Helmets - increase injuries

I had 2 crashes in one year about 9 years ago. Second one was major and I was thrown upwards and landed directly on my head with the legs coming over the top afterwards. Helmet had a crack down the middle afterwards. My head did not. Only injury was to my ankle from the force of it whacking off the ground but I was able to walk away no bother (going into shock meant I wrongly assumed I was to blame and I was feeling guilty and just wanted to get out of there).

I've glanced at some of the research linking helmet wearing to increased likelihood of injury and have never been convinced enough by the methodology to believe that they are not falling into the correlation does not equal causation trap.

For example, I may be wrong, but I don't believe that any of these studies take into account the amount of time the subjects actually spent on their bike. It's reasonable to assume that people that cycle regularly will make a conscious decision on whether or not to wear a helmet and I would strongly suspect that the majority of people that spend a lot of time on their bike would opt to wear a helmet (though I appreciate there is a minority who decide not to). Put another way - the majority of helmet wearers are probably serious/frequent cyclists, though that doesn't mean that all serious/frequent cyclists do wear a helmet.

Now take Average Joe who just pops on the bike down to the shops or for a relatively short commute - short enough that he can get to work without breaking sweat so he decides to dress for the office before getting on the bike and doesn't want to wear a helmet cos he'll probably sweat and unless JD hooks him up with a HairMet, that chick in Accounts that he's been working on for the past while ain't gonna like the cut of his jib when he shows up.

Now compare the number of incidents per subject as a ratio of Number of Incidents/Total Time On Bike. Split that into your With Helmet and Without Helmet groups and then your research might merit the time to read it.

Lumen wrote: »

I love that blog.

This one is particularly great.

That's shocking. Does she not know she is going to end up like a zombie on a life support machine? Someone please get over there and save her from herself.

I don't think anyone who has been in an accident is going to look at their helmet and curse it afterwards. Its counter-intuitive. The likehood is your going to be thanking your lucky stars you were wearing it. I find it difficult to believe anyone whos been in an accident and suffered some form of head injury, mild or severe not accepting that leaving their helmet at home was a bad idea. There has been numerous accident reports on this forum over the years and the general consensus has been that helmets prevented a more serious injury. There was also a thread, cant remember the user, a non helmet wearer anyway, was involved in a graceless high speed fall. The conclusion at the end was his acceptance of wearing a helmet in future. Unfortunately that is what it take to convert people. A good hard fall. It doesn't have to be that way but i guess it just human nature.

As for the likes of likes of Copenhagen and Amsterdam the cycling culture, cycling infrastructure and attitudes of other road users towards cyclists is completely different and not comparable to our fair city/country. Just look at the first rule of cycle chic "I choose to cycle chic and, at every opportunity, I will choose Style over Speed." I doubt most cyclists using those rust buckets can gather an speed to do themselves serious injury.

From reading your blog tunney im guessing your a helmet wearer and thanking your lucky stars for their existence?

Can someone point me in direction of 'scientific evidence shows' studies for non-helmet wearing safety? Would like to take a look. From doing other sports its quite common for the 'non-freds' not to comply with safety to show seniority. I've boxed for many years and only the senior guys would get away with it when sparring, although i'm guilty of this i wouldn't go out without a cycling helmet :-) I've seen this on many a club spin. I'm presuming the same is true in hurling.

c0rk3r wrote: »

As for the likes of likes of Copenhagen and Amsterdam the cycling culture, cycling infrastructure and attitudes of other road users towards cyclists is completely different and not comparable to our fair city/country..

So we should give up on creating a safe cycling culture and insist everyone wear a hemlet, rather than making the act of cycling safer?

c0rk3r wrote: »

Just look at the first rule of cycle chic "I choose to cycle chic and, at every opportunity, I will choose Style over Speed." I doubt most cyclists using those rust buckets can gather an speed to do themselves serious injury.

If you want to race, ride fult pelt through a town or ride in large close knit group, then yes you should wear a hemlet. Club training rules and race regularions already cover 2 of these situations. If you want to wander around at a moderate pace (which is what I do most of the time) then you shouldn't have to. Why can't we make a reasoned choice based on the type of cycling we are going to do?

Efforts should be made to increase cycling numbers and improve cycling facilities not on badgering people into strapping foam to their heads.

petethedrummer wrote: »

But the debate has deviated from that question. I believe that for normal utility cycling (commuting, shopping, visiting friends), where it is not necessary to cycle anywhere close to a dangerous speed, then a helmet should not be compulsory. And that time arguing over mandatory use would be better spent lobbying for better facilites and encouraging people into cycling (I should listen to myself and stop posting in these threads). I would rather avoid accidents than limit the consequences.

I actually largely agree with you on that. Personally, I'd still wear the helmet >90% of my time on the bike out of habit if nothing else, but I'm not sure making it compulsory is the right thing to do as I agree the main focus should be on increasing cycling adoption as the more people that cycle the more drivers learn to deal with cyclists appropriately and then it'll become safer to cruise around the city at low speeds on the bike.

tomasrojo wrote: »

This isn't evidence really. You can find glowing personal testimony to the efficacy of copper bracelets and homeopathy as well.

Are you reading bad science too?