Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

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

1…1415171920…51

Comments

  • #802
    Gorman700
    Registered Users Posts: 263 ✭✭Gorman700


    Seweryn wrote: »
    Do you also put your helmet on when running or walking at 10mph?

    I'm not Rob Heffernan pal so a 10mph walk isn't my usual gig. Pair of **** knees too so on the bike, I stick it on ya!


  • #803
    BadCharlie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,614 ✭✭✭BadCharlie


    My self & my friend always put our Helmet on. One time as he was cycling along someone on the side of the road asked for the time. He looked down at his watch and looked left at the person to tell them the time. Before he knew it he had rammed the back bumper of a car with his wheel and put his head and helmet through the back window. On that day im sure my friend was quite happy that he put on the helmet before his ride.

    I know a little off topic but found it funny. Was playing Hurling when the days you did not have to have a helmet on. And was going up for a ball which i won but the guy i was marking just slamed his hurley into the back of my head and i was split open. Went to hospital and the doctor said you should have been wearing a helmet, then you would not be cut up as you are today. I told him i infact was wearing a helmet...... he stops and looks at me and then says "just as well you had your helmet on" as he preceded to stich me up.


  • #804
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    I haven't looked at the PDF, and I don't have time, but Cochrane is presumaby the Cochrane Review, which purported to take an unbiased look at the best available evidence and summarise it. Unfortunately, the authors of the review decided that their own work and work very similar to it constituted the best available evidence, which means it's really rather lop-sided, consisting only of case-control studies.

    Elvik is Rune Elvik, who is a distinguised researcher, from what I've read. He actually takes the Cochrane Review to task for omitting good-quality research and including poor-quality research in that very paper referenced. Of all the studies done in this area, Elvik's is the only one that can't be understood with undergraduate-standard statistics. For that reason, I can't comment on it, and neither, it seems, can many of the researchers in this area. I haven't seen any attempt to call it into question or discredit it.

    If you take Elvik as being broadly true, I guess you can summarise it as:
    * helmets have a modest protective effect, at the expense of increased risk of neck injury
    * soft-shell helmets don't work as well as hard-shell helmets (this being based on the protective effect diminishing over time, and disappearing if you take later data in isolation)

    Something recent about Elvik:
    http://sciencenordic.com/bike-helmets-are-less-effective-we-think?utm_source=ScienceNordic.com+Newsletter&utm_campaign=6d0875d123-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3bb7f89ffc-6d0875d123-239715405

    Not sure whether that's just a journalist playing catch-up on the research from a few years ago.



    Agree re the Cochrane reviewers citing a number of their own studies. I'm told (by someone who has done training in Cochrane methodology) that it's acceptable practice, but to me it's an obvious flaw. Human nature being what it is, the authors are not going to omit their own studies on the basis that they're flawed.

    Elvik is an authority that I would trust (fwiw) and I would accept his findings which suggest that there is a modest benefit to be had from cycle helmets. The methodology he used, such as trim and fill, is way over my head, however.

    In this paper Elvik discusses why the supposed benefit for individual helmet wearers does not translate into the expected benefit at population level: http://www.cycle-helmets.com/elvik.pdf

    That's the kernel of the whole cycle helmet debate, imo. Much of the rest is just noise.


  • #805
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    Agree re the Cochrane reviewers citing a number of their own studies. I'm told (by someone who has done training in Cochrane methodology) that it's acceptable practice, but to me it's an obvious flaw. Human nature being what it is, the authors are not going to omit their own studies on the basis that they're flawed..
    Very common in fact, I got pulled up for not citing my own lab enough at a conference. The more times a paper is referenced, the higher it will appear to be valued. It is a flawed system. Luckily, it is usually only reference points in the introduction, and rarely as part of the important bulk.


  • #806
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,800 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    And, I imagine, really awful papers sometimes get referenced a lot by outraged researchers, pushing up their citations and impact factor.


  • #807
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    And, I imagine, really awful papers sometimes get referenced a lot by outraged researchers, pushing up their citations and impact factor.
    The autism/vaccine paper being the greatest example ever.


  • #808
    enas
    Registered Users Posts: 585 ✭✭✭enas


    BadCharlie wrote: »
    Went to hospital and the doctor said you should have been wearing a helmet, then you would not be cut up as you are today. I told him i infact was wearing a helmet......

    I'm a bit confused. So are hurling helmets useful or not in the end?


