Helmets - the definitive thread.. Mod Note - Please read Opening Post

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So do you wear a helmet at all times in the car to get that extra level of protection? And when you go out drinking, given the link between alcohol and head injuries?

You have the seat belt and air bag as the extra protection in the car.

As for when you are out drinking, your not travelling at speed as you are on a bike.
How many head injuries come from just drinking and not a side effect of an outside influence?

Now if you want to go OTT, maybe we should make helmets optional for motorbike users or make cyclists where body armour. But this is all OTT

Do you think all motor cyclists should have helmets even though some bikes are slower than the speed cyclists go at?

Chips Lovell

average_runner wrote: »

I never said it was irresponsible at all.

Good!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7dG9UlzeFM

average_runner wrote: »

You have the seat belt and air bag as the extra protection in the car.

As for when you are out drinking, your not travelling at speed as you are on a bike.
How many head injuries come from just drinking and not a side effect of an outside influence?

Now if you want to go OTT, maybe we should make helmets optional for motorbike users or make cyclists where body armour. But this is all OTT

Do you think all motor cyclists should have helmets even though some bikes are slower than the speed cyclists go at?

Mmm I dunno...I think peoples faith in Seat belts, airbags etc. in cars is over rated. the best safety feature in a car is the middle pedal

there's a middle pedal? how you you pedal it if you've only two feet?

[Deleted User]

average_runner wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

So do you wear a helmet at all times in the car to get that extra level of protection? And when you go out drinking, given the link between alcohol and head injuries?

You have the seat belt and air bag as the extra protection in the car.

As for when you are out drinking, your not travelling at speed as you are on a bike.
How many head injuries come from just drinking and not a side effect of an outside influence?

Now if you want to go OTT, maybe we should make helmets optional for motorbike users or make cyclists where body armour. But this is all OTT

Do you think all motor cyclists should have helmets even though some bikes are slower than the speed cyclists go at

Though even with seat belts and air bags, there are still way more head injuries in cars than on bikes. If you're really convinced on the value of helmets to reduce head injury, why wouldn't you be pushing for mandatory motoring helmets as a top priority?

I don't know much about motorcycling, so I'm not going to comment on that one.

magicbastarder wrote: »

there's a middle pedal? how you you pedal it if you've only two feet?

Or if the car is an automatic???

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Though even with seat belts and air bags, there are still way more head injuries in cars than on bikes. If you're really convinced on the value of helmets to reduce head injury, why wouldn't you be pushing for mandatory motoring helmets as a top priority?

I don't know much about motorcycling, so I'm not going to comment on that one.

I never said I was convinced on the value of helmets, but i did say the following:

"Is there any evidence that shows a helmet doesn't offer any extra protection where a head hits head on to something? "

average_runner wrote: »

I never said I was convinced on the value of helmets, but i did say the following:

"Is there any evidence that shows a helmet doesn't offer any extra protection where a head hits head on to something? "

if you assume the accident, i woudl be very surprised if helmets didn't offer some level of protection (averaged out - that the benefit would outwigh neutral or negative effects).
but as mentioned, that's if you assume the accident is already a given.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAwJsOECGBU

magicbastarder wrote: »

there's a middle pedal? how you you pedal it if you've only two feet?

It's called "Heel and toe". You have to wear white socks to do it properly!

Ray Bloody Purchase

magicbastarder wrote: »

there's a middle pedal? how you you pedal it if you've only two feet?

With your flute.

conkennedy

07Lapierre wrote: »

It's called "Heel and toe". You have to wear white socks to do it properly!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAwJsOECGBU

How did that turn out for Senna in the end?

[Deleted User]

average_runner wrote: »

"Is there any evidence that shows a helmet doesn't offer any extra protection where a head hits head on to something? "

Which would equally apply within a car, right?

conkennedy wrote: »

How did that turn out for Senna in the end?

I think he was impressed with the NSX.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Which would equally apply within a car, right?

But this is the cycling forum and in relation to cycling only, if you want to talk about it in relation to cars, open a thread in that forum.

[Deleted User]

average_runner wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Which would equally apply within a car, right?

But this is the cycling forum and in relation to cycling only, if you want to talk about it in relation to cars, open a thread in that forum.

The reason for bringing it up here is to expose the utter hypocrisy of the helmet fans. Your deflection tells me that I'm on the right track.

ChrisJ84

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The reason for bringing it up here is to expose the utter hypocrisy of the helmet fans. Your deflection tells me that I'm on the right track.

