -- To not wear one is stupidity... I grew up in NZ and its an enforced law. Forget about being cool

So do you wear one in a car? it would be stupid not to as it offers far more protection than a seatbelt or airbag, and it is supposed to afford far more protection in a car crash than a bicycle crash. In Australia it was also compulsory and I think head injuries went up while actual numbers of cyclists went down (i.e. large % increase). Wear one in the car, forget about being cool....

Most cannot understand why people would not wear one, and have your idea of not being "cool" as the only reason. A study showed cars give people less room when overtaking people wearing helmets, they think they are safer. This makes sense to me, when I pass pedestrians walking on cycletracks I slow down according to the perceived risk I see, if they look old and doddery I slow down, if it is young kid I go at a snails pace, if it is a runner who is sticking to one side I only slow a bit. Motorists seem to use this same perceived risk.

blorg wrote: »

A lot of people reckon "it saved my life" but I would be skeptical on this TBH, I have had my fair share of crashes including some major head impact with ambulance, A&E and blood pouring down my face but the skull is actually pretty tough.

Yes, helmets are designed to crack and fail on impact, it absorbs the energy, skulls are a LOT stronger. People see a crack in a helmet and use faulty logic and think that would have been their skull. Also if you were hit by a car there is that possibility you would not have been hit at all if you had no helmet on, i.e. they might have given more room.

Lumen wrote: »

I understand the theory that wearing a helmet makes a person take more risks, thus evening out the odds,

Raam wrote: »

I don't buy into that one at all!

Of course it is not the case for all people, but it certainly does have an effect on some. Watch kids put on shin guards and the first thing they do is lash each other on the shins, and some are more likely to go in for hard tackles. Same goes on the bike, Lumen already said he does it! riding harder with the helmet on.

Raam

The reason I wear one these days is to avoid road rash if I fall off. A few years ago I crashed, hit the ground and ended up with road rash on my forehead and cheek. I didn't really like it. If I was to stop wearing a helmet now, I'd probably feel odd for the first couple of spins, but I'm sure I wouldn't bat an eyelid after that.

ednwireland

i'm sure i told this before but i've fallen off 3 times on the road (serious accidents) twice i road home with a sore neck and gravel rash and a spilt helmet once i ended up in casualty with several stitches round my eye and a fractured skull (a crack right down my eye socket, with wrecked sinuses and personality changes to boot. guess what never ever ride without a helmet now. i obviously think there is no argument here (and dont start me on if you get hit by a car, that is not the accident you are preventing injury from here)
these would have been similiar accident situations.

c0rk3r

rubadub wrote: »

I think

You got a link ? I remember someone talking about this then alluding to the fact wearing a helmet may cause more damage if your involved in an accident. Something along the lines of rotational force. Seems ludicrous and just reminds me of Mbeki denying you cant get Aids from HIV.

Like seatbelts and airbags a helmet will offer protection in certain instances. If a 12-wheeler slams into you at 80km/h the seatbelt and airbags wont save you but thats not a reason not to have them.

Ive never met someone whos been in an accident and then decided not to wear a helmet after it.

Thomas_S_Hunterson

c0rk3r wrote: »

You got a link ? I remember someone talking about this then alluding to the fact wearing a helmet may cause more damage if your involved in an accident. Something along the lines of rotational force. Seems ludicrous and just reminds me of Mbeki denying you cant get Aids from HIV.

Seeps fairly reasonable to me if you look at the shape of a helmet. If you're sliding sideways along the road, the curved, jutting out edge of the helmet is highly likely to 'roll'. The shape of the rest of your body isn't conducive to the same rolling and so there's a conflict of interest as it were.

That said, depending on the type of collision, they could save your life.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

if you are dumb enough not to wear a helmet ,
then evolution / survival of the fittest will eventually take its course and take you out of the gene pool when you go out one day on the bike get into trouble and smack your head - and either die or become a vegetable - dying would be the best option .

on my 5th now , and 3 of them saved my bacon due to car driving pcyschos and rubbish on the road .

ive seen morons wearing high heels and no helmet banging through redlights that turned ages ago - the mind boggles at how dumb people are.

Lumen

c0rk3r wrote: »

certain instances. If a 12-wheeler slams into you at 80km/h the seatbelt and airbags wont save you but thats not a reason not to have them.

Ah, but that's also complicated. Airbags were introduced primarily to reduce injury to people NOT wearing seatbelts (common in the US). Crash testing in the US involves (at least in part) testing for unbelted occupants - in my opinion this is completely retarded - if people won't wear a seatbelt, which has no significant downside risk, they deserve no additional protection from the car.

FWIW I feel much safer driving a car with 6-point harnesses, no airbags and no ABS than in one with airbags, seatbelt, and ABS - but that's not an option that most manufacturers provide.

It's fairly obvious why bike helmets make certain types of injuries worse - adding mass (even 300g) to the head is a bad idea for the spinal column, and increasing the size of the head increases leverage when your head hits something.

I still wear one though, partly because it avoids having to justify my family why I don't.

blorg

I've been in serious accidents and don't generally wear a helmet.

I don't buy the argument that they put you at more risk though, I would believe they have a net benefit.

