nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Felloffmebike

I'm sure this has been discussed before but I'm interested in a lot of recent comments about wearing or not wearing a helmet. It never occurred to me not to wear one but recently I'm picking up a lot of people who seem to have a different view. Why is that? Does wearing a helmet not make it safer if you fall, even a little bit? And those who advocate not wearing one, is it a safety thing or a style thing or a macho man thing or what? Or is there some evidence that a helmet doesnt actually give you any protection or even that wearing one could be dangerous in itself.

I'm not looking to start an argument, just interested in the different views.

Mod note

Title changed - this can hopefully be considered the definitive helmet thread that can be pointed to whenever anyone wants to start another discussion on the subject - I'll put a link from the FAQs to it also

Find more posts tagged with

cycling

safety

myths

helmet

helmets

henry marsh

Quick Links

Comments

seamus

They all seem pretty low to me. 76 trips per bike per month - just over two trips a day for each bike. From the figures I can find on wiki, Dublin Bikes did 177 trips per bike each month in its first seven months.

tomasrojo

I know that DB did hit 13 per bike one day, which is equivalent to 390 trips per bike per month. Obviously, that's not typical, but well over 100 trips per bike per month is about right, I think.

Capt'n Midnight

tomasrojo wrote: »

http://irishcycle.com/2015/10/12/rsa-funded-researcher-admits-helmets-could-increase-risk-of-brain-injury/

Like I've been saying for years. Bicycle helmets don't offer much protection from motorists at typical motoring speeds. They are fine if you fall off your bike.

For protection from speeding motorists it's little more than a hi-viz hat. If you are worried about motorists get a proper motorcycle helmet.

RSA Free Speed Survey yet again makes for disappointing reading Page 10
Urban National - 30 100% speeding Average speed 55
Urban Arterial - 50 83.4%
Local Roads - 50 91.4%
Road works > 97.9%

Judging by those stats getting motorists to obey the speed limit could save more cyclist and pedestrian lives than helmets ever could.

What protection do cycling helmets offer from vehicles when the typical motorist doesn't even slow down to 50 in a 30 zone ??

The kinetic energy of a 20Km/hr impact , typical of what cycling helmets are designed for, is the same as the difference between 51Km/hr and 55 Km/hr.

So if you are hit by a motorist travelling at typical speeds in a 30Km/hr zone , a helmet won't even reduce the impact to what it would be if the motorist was at the speed limit in a 50km/hr zone.

Capt'n Midnight

DB 2014 98 trips per bike per month in 2014 1760832/1500/12

http://irishcycle.com/2014/09/12/dublinbikes-nears-8-million-trips-as-it-turns-5/
http://irishcycle.com/2015/04/23/dublinbikes-hits-10-million-trips/

Beasty

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Like I've been saying for years. Bicycle helmets don't offer much protection from motorists at typical motoring speeds. They are fine if you fall off your bike.

For protection from speeding motorists it's little more than a hi-viz hat. If you are worried about motorists get a proper motorcycle helmet.

I suspect it's very rarely the case that the primary impact in any collision is with the head/helmet. It's much more likely that some other part of the body is in impact with the vehicle (or indeed road) first and any "bang on the head" is secondary with the force of impact reduced. I suspect that in such a scenario the helmet may well offer significant protection.

Whatever head protection is being used, be it a cycle helmet or motorcycle helmet, the protection against brain injury is going to be very limited at impacts at a speed of 50 km/h or so.

tomasrojo

Cyclist fined for wearing helmet too loosely on Ride2Work Day
m.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/cyclist-fined-for-wearing-helmet-too-loosely-on-ride2work-day/story-fni0fee2-1227570144368

Australia is an embodiment of the old principle that if you can't be a good example, you'll just have to be a terrible warning.

tomasrojo

Australia again.

Man tackled to the ground by Coast cop for riding a push bike without a helmet
http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/crime-court/man-tackled-to-the-ground-by-coast-cop-for-riding-a-push-bike-without-a-helmet/story-fnje8bkv-1227566531613

For his own safety they had to harm him.

check_six

tomasrojo wrote: »

Australia again.

Man tackled to the ground by Coast cop for riding a push bike without a helmet
http://www.goldcoastbulletin.com.au/news/crime-court/man-tackled-to-the-ground-by-coast-cop-for-riding-a-push-bike-without-a-helmet/story-fnje8bkv-1227566531613

For his own safety they had to harm him.

