Helmet or not

petethedrummer

Signal_ rabbit wrote: »

It is totally up to the individual, just leave them be, why does either side try force their opinions on others?. I personally wear a helmet, thats my choice. I don't give a flying **** if other people do or don't!

If you read back through the thread, its generally the helmet wearers that refer to the non-helmet wearers as idiots etc... not the other way round.

I used to be a helmet wearer, but not now having reading various articles.

monument

Just a disclaimer first... I don't see a problem with helmet wearing for sports cycling (or leisure cycling which amounts to the same) or for mountain biking...

Signal_ rabbit wrote: »

It's a never ending debate thats always goes nowhere,

I don't think it is. Things change.

My own views have changed from "I'm not wearing and maybe I am being a bit careless?" to "there's nothing to back their use up and maybe there are negative affects for the wearing and for others?"

Generally speaking, helmets are only used to any notable percentage in English speaking states... the reason this has come about seems to have been a "safety" push with no back up. All the studies / research I've read are limited, use limited data, and make no split between sports-type cycling, mountain biking, and commuting (without acting like the first two).

So what? Because it doesn't affect non helmet wears? Yes it does...

1. It makes government at different levels wrongly focused, which is counter-productive to safety.
2. It makes cycling less attractive by making it appear more dangerous (more cyclists more cying provisions, less cars in town and cities etc etc)
3. ...which in turn make safety via safety in numbers (a proven way of increasing safety) less likely.
4. Left unchallenged, pro helmet views of many could turn to mandatory helmet views which could lead to more support for laws on such.

Lumen

Agree that there is a lot of mass psychology and marketing at work.

Many people feel safe in cars without helmets, but not on bikes even with helmets. This is not necessarily logical.

I've crashed/rolled a car into a field at 120kph, and sustained a minor brain haemorrhage, bleeding eyeballs, broken ribs and some scarring from broken glass.

The worst accident I've had on a bike was "losing it" on a downhill corner at about 30kph. My helmet was unmarked, but the gravel rash on my legs took a few weeks to heal.

If you are driving a car at 80kph and have a head-on collision with another car doing 80kph, almost certainly everyone involved gets seriously injured or killed. People feel safe in this situation because everyone is in the same boat, and because their car has airbags, seatbelts and 5 stars in a EuroNCAP test (whose frontal tests are performed at only 64kph into an offset deformable barrier). Yet every day millions of people drive on rural roads where the only thing keeping them from this fate is a couple of feet of tarmac, which can be crossed in a fraction of a second. If you thought about this too hard, you'd never drive a car, or at least insist on a helmet and HANS device for every trip.

I wear a helmet on a bike because it makes me feel safer and because (almost) everyone else does, whilst acknowledging that this may not be very logical.

Each to their own.

rubadub

Sean_K wrote: »

Ok my one main reason is that helmets are unfashionable, uncomfortable and impractical contraptions :P

But they have become "fashionable", or "trendy", as in it is now becoming the trend to wear one, style aside (which I know is what you meant).

As I said earlier in the 80's you would see nobody wearing them, but do wearers now brand their parent complete idiotic morons for not wearing them back then. Do wearers who did cycle in the 80's now brand themselves idiots for not availing of them at the time. In 20's years time will they be branding people morons for not wearing helmets in cars, or while out drinking. A huge amount of injuries that people I know get are drink related, so why not have drinking helmets, you might laugh now, just as people laughed at the idea of cycling helmets.

monument wrote: »

Just a disclaimer first... I don't see a problem with helmet wearing for sports cycling (or leisure cycling which amounts to the same) or for mountain biking...

yes I would wear one if doing serious mountain biking. I would wear a full on crash helmet if taking a spin in a rally car too. Under some circumstances the protection offered outwieghs any downside. A rally helmet would enclose my view in a normal driving situation, and probably leave me in more danger. There are no cars on the mountainbike track passing my too closely, I am also inherently cycling more dangerously. In my work I use safety goggles, but sometimes they would hinder my view so much as to leave my hands at risk doing delicate work, without the goggles I work far more slower and controlled too. Same with safety gloves, I have 3 types, each will give more protection at the expense of dexterity.

monument wrote: »

The worst accident I've had on a bike was "losing it" on a downhill corner at about 30kph. My helmet was unmarked, but the gravel rash on my legs took a few weeks to heal.

I brought this point up many times in previous threads with no decent response. The people branding others complete idiots only seem to value their skulls, and would not wear any other protection, and would probably find it laugable to have knee pads etc. I wear long sleeves and trousers & gloves (all year round) to give some protection. The main falls I ever had were on ice and I was nowhere close to getting a head impact at the slow speeds, the only specific protection I ever did consider on a bike was knee and elbow pads.

Lumen

rubadub wrote: »

A rally helmet would enclose my view in a normal driving situation, and probably leave me in more danger.

I used to regularly wear a full-face helmet whilst driving a car on the road. This was necessary due to the car having a roll cage and no windscreen. It doesn't restrict vision at all.

unionman

I never wear a helmet in the house. Especially in the kitchen.

And I love Marmite.

niceonetom

rubadub wrote: »

drinking helmets

genius. lives would be saved. the a&e crisis would disappear.

would have to be a full face helmet though. i sport a mini-beard now because of a tequila related chin injury...

c0rk3r

rubadub wrote: »

you might laugh now

Hahahaha

cyclopath2001

Signal_ rabbit wrote: »

just leave them be, why does either side try force their opinions on others?.

I'd be prepared to make a small bet that all helmet threads are started by people with strongly-held pro-helmet beliefs.

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

genius. lives would be saved. the a&e crisis would disappear.

would have to be a full face helmet though. i sport a mini-beard now because of a tequila related chin injury...

Bertie fell down some stairs and broke his leg today.

I await the call for mandatory airbags for the over-50s.

Canis Lupus

Lumen wrote: »

Bertie fell down some stairs and broke his leg today.

I await the call for mandatory airbags for the over-50s.

Mandatory leg helmets.

TinyExplosions

rubadub wrote: »

so why not have drinking helmets

What, like this?

rubadub

Signal_ rabbit wrote: »

why does either side try force their opinions on others?.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I'd be prepared to make a small bet that all helmet threads are started by people with strongly-held pro-helmet beliefs.

Yes, I have yet to see people branding helmet wears idiots/morons/stupid etc, I only really see some people on one side trying to force opinions. As I said the arguments from studies & stats seem even enough, so I can understand the split. But the people branding people idiots seem ignorant about the reasonings people have either way.

Lumen wrote: »

Bertie fell down some stairs and broke his leg today.

Free drinking helment with every 12pack O'Dutch

monument

rubadub wrote: »

Free drinking helment with every 12pack O'Dutch

Mandatory drinking helmets with every 12 pack of Dutch Gold! But the drinkers would only use it to aid head butting others...