  • #809
    Valentine1
    Registered Users Posts: 434 ✭✭Valentine1


    BadCharlie wrote: »
    I know a little off topic but found it funny. Was playing Hurling when the days you did not have to have a helmet on. And was going up for a ball which i won but the guy i was marking just slamed his hurley into the back of my head and i was split open. Went to hospital and the doctor said you should have been wearing a helmet, then you would not be cut up as you are today. I told him i infact was wearing a helmet...... he stops and looks at me and then says "just as well you had your helmet on" as he preceded to stich me up.

    Presumably he was of the somewhat logical opinion that if you had not been wearing your helmet your injuries would have been much more severe.


  • #810
    Jackobyte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,321 ✭✭✭Jackobyte


    Picked up my first road-bike for Christmas today(Trek 1.1 2014), and got a BBB Elbrus helmet with it. First time having a helmet since I was about 6.

    When I last wore a helmet on a bike aged 6, I fell while turning sharply and hit the ground with my chin, right where the buckle on the chinstrap of the helmet sat. The plastic shattered and cut up into my chin requiring stitches. Doctors said without the helmet, I'd have gotten away with a scratch. :pac:

    However, now that I'll be cycling on roads around traffic and not just around an estate anymore, I'll be going back to wearing a helmet.


  • Advertisement
  • #811
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    In the news recently , more appropriate to risk takers than commuters.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/sports/on-slopes-rise-in-helmet-use-but-no-decline-in-brain-injuries.html
    In fact, some studies indicate that the number of snow-sports-related head injuries has increased. A 2012 study at the Western Michigan University School of Medicine on head injuries among skiers and snowboarders in the United States found that the number of head injuries increased 60 percent in a seven-year period, from 9,308 in 2004 to 14,947 in 2010, even as helmet use increased by an almost identical percentage over the same period. A March 2013 study by the University of Washington concluded that the number of snow-sports-related head injuries among youths and adolescents increased 250 percent from 1996 to 2010.

    ...
    “The helmet does a very good job at protecting against skull lacerations and skull fractures, but it doesn’t seem to have much effect on concussions or T.B.I.’s,” Shealy said, referring to traumatic brain injuries. “Our guess is that this is due to the fact that those injuries are occurring at such a high magnitude of energy that they overwhelm what a helmet can do for you.”


  • #812
    elnino23
    Registered Users Posts: 262 ✭✭elnino23


    I'm sure its on here somewhere but sorry I'm not going through 50 pages to find it. Crashed this morning on ice and hit my head slightly on the intial fall as I then glided along the road on my Ass! Appears to be no real damage to the helmet except some dirt.

    So here is the question : Replace it or not?

    It seems fine but I see a lot of sites saying replace it, I even saw one that said replace if you drop it?


  • #813
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,497 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    elnino23 wrote: »
    I'm sure its on here somewhere but sorry I'm not going through 50 pages to find it. Crashed this morning on ice and hit my head slightly on the intial fall as I then glided along the road on my Ass! Appears to be no real damage to the helmet except some dirt.

    So here is the question : Replace it or not?

    It seems fine but I see a lot of sites saying replace it, I even saw one that said replace if you drop it?
    If it's had an impact, replace. Some manufacturers offer crash replacements at reduced cost so it's worth asking


  • #814
    bedirect
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭bedirect


    High Vis or helmets, I think most drivers see cyclists but you can meet drivers that are drunk, drugged, talking on mobile phones, poor eyesight, distracted by children etc, so if wearing something more visible helps your chances or a helmet might save your head, i say go for it. There is only 1 winner in a collision between a cyclist & a car


  • #815
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,800 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    bedirect wrote: »
    High Vis or helmets, I think most drivers see cyclists but you can meet drivers that are drunk, drugged, talking on mobile phones, poor eyesight, distracted by children etc, so if wearing something more visible helps your chances or a helmet might save your head, i say go for it. There is only 1 winner in a collision between a cyclist & a car
    At least you've been reading the thread.


  • #816
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    I thought this thread had been full circle by now. I even went through a brief period of posting each of the original posts in sequence. No one noticed. I am glad this thread is here though as it keeps so much nonsense out of other threads.


  • Advertisement
  • #817
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Raam wrote: »
    I thought this thread had been full circle by now. I even went through a brief period of posting each of the original posts in sequence. No one noticed. I am glad this thread is here though as it keeps so much nonsense out of other threads.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs3xXlXSOKk


  • #818
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    Luciano Jealous Underdog wrote: »
    This morning on my way to work I was hit by a car...The lady continued driving...She didn't even know what to do in an accident. The traffic started moving again and she moved off.
    That's where a call to the Gardai becomes necessary.