Holy moley! That's mental. That cop was not as laid-back as the national stereotype would have you believe.

Would it be fair to say that there is an aggressively negative attitude to cyclists in general in Australia? Or is it just the nature of the sensationalist stories that tend to filter through?

tomasrojo

People I know who've been there (and New Zealand) have said it's pretty hostile.

tomasrojo

tomasrojo wrote: »

Mayer Hillman did a similar review using actuarial statistics and came to the same conclusion that habitual cyclists live longer than non-cyclists (on average, obviously).

There's another study out, which purportedly adjusts for other physical activity:
http://www.ijbnpa.org/content/11/1/132/abstract

The analysis shows that walking and cycling have population-level health benefits even after adjustment for other PA. Public health approaches would have the biggest impact if they are able to increase walking and cycling levels in the groups that have the lowest levels of these activities.

Probably should start a thread for statistical evidence for health benefits of cycling. Only put it here because it fits in with that tangent from a few pages back.

tomasrojo

More on Seattle's bike share.
http://www.seattlebikeblog.com/2015/10/13/happy-first-birthday-pronto-a-look-at-use-and-how-the-bike-share-system-can-grow/

City staff may also want to look into changing King County’s rare all-ages bicycle helmet law. While Pronto has done a little better than the system in Melbourne (one of the only other major systems operating under an all-ages helmet law), usage is not as strong as some similar-sized systems in cities without helmet laws.

But King County’s helmet law is one likely factor holding the numbers down. The original business model assumed a reduction in use due to the helmets, and maintaining and cleaning the helmets and bins adds cost to the system other cities skip. To date, bike share systems in the US have proven remarkably safe, and there’s no evidence that helmets are needed to protect users. As reported last year, no US bike share user had died in 24 million trips, mostly in cities where few users wear helmets (I am not aware of any deaths since then, though I don’t have more recent data).

There are far better uses of police resources than ticketing an adult choice that is perfectly legal in nearly every other big city in the world. The question isn’t whether you think people should wear a helmet, it’s whether you think we need to actively police that choice. Most of the tickets were given by just three officers, suggesting that nearly all of the SPD force already agrees adults not wearing a bicycle helmet are a low priority.

Most of 2,500 tickets given by just three officers.

Qualitymark

People here have kindly given me advice on buying a helmet, suggesting that I look at helmets with MIPS installed, and that I try helmets in shops before buying.

Unfortunately, this proved impossible, as the shops in Dublin don't have small sizes in the MIPS helmets recommended. They don't want to get several brands in, in small sizes, and not have me buy them, naturally, as the stock would probably be left on their hands - the MIPS standard, which possibly should be in all helmets, is relatively rare and very expensive compared to other helmets.

I have to mooch over to London soon to check some stuff in Kew and the British Library and Brighton; can people recommend a huge cycle shop there that might have small MIPS helmets on the premises so I could try them?

galwaycyclist

http://www.ecf.com/news/helmet-effectiveness-research-forced-to-go-back-to-the-drawing-board/

Helmet effectiveness research forced to go back to the drawing board

New research from Theo Zeegers in the Netherlands seems to have thrown the cat amongst the pigeons with regards to bicycle helmet research.

If I understand correctly, key case control studies claiming benefits for helmets were based on assumptions of no effect on general injury risk for those wearing helmets.

By applying a factor for exposure (taken from the original data sets) the new analysis refutes this assumption with the effect that the claimed helmet benefit is reduced or reversed.

tomasrojo

Good description of how the hospital studies are carried out too.

frosty90

Hi,

I commute about 13km each way through Dublin city every day to work. I always wear a helmet - its a cheap Lidl/Aldi helmet.

I was out cycling with a friend today and he was wearing a relatively expensive (>€100) helmet. We discussed the safety differences between the two.

Is an expensive helmet much safer than a cheap one?

Is it worth spending approx one hundred euro to buy a 'better' one? Or will I endure with my cheap one?

Thanks!

Beasty

Both will satisfy basic safety standards. Unless the more expensive one has additional safety features, such a MIPS (which is quite unlikely) the price will probably make little or no difference on the safety front.

Beasty

Threads merged

knockoutned

I asked a guy in a bike shop about this a couple of years ago and he told me it's to do with the amount of holes and the weight of the helmet. The more holes and the lighter the helmet, the more expensive.

I suppose to make the helmet fit for purpose, a superior and probably more expensive material is required for a light and ventilated helmet.