See helmeted cyclists doing stupid things I would never do every day mind (of course see non-helmeted cyclists doing the same, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between helmet wearing and good cycling.)

petethedrummer

Its my head, I'll wear one if I want to or not.

Mr. Presentable

rubadub wrote: »

So do you wear one in a car? it would be stupid not to as it offers far more protection than a seatbelt or airbag, and it is supposed to afford far more protection in a car crash than a bicycle crash. In Australia it was also compulsory and I think head injuries went up while actual numbers of cyclists went down (i.e. large % increase). Wear one in the car, forget about being cool....

Most cannot understand why people would not wear one, and have your idea of not being "cool" as the only reason. A study showed cars give people less room when overtaking people wearing helmets, they think they are safer. This makes sense to me, when I pass pedestrians walking on cycletracks I slow down according to the perceived risk I see, if they look old and doddery I slow down, if it is young kid I go at a snails pace, if it is a runner who is sticking to one side I only slow a bit. Motorists seem to use this same perceived risk.


Yes, helmets are designed to crack and fail on impact, it absorbs the energy, skulls are a LOT stronger. People see a crack in a helmet and use faulty logic and think that would have been their skull. Also if you were hit by a car there is that possibility you would not have been hit at all if you had no helmet on, i.e. they might have given more room.




Of course it is not the case for all people, but it certainly does have an effect on some. Watch kids put on shin guards and the first thing they do is lash each other on the shins, and some are more likely to go in for hard tackles. Same goes on the bike, Lumen already said he does it! riding harder with the helmet on.

If you do not wear a helmet you are more likely to end up posting rubbish like this.

"Do you wear one in a car?" Who cycles in a car? Or are you ignoring the fact that a car offers some protection where a bike offers none? Spurious nonsense, and I hope you never have to wish you'd worn one. Be safe!

Húrin

Normally I do not wear one for commuting, unless the weather is wet in which case the road is slippy and the helmet also provides dryness against the rain.

If I'm going out on a spin or trip which will involves steep descents, I always certainly wear it.

blorg

@nipplenuts, what argument would you make for not wearing a helmet in a car?

... a new study which claims that headwear can dramatically reduce brain injuries in road accidents. A report by the Federal Office of Road Safety claims that "bicycle-style" helmets would be as effective as airbags and better than seat belts, reducing the severity of accidents by 50 per cent and saving the life of one in five head-injury victims. ... The universities concluded that helmets would provide more protection than safety options such as interior padding, side-impact airbags and advanced seat belt designs. Full helmet protection would lessen the severity of more than 60 per cent of brain injuries, compared with a bicycle-style helmet (50 per cent) and better interior vehicle padding (30 per cent).

- Sydney Morning Herald

zzzzzzzz

petethedrummer wrote: »

Its my head, I'll wear one if I want to or not.

+1

I definitely don't think it should be compulsary to wear a helmet but that said, I wear a helmet 99% of the time. I'd only ever take it off when climbing on a hot day.

And sometimes when bathing.

72hundred

When considering a topic as this, speculation and personal experiences aren't really sufficient to advise others on the pro's / con's of helmet wearing.



So here follows research against helmets:

• Cycle helmets and road casualties in the UK.

• CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that cycle helmets reduce the overall cyclist injury burden at the population level in the UK when data on road casualties is examined. This finding, supported by research elsewhere could simply be due to cycle helmets having little potential to reduce the overall transport-related cycle injury burden. Equally, it could be a manifestation of the "ecological fallacy" where it could be conceived that the existence of various sub-groups of cyclists, with different risk profiles, may need to be accounted for in understanding the difference between predicted and realised casualty patterns.

• Bicycle helmets and public health in Australia.

• CONCLUSIONS: Compulsion to wear a bicycle helmet is detrimental to public health in Australia. **This study is on a population level. Benefits/Decremental effects to the individual who chooses to wear a helmet were not explored in this study.

And here follows one research for helmets:

• Head injuries and bicycle helmet laws

• An extract from the abstract: ...the proportion of head injuries in cyclists admitted or treated at hospital declined by an average of only 13%. The percentage of cyclists with head injuries after collisions with motor vehicles in Victoria declined by more... **Note there are confounders in this study. New laws/enforcement was enacted for motorists at the same time in relation to drinking and speeding.

These are just a few studies, but I think they give and actual perspective of true information about the topic.


72oo

EDIT: For what its worth I always wear a helmet myself, and it saved me some serious scratches on the face in August.

Mr. Presentable

blorg wrote: »

@nipplenuts, what argument would you make for not wearing a helmet in a car?

- Sydney Morning Herald

None. But you're missing the point. The issue is cyclists and helmets

blorg

In terms of other sites with a very wide range of information, www.cyclehelmets.org has a definite anti-compulsion stance while www.helmets.org is pro-helmet. Good article about cycling risk here.

blorg

nipplenuts wrote: »

None. But you're missing the point. The issue is cyclists and helmets

The point is that wearing helmets in a car would be extremely beneficial to safety in case of accidents but no-one gets up on their high horse about drivers who choose not the wear them. Similarly, in the UK at least pedestrians are 50% more likely to be killed than cyclists per kilometer traveled* but no-one seems to think that a ped who doesn't wear a helmet is nuts.

*Assessing the actual
risks faced by cyclists.