  • #819
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,088 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Luciano Jealous Underdog wrote: »
    Every day there are incidents on the trip to work. Some of the stuff you witness is mental

    What are incidents?

    Are you trying to make out that you see collisions or nothwothy near collisions daily? Where's your commute?


  • #820
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    monument wrote: »
    What are incidents?

    Are you trying to make out that you see collisions or nothwothy near collisions daily? Where's your commute?

    An incident, an occurance, something happening. Sometimes it's a big thing, sometimes it's a small thing. Road rage, punishment passes, cars swerving, padestrians stepping out in front of vehicles, running red lights. One woman crossing the road slapped this mans BMW as he was over the padestrian line... Self entitled so and so.

    One day a car overtook about 8 other cars, driving into oncomming traffic (which had to stop) just so he could take his turn a little earlier. Funny thing is, the barrier which was open, closed on his nice big car, lol :P

    Blackrock area to Clontarf area is my commute. What's yours?


  • #821
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    bedirect wrote: »
    High Vis or helmets, I think most drivers see cyclists but you can meet drivers that are drunk, drugged, talking on mobile phones, poor eyesight, distracted by children etc, so if wearing something more visible helps your chances or a helmet might save your head, i say go for it. There is only 1 winner in a collision between a cyclist & a car
    Just in case there is any confusion.

    Bicycle helmets are only designed to protect a cyclist falling off a bike up to about 20-30Kmph.

    They are not designed to offer significant protection for a collision with a motor vehicle at 50Kmph+ , for that you'd need something much stronger like a motorbike helmet.


    High levels of high Viz, means motorists may be come lazy because they are conditioned to cyclists being easy to see and thus won't look as hard in future.



    Ninja cyclists serve to keep motorists on their toes. But they are scary and should be arrested. High Vis at night is almost useless. lights and reflectors (not all high vis are equal) matter much more than colour.


  • Advertisement
  • #822
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    hivisteria and helmetophilia
    Added to vocabulary. ;)


  • #823
    Hunterbiker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭Hunterbiker


    This was on BBC News this morning:

    Cycling ad banned over 'no helmet' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572


  • #824
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    The article reads like this thread to an extent :pac: Might be quicker to point people there.


  • #825
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    What's next for the Advertising Standards Authority I wonder?

    "I'm sorry Food Standards Agency, but we know best about how to safely cook meat. Your ad is banned'.

    "No, NHS, we don't think you're qualified to give advice on eating healthily and avoiding heart disease".


  • #826
    Hunterbiker
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭Hunterbiker


    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    What's next for the Advertising Standards Authority I wonder?

    "I'm sorry Food Standards Agency, but we know best about how to safely cook meat. Your ad is banned'.

    "No, NHS, we don't think you're qualified to give advice on eating healthily and avoiding heart disease".

    I doubt it is too far off. Didn't they want to ban cheese adverts here during kids tv too?

    Either way the UK ASA seems to be lumping not wearing a lid as being as bad as smoking or drink driving which is a little strong.

    And dont get me started on the complaints re road posistion


  • #827
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,088 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    They are just following the Irish standards authority lead: http://irishcycle.com/2013/08/12/cycling-ads-banned-but-illegal-driving-reflects-heritage/


  • #828
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Hunterbiker wrote: »
    This was on BBC News this morning:

    Cycling ad banned over 'no helmet' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572
    But bicycle helmets aren't designed to handle collisions with motorists.


  • #829
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,800 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Hunterbiker wrote: »
    This was on BBC News this morning:

    Cycling ad banned over 'no helmet' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25926572
    http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/01/29/the-advertising-standards-authority-not-fit-for-purpose

    http://beyondthekerb.wordpress.com/2014/01/29/the-killing-of-the-horse/#more-500


  • #830
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    monument wrote: »
    They are just following the Irish standards authority lead: http://irishcycle.com/2013/08/12/cycling-ads-banned-but-illegal-driving-reflects-heritage/
    Who has the time to be complaining about adverts? If an ad annoys me, I don't buy whatever they're advocating. That's it.


  • #831
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    No Pants wrote: »
    Who has the time to be complaining about adverts? If an ad annoys me, I don't buy whatever they're advocating. That's it.



    It's thin-end-of-the-wedge/slippery-slope territory, unfortunately.

    Advertising is a powerful medium. If it wasn't, industry, commerce and other vested interests would not be spending billions on it.

    The effect of such bans is that the image of cycling promoted in the mass media is only that approved by people whose primary interest is not the promotion of cycling.