Not sure how true that is though!

frosty90

Maybe I'll stick with my cheap one for the moment so!

NeedMoreGears

galwaycyclist wrote: »

http://www.ecf.com/news/helmet-effectiveness-research-forced-to-go-back-to-the-drawing-board/

Very interesting.

The part that strikes me as most odd is that the non-head injury rate per km for those wearing helmets is so much higher (about 2.8 times so in the Dutch case).

Anyone any idea why that would be the case (apart from the possibility that the distance estimates are incorrect?

tomasrojo

Helmet wearers in the Netherlands tend to be sports cyclists (more so than here anyway). Sports cyclists more likely to be injured generally.

Think that might be it.

Qualitymark

knockoutned wrote: »

I asked a guy in a bike shop about this a couple of years ago and he told me it's to do with the amount of holes and the weight of the helmet. The more holes and the lighter the helmet, the more expensive.

I suppose to make the helmet fit for purpose, a superior and probably more expensive material is required for a light and ventilated helmet.

Not sure how true that is though!

Hmm, so you're basically paying for air?

Taxuser1

Following on from my christmas wish list aero helmet request, is there any that stand out above the rest or is it all marginal ? For an Irish racer, cooling airflow wouldn't be my massive concern so the more aero the better for me.

Bike Radar went with the Bontrager Ballista (around €200) as their best aero helmet ahead of some of the leaders, Giro Synthe, Specilaised Evade, Bell Pro, Air Attack, POC etc

I didn't see Kask Infininty in that review - I wonder how it would fare against them.

There's lots of offers out now for 2015 stock. I hadn't heard of anything ground breaking for 2016

CramCycle

Taxuser1 wrote: »

cooling airflow wouldn't be my massive concern so the more aero the better for me.

I have found that you will be shocked at how warm it gets with the less aerated helmets in Ireland, but I am a bit of a hot head at times so maybe not.

Macy0161

Qualitymark wrote: »

Hmm, so you're basically paying for air?

No, a cooler head! More vents and an engineered air flow, as well as the weight. A helmet upgrade has long been on my list, but coming into winter there's no rush for me (unless I see a bargain!).

Beasty

Taxuser1 wrote: »

Following on from my christmas wish list aero helmet request, is there any that stand out above the rest or is it all marginal ?

This is a thread on the safety aspects of helmet wear, and not really for discussion of "recommendations/best buys" (which are likely to get submerged within the safety debate)

It's absolutely fine to start separate threads looking for helmet recommendations (so long as they don't the turn into discussion over safety attributes (or otherwise) of particular helmets)

Taxuser1

understood, i saw "definitive" and worried about the opening of a new helmet thread

Qualitymark

Macy0161 wrote: »

No, a cooler head! More vents and an engineered air flow, as well as the weight. A helmet upgrade has long been on my list, but coming into winter there's no rush for me (unless I see a bargain!).

Yeah, it would be nice if MIPS became standard and brought the price down.

Beasty

Qualitymark wrote: »

Yeah, it would be nice if MIPS became standard and brought the price down.

Given recent publicity concerning the Schumacher incident, which highlighted how motor racing helmets have improved enormously over recent years, I would not be surprised to see significant improvements in cycle helmet safety over the next few years.

I see MIPS as one of the early improvements, but hope (and indeed expect) a lot more research to be done with a view to improving helmets for the likes of cycling, horse riding and certain winter sports.

tomasrojo

Beasty wrote: »

I see MIPS as one of the early improvements, but hope (and indeed expect) a lot more research to be done with a view to improving helmets for the likes of cycling, horse riding and certain winter sports.

Reminds me of Ken Kifer:

My saying this does not indicate that I am opposed to helmet use. In fact, the one reason for my not writing this earlier was that I did not and do not wish to discourage cyclists from wearing helmets if they want to. After all, some people would not feel comfortable on a bike without a helmet. If not allowed to wear helmets, they would bicycle less or not bicycle at all, which would be bad for their health. I also feel that those cyclists involved in high risk activities should be encouraged to wear helmets and that they should be able to purchase better helmets than those currently available.

http://www.phred.org/~alex/kenkifer/www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/advocacy/mhls.htm

That was at least twelve years ago, and things haven't changed much so far, but it's always possible that this issue will be addressed meaningfully. There probably is some technology that properly ameliorates the outcome of crashes in high-risk activities.