A week without a helmet.

[User6179]

That is not an opinion, that is a simple analysis of the facts. If you take the number of helmet wearers who claim their life has been saved by a helmet and scale that number into the population of cyclists who do not wear one, the non helmet wearers should be sustaining fatal head injuries at a rate many times higher than they do.

How can he know the number of cyclists who claim " a helmet saved my life" ?

edit - facts would contain numbers , he also goes on to say " it would seem" which is an opinion .

 

[Mugshot]

It's not surprising that people who've been through a crash on their bike and escaped serious consequences but found helmet damage often believe strongly that the helmet has “saved their life”.

In my experience most people have no idea what their "standard" cycle helmet is rated to. @Racing roadkill for example does not appear to wear a typical cycle helmet, it would be interesting to know why, there's another poster (who's name escapes me I'm sorry) that wears a full faced helmet. I'm sure there are others, but each of them appears to have made a decision that a typical cycle helmet does not afford them sufficient protection which personally I find interesting especially considering the stance which @Racing roadkill appears to have.

 

[Mugshot]

Read some of it before and found the site agenda driven ,here is another quote .


If you 'shadow box' at the wall but carefully stop your fist about 50 mm before it reaches the wall (be sure it's limited by your arm's length), no harm will come to your fist. If, without changing your position, you slip a 75 mm thick piece of styrofoam against the wall and repeat the punch, you'll get compressed (and cracked) styrofoam and false 'evidence' that it saved you from harm. In other words, many impacts of helmets would be near misses with bare heads.

Ok. So what would you consider evidence and what would you like to be evidenced?

 

[User6179]

As with everything else, you cannot know with certainty. We could get a good handle on the number of people stated to have been saved by helmets in the opinion of paramedics and A&E staff. That would be improbable enough to illustrate the point.

Are you saying there is stats on this ?

 

[User6179]

Ok. So what would you consider evidence and what would you like to be evidenced?

The thing is I don't think the data needed is available , anybody who crashes and does not require treatment but might of done had they not been wearing a helmet is not going to be in any accident statistics as is someone crashing not wearing a helmet and not needing treatment .

 

[4F]

Yeah there is. Me 'n' @ianrauk. Admittedly it's more of a Helmets Are Sh*te" lobby, really, but we are obliging sorts, and we feel that the lid evangelists need a proper enemy.

ahem and me, and you could add @mickle to the list as well

TMN to myself

 

[Mugshot]

The thing is I don't think the data needed is available , anybody who crashes and does not require treatment but might of done had they not been wearing a helmet is not going to be in any accident statistics as is someone crashing not wearing a helmet and not needing treatment .

Certainly difficult to evidence this, although there are lots and lots of ancedotes. The issue here is you could apply this to anything, unfortunately it starts to sounds increasingly churlish when you do, for example,
anybody who puts their hands in a bowl of hot water and does not require treatment but might of done had they not been wearing gloves is not going to be in any accident statistics as is someone who puts their hands in a bowl of hot water not wearing gloves and not needing treatment
It's ludicrous of course, but it does suggest that wearing gloves may help in some situations, as a fact it's undeniable although very difficult to evidence, the same applies to cycle helmets when you look for evidence which you know can't exist.

 

[User6179]

Certainly difficult to evidence this, although there are lots and lots of ancedotes. The issue here is you could apply this to anything, unfortunately it starts to sounds increasingly churlish when you do, for example,
anybody who puts their hands in a bowl of hot water and does not require treatment but might of done had they not been wearing gloves is not going to be in any accident statistics as is someone who puts their hands in a bowl of hot water not wearing gloves and not needing treatment
It's ludicrous of course, but it does suggest that wearing gloves may help in some situations, as a fact it's undeniable although very difficult to evidence, the same applies to cycle helmets when you look for evidence which you know can't exist.

You obviously have not read the website "Gloves have little value against water burns "

That's my point on these helmet debates that most are arguing blind or using cherry picked data to prove an unprovable point .

 

[totallyfixed]

ahem and me, and you could add @mickle to the list as well

TMN to myself

Clears throat [noisily].

 

[theclaud]

ahem and me, and you could add @mickle to the list as well

TMN to myself

Technically, it is @User who gets the TMN.

 

[4F]

Technically, it is @User who gets the TMN.

That's right kick me when I am down, fortunately I was wearing a lime.

 

[Mugshot]

You obviously have not read the website "Gloves have little value against water burns "

That's my point on these helmet debates that most are arguing blind or using cherry picked data to prove an unprovable point .

That depends on the point you want proved. If you want to see the effects of compulsion look at the data from Australia, if you want to prevent more transport related head injuries have a look at which group suffers the greatest number, if you want to see how effective wearing a helmet is against serious head injury Australia gets another nod, if you want to see what the chances of sustaining a head injury are when cycling then do a bit of googling. You could just have a read through www.cyclehelmets.org of course for all this information and more, I know you think they have an agenda but everything on there has links to all the relevant studies, so you are invited to draw your own conclusions from it. However, if you're looking for evidence for every off which occurs where a helemt may or may not have proved useful against any injury then I think you'll be disappointed. Of course, if this lack of information means that you would prefer to continue wearing a helmet and that means you continue cycling then that's entirely up to you, but it is useful to at least look at both sides with an open mind.

Edit: Due to posting before I'd finished typing.

 

[User6179]

That depends on the point you want proved. If you want to see the effects of compulsion look at the data from Australia, if you want to prevent more transport related head injuries have a look at which group suffers the greatest number, if you want to see how effective wearing a helmet is against serious head injury Australia gets another nod, if you want to see what the chances of sustaining a head injury are when cycling then do a bit of googling. You could just have a read through www.cyclehelmets.org of course for all this information and more, I know you think they have an agenda but everything on there has links to all the relevant studies, so you are invited to draw your own conclusions from it. However, if you're looking for evidence for every off which occurs where a helemt may or may not have proved useful against any injury then I think you'll be disappointed. Of course, if this lack of information means that you would prefer to continue wearing a helmet and that means you continue cycling then that's entie, but it is useful to at least look at both sides with an open mind.

I wear a helmet because I feel safer , whether I am actually safer I don't know .
I do look at both sides with an open mind but fear most don't on here .

 

[Mugshot]

I wear a helmet because I feel safer , whether I am actually safer I don't know .
I do look at both sides with an open mind but fear most don't on here .

There is an argument which suggests that one of the effects of feeling safer is that you then take more risks

 

[User6179]

There is an argument which suggests that one of the effects of feeling safer is that you then take more risks

I nearly wrote that myself , if any safety gains are then lost by taking more risks !?