    By way of illustration, in the Irish context, the ASAI is of the view that cars can be depicted driving at speed even in urban settings, on the entirely fabricated grounds that drivers of certain brands of car are the sort of people who are careful and responsible. However, a family cannot be shown cycling happily and healthily on an off-road cycle path in a sunlit park without helmets because that is risky behaviour and sets a bad example.

    Cultural messages: (1) drivers are responsible people and certain brands of car can be regarded as inherently safe; (2) cycling is inherently dangerous, and cyclists must be protected from their own folly and lack of responsibility.


  • Advertisement
  • #832
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,095 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    By way of illustration, in the Irish context, the ASAI is of the view that cars can be depicted driving at speed even in urban settings, on the entirely fabricated grounds that drivers of certain brands of car are the sort of people who are careful and responsible. However, a family cannot be shown cycling happily and healthily on an off-road cycle path in a sunlit park without helmets because that is risky behaviour and sets a bad example.

    The ASAI are conducting a review of their advertising code - http://www.asai.ie/survey.asp

    It's officially closed, but the form is still open for submissions if anyone didn't get around to doing it before.


  • #833
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    Car ads don't tend to show people or traffic at all.


  • #834
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,158 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    MOD VOICE: Hi vis stuff moved to new thread here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88491882#


  • #835
    hardCopy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,969 ✭✭✭hardCopy


    Hunterbiker wrote: »
    And dont get me started on the complaints re road posistion

    I am pulsating with rage over the bit about the car having to almost cross the line to overtake.

    Whoever wrote that judgement should be dragged out and shot.


  • #836
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    CramCycle wrote: »
    MOD VOICE: Hi vis stuff moved to new thread here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88491882#



    Sorry mate, I didn't see it. :pac:


  • #837
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    hardCopy wrote: »
    I am pulsating with rage over the bit about the car having to almost cross the line to overtake.

    Whoever wrote that judgement should be dragged out and shot.
    I went back to the article to take another look at the overtake shot that was there earlier and now it's gone. :(


  • #838
    RainyDay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,925 ✭✭✭RainyDay


    buffalo wrote: »
    The ASAI are conducting a review of their advertising code - http://www.asai.ie/survey.asp

    It's officially closed, but the form is still open for submissions if anyone didn't get around to doing it before.

    Dunno about the UK, but here in Ireland, the ASAI have absolutely no power. They are a self-appointed 'self-regulating' industry watchdog, appointed and funded by the advertising industry. The only power they have is name and shame.

    If want to make a real complaint, contact the www.bai.ie.


  • #839
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    that not advertising standards, it's plain censorship


  • #840
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,095 ✭✭✭buffalo


    Cookie_Monster wrote: »
    that not advertising standards, it's plain censorship

    They've withdrawn the ban: http://road.cc/content/news/109781-asa-suspends-ban-cycling-scotland-advert-pending-independent-review
    The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has said it has withdrawn its formal ruling against Cycling Scotland’s ‘See Cyclist. Think Horse’ advert, announced yesterday, “pending the outcome of an Independent Review.


  • Advertisement
  • #841
    No Pants
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,347 ✭✭✭No Pants


    Those MPs fairly pulled the ruling apart.


  • #842
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,800 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/jan/31/bike-blog-cycling-campaign-asa
    An aghast Cycling Scotland pointed out that cycle helmets are not compulsory, and that police and the highway code specifically advise cyclists that it is safest to position themselves some way into their lane. The ASA conceded a likely error over the latter point and withdrew its ruling pending an independent review. However, it appeared to stay firm over the helmet, which it argues should be shown in advertisements as their use, while not compelled under law, is recommended by the highway code.

    I suspect the ASA will hold firm on the helmet part of their ruling.

    Still, some campaigners are having a bit of pointed fun, drawing attention to adverts that contravene other strategies recommended in the UK highway code:
    It is a scene familiar from many a TV advert for lager: a group of laughing young men walk down the pavement for an evening pint in their local pub. But this time, rather than being dressed in casual shirts they're kitted out in bright, building site-style fluorescent jackets.


  • #843
    LeoD
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 710 ✭✭✭LeoD


    There was an interesting piece with Dr. Pete Lunn on Newstalk's Breakfast Show this morning about how we perceive risk. Cycling isn't discussed but you can see how the psychology applies.


  • #844
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,095 ✭✭✭buffalo


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    I suspect the ASA will hold firm on the helmet part of their ruling.