Ah the internet, the home of nuanced and moderate debate! The interesting point with helmets for car drivers/drinkers/everyone is whether we should force people to do something that **might** keep them safer, but ultimately has no impact on anybody else. I think it's a good idea to wear a helmet on the bike, but am also happy to let you wear whatever you want on your head as long as it doesn't impact on anyone else.

Just like the hi-viz question, the real problem is with the assumption that a helmet is some kind of magic charm that's going to keep me safe. Ultimately, the biggest danger to me on the bike is other road users (and myself if I make bad decisions).

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The reason for bringing it up here is to expose the utter hypocrisy of the helmet fans. Your deflection tells me that I'm on the right track.

Not really. My interest on the helmets was there any evidence showing they were or were not effective for cyclists.

If helmets provide safety for head injuries when cycling, surely then its a good idea to safe at least 1 life? Do you agree or disagree in relation to just cycling?

Now if you want to go down the road of what other modes of transport should or have for safety, then ideally cyclists should have the same protection gear a motorcyclists has, pads for knees and elbows, and back protection also when racing.

ChrisJ84 wrote: »

Ah the internet, the home of nuanced and moderate debate! The interesting point with helmets for car drivers/drinkers/everyone is whether we should force people to do something that **might** keep them safer, but ultimately has no impact on anybody else. I think it's a good idea to wear a helmet on the bike, but am also happy to let you wear whatever you want on your head as long as it doesn't impact on anyone else.

Just like the hi-viz question, the real problem is with the assumption that a helmet is some kind of magic charm that's going to keep me safe. Ultimately, the biggest danger to me on the bike is other road users (and myself if I make bad decisions).

But can a helment give better protection on when a head injury occurs?

buffalo

average_runner wrote: »

Not really. My interest on the helmets was there any evidence showing they were or were not effective for cyclists.

If helmets provide safety for head injuries when cycling, surely then its a good idea to safe at least 1 life? Do you agree or disagree in relation to just cycling?

Do you think that if something would save "at least 1 life", then it's worth doing?

Fighting Tao

buffalo wrote: »

Do you think that if something would save "at least 1 life", then it's worth doing?

We should ban selfies, walking, sitting, eating, not eating, driving, running.....

rubadub

average_runner wrote: »

"Is there any evidence that shows a helmet doesn't offer any extra protection where a head hits head on to something? "

I have read that if you fall wearing a helmet increases the risk of hitting your head 100%, due to the bulky size. It can also make some injuries worse. I have said if I wore a helmet 24/7 I reckon I would crack 3 or 4 per year, and I would spare people the drama "jaysus I'd be dead if I wasn't wearing that".

I wear elbow and knee protection on my bike in icy weather. I have also worn downhill mountain bike elbow protection when walking in icy weather.

I do not wear a helmet commuting but would if downhill mountain biking, I do not partake in that as I think it is generally too dangerous. If I was to wear a helmet on any transport it would be on the luas, bus, or a car before on a bike in normal weather.

I have thought of wearing a helmet in icy weather. I did have a fall and split the top of my head as I fell against a railing, a helmet would have stopped the cut but might have lead to a worse neck injury, my neck was quite sore a day later. Due to the bulk of the helmet my head would have been twisted a lot more.

A&E is brimming with head injuries due to drunks falling or in fights. Whenever they ask the coronors or doctors if a helmet would have decreased the head injury they invariably say yes, and recommend drinkers all wear helmets -oh wait, I'm all mixed up the media NEVER ask them that, sure that would be CRAZY, as CRAZY as cycling without a helmet :rolleyes:

velo.2010

rubadub wrote: »

I have read that if you fall wearing a helmet increases the risk of hitting your head 100%, due to the bulky size. It can also make some injuries worse. I have said if I wore a helmet 24/7 I reckon I would crack 3 or 4 per year, and I would spare people the drama "jaysus I'd be dead if I wasn't wearing that".

I wear elbow and knee protection on my bike in icy weather. I have also worn downhill mountain bike elbow protection when walking in icy weather.

I do not wear a helmet commuting but would if downhill mountain biking, I do not partake in that as I think it is generally too dangerous. If I was to wear a helmet on any transport it would be on the luas, bus, or a car before on a bike in normal weather.

I have thought of wearing a helmet in icy weather. I did have a fall and split the top of my head as I fell against a railing, a helmet would have stopped the cut but might have lead to a worse neck injury, my neck was quite sore a day later. Due to the bulk of the helmet my head would have been twisted a lot more.

A&E is brimming with head injuries due to drunks falling or in fights. Whenever they as the coronors or doctors if a helmet would have decreased the head injury they invariably say yes, and recommend drinkers all wear helmets -oh wait, I'm all mixed up the media NEVER ask them that, sure that would be CRAZY, as CRAZY as cycling without a helmet :rolleyes:

Steoller

average_runner wrote: »

Not really. My interest on the helmets was there any evidence showing they were or were not effective for cyclists.

If helmets provide safety for head injuries when cycling, surely then its a good idea to safe at least 1 life? Do you agree or disagree in relation to just cycling?

Now if you want to go down the road of what other modes of transport should or have for safety, then ideally cyclists should have the same protection gear a motorcyclists has, pads for knees and elbows, and back protection also when racing.

Ok leave the effectiveness of helmets in other transport modes out of it. The argument boils down to the direct pros/cons of helmet use, versus the epidemiological pros/cons of helmet use.

In the direct use case, helmets provide extra protection. not against all possible injuries, not even against all possible injuries to the head, but they do offer some protection. Pro/Con, it is probably better to be wearing a helmet when you are having an accident.

In the epidemiological case, the risks of getting into an accident were you need a helmet, seem to increase when you wear a helmet. Either because there is a documented psychological phenomenon where the helmet wearer takes more risks [Gamble and Walker, 2016] , or the other documented phenomenon where other road users pass closer to cyclists wearing helmets [Walker, 2007]. There is also the issue of mandatory helmet laws acting as a barrier to people taking up cycling, reducing the "Safety in Numbers" effect, but that is an argument against making helmets mandatory, not whether one should choose to wear one.

So is it better to reduce the risk of having an accident, or increase the risk of having an accident, and very slightly reduce the risk of some specific injuries?

ChrisJ84

average_runner wrote: »

But can a helment give better protection on when a head injury occurs?

Yes, absolutely. As I said, I think it is a very good idea to wear a helmet. I always wear one myself, and I would advise others to do likewise.

That said, while the possibility of a serious head injury is real it isn't the biggest risk faced on the bike. Over-stating the safety benefits of a helmet or trying to make them mandatory is a distraction from the really significant risks to cycling safety - poor infrastructure, inconsiderate and dangerous driving etc.

average_runner wrote: »

If helmets provide safety for head injuries when cycling, surely then its a good idea to safe at least 1 life? Do you agree or disagree in relation to just cycling?

that's a massively slippery slope though, and as others have mentioned, ignores the wider picture.
the 'just one life saved' argument is an attempt to avoid the debate, not stimulate it.
and the health benefits of cycling outweighing the dangers massively is such a well known factor i'm not sure if i could be bothered mentioning it again.

theunforgiven

From my own experience I was blessed to be wearing a helmet when I came off the bike a few years ago.
Hit the deck about 40km/h, cuts, bruises, shoulder separation, broken ribs.
Anyway, in A&E I was asked if I had hit my head, I said no . . . .

I checked my helmet a few days later, it was split at the side,(the temple of my head, the crack was about 4 inches long, from roughly eye socket to past my ear) from the outside shell, through the EPS core and also a smaller crack on the back.

Regardless of the helmet debate, I for one am glad I wore it that day and will continue to wear one. I have no doubt a serious head injury would have occurred had I not been wearing it.

CramCycle

average_runner wrote: »

Not really. My interest on the helmets was there any evidence showing they were or were not effective for cyclists.

Quite alot actually, links were provided earlier. The problem with alot of pro and anti helmet viewpoints is they pick out anecdoetes or single case studies. Meta studies are of far more use in regards assessment IMO, and in the main, they show no difference to mortality or rserious injury rates. You can look at change in behaviour etc. but the truth from my reading is that in the main, it makes such a statistically insignificant difference, it is not worth discussing. As Chris Boardman said quite succinctly, in regards Cycling Safety, Helmets shouldn't even get into the top 10 discussion points.

average_runner wrote: »

But can a helment give better protection on when a head injury occurs?

Depends on the hit, the angle, the speed, the helmet, what did you hit, and so on. Unless you are willing to go through every possibility, then you have to ignore it and go into the large scale analysis.

I wear a helmet when I'm out on a longer spin and there's a good chance I'll hit a decent speed. If I'm going down to the shop, I won't wear one. That's the not-actually-that-subtle difference which is often too subtle in debates like this. Many of us here have 'I'm glad I was wearing a helmet at the time' stories (I do) but there's no one size fits all scenario for a clear 'should you wear a helmet' question.