    Still, some campaigners are having a bit of pointed fun, drawing attention to adverts that contravene other strategies recommended in the UK highway code:

    Some wag pointed out that the ASA are contravening their own policies, and should censor themselves:

    BfJPbXXIgAAMvXf.png


  • #845
    doozerie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    I've moaned before about the seeming lack of interest by helmet manufacturers in improving the effectiveness of helmets, in my more cynical moments I'm convinced they are more interested in simply selling stock than truly addressing the risks that they'd have you believe necessitate the wearing of their helmets - so long as people buy their product they don't seem too pushed about pursuing innovation in helmet design.

    So I'm interested to read that apparently Kali Protectives are one manufacturer that are really trying to address helmet effectiveness, or so they claim anyway:
    “Would you rather get hit in the head with a pillow or a hammer?”

    Kali Protectives’ Bryan Mason asked that rather daft question last week to prove a highly salient point: though most would quickly pick the pillow, Mason believes that many accidentally pick the hammer during a helmet purchase.

    It’s not totally our fault; the marketing machines of helmet manufacturers don’t use protection bywords like “low-density foam,” “low-speed impact,” or for that matter, “safety.” And the reason they don’t is simple: talking about saving our brains when we crash isn’t sexy; we don’t want to hear about, and it doesn’t sell helmets. We want low weights, cooling, and good looks.

    Whatever the outcome, whether it's really a more effective helmet(s) or not, it's good that at least one manufacturer is questioning whether current helmet design is adequate.


  • #846
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 77,497 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    On that point there's some interesting stuff here by former F1 doctor Gary Hartstein where he highlights the amount of research that has gone into developing F1 helmets, and suggests other sports (notably skiing in light of the Schumacher accident, but he mentions others including cycling) should target more the types of injuries typically suffered in those sports and adapt the helmet accordingly. I for one find it strange that the suggestion is that cycle helmets are only designed to offer protection at relatively low impacts, while they are being promoted as a requirement for racing where any impact is likely to be much more forceful


  • Advertisement
  • #847
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,800 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Well, they're definitely only tested for low-speed impacts: put a 5kg headform into the helmet, let it drop 1.5m onto an anvil and make sure the foam compresses but doesn't break up. Something like that anyway. It's not very rigorous, and not all that representative of either falls during races or collisions with motor vehicles.


  • #848
    buffalo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,095 ✭✭✭buffalo


    http://road.cc/content/news/111258-chris-boardman-helmets-not-even-top-10-things-keep-cycling-safe
    Government encouragement to wear helmets was therefore “a big campaign to get people to wear body armour, by the people who should be stopping the shooting.”

    Widespread use of helmets, he said, sends the wrong message.

    “Once you see somebody wearing body armour, even if there’s no shooting, you think ‘Christ I’m not going down there if they’re wearing body armour to go down that street.’ It scares people off.”

    I concur. </Carl>


  • #849
    Iwannahurl
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,156 ✭✭✭Iwannahurl


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    Well, they're definitely only tested for low-speed impacts: put a 5kg headform into the helmet, let it drop 1.5m onto an anvil and make sure the foam compresses but doesn't break up. Something like that anyway. It's not very rigorous, and not all that representative of either falls during races or collisions with motor vehicles.


    And very flimsy, apparently. I got a new helmet for Senior Infant yesterday. The instructions include the following warning: "do not ... add stickers to decorate the helmet, as this can make the helmet ineffective in an accident." :eek:


  • #850
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 92,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Iwannahurl wrote: »
    And very flimsy, apparently. I got a new helmet for Senior Infant yesterday. The instructions include the following warning: "do not ... add stickers to decorate the helmet, as this can make the helmet ineffective in an accident." :eek:
    It's because the solvents used in the glue for the sticker might weaken the plastic used in the helmet.

    That applies to all helmets including those designed to offer protection in a road traffic accident as well as cycling helmets.


  • #851
    doozerie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,830 ✭✭✭doozerie


    On the fragility, or not, of cycling helmets, something else to consider is whether you should automatically replace it regularly. Here is the Snell Foundation's take on it, for what it's worth:
    Why should you replace your helmet every five years?

    The five-year replacement recommendation is based on a consensus by both helmet manufacturers and the Snell Foundation. Glues, resins and other materials used in helmet production can affect liner materials. Hair oils, body fluids and cosmetics, as well as normal "wear and tear" all contribute to helmet degradation. Petroleum based products present in cleaners, paints, fuels and other commonly encountered materials may also degrade materials used in many helmets possibly degrading performance. Additionally, experience indicates there will be a noticeable improvement in the protective characteristic of helmets over a five-year period due to advances in materials, designs, production methods and the standards. Thus, the recommendation for five-year helmet replacement is a judgment call stemming from a prudent safety philosophy.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement