Anyone Who Watched the Giro Yesterday Still Think Helmets Don't Do Their Job!?!

[bpsmith]

For the umpteenth time, no one is saying that cycle helmets are never of any use under any circumstance. What people do try to say is that the issues are way more complex than that. That the marginal benefits on the very rare occasions that a person might hit their head need to be counterbalanced by the negative impacts. That there are other activities and circumstances where helmets could be as or more useful. Etc. Etc. Etc. It is all there in numerous threads, most of them locked, for you to read any time you want.

On the rare occasion that I might hit my head on descending at speeds of 40mph, that I regularly hit where I live, I am pretty certain that I would like to have a helmet on. No argument that I am likely to do More damage by wearing one will stop me.

This thread is actually about asking the question raised and specific to yesterday's accident and nobody appears to be answering this despite numerous replies on the 3 pages so far...

 

[bpsmith]

Firstly, your helmet is not rated to help you in 40mph impacts. Secondly, yes they have but not in the narrow terms you want.

They don't rate helmets for speed, that I can find anyway, and you don't know what helmet I have either to comment.

More importantly, on thread topic, please point me at the answer to my question within this thread. I have read back once more and cannot find a single answer to the question. Maybe you ought to be the first for a change?

 

[Mugshot]

This reply,

This thread is actually about asking the question raised and specific to yesterday's accident and nobody appears to be answering this despite numerous replies on the 3 pages so far...

does not sit well with this reply.

Would you advise how that has any relation to this topic? Read the title...

What I believe @mickle was asking was whether the equipment used by a competitive cyclist was automatically relevant to all cyclists. That to me seems a resonable question it has not been answered despite numerous replies on the 3 pages so far.

 

[Mugshot]

They don't rate helmets for speed, that I can find anyway, and you don't know what helmet I have either to comment.

How do they rate them?

 

[bpsmith]

This reply,



does not sit well with this reply.



What I believe @mickle was asking was whether the equipment used by a competitive cyclist was automatically relevant to all cyclists. That to me seems a resonable question it has not been answered despite numerous replies on the 3 pages so far.

Give me an answer to my question first, then we can think about Mickle's sub question?

 

[Mugshot]

Give me an answer to my question first, then we can think about Mickle's sub question?

Oki doki.
I think that it is quite possible that the helmet which Pozzovivo was wearing may have reduced his injuries, I also think that it is quite possible that he may well have hit his head whether he was wearing a helmet or not.

 

[bpsmith]

Oki doki.
I think that it is quite possible that the helmet which Pozzovivo was wearing may have reduced his injuries, I also think that it is quite possible that he may well have hit his head whether he was wearing a helmet or not.

Finally. I do appreciate an honest reply, so thank you for that. This is the answer I suspect many of the above posters would honestly answer, but won't. I also suspect that most would actually think it is more likely that the helmet saved his life than caused more injury.

To answer @mickle, I don't automatically assume that helmets should be worn when driving our everyday cars, just because they wear them in Formula 1. The basis for this is that I don't do 200mph and naturally don't have the same vehicle with others doing 200mph around me.

What I do think is that we are far closer to the equipment used by pro cyclists and do often use similar roads and hit high speeds also. Arguably, we are closer to the damaging speeds than your everyday car is to a Formula 1 car. Unfair comparison, although I do follow where I was being led.

If you're asking my own opinion on whether we should all wear helmets, then I think it's clear that I fall into being an advocate of wearing a helmet when cycling. I don't see any negatives that outweigh the positives.

Would like honest replies to my thread though. I think that's fair before posting unrelated questions.

 

[MisterStan]

I don't see any negatives that outweigh the positives.

I suggest as Adrian has mentioned that you do a little more research then....

 

[Mugshot]

Finally. I do appreciate an honest reply, so thank you for that. This is the answer I suspect many of the above posters would honestly answer, but won't. I also suspect that most would actually think it is more likely that the helmet saved his life than caused more injury.

To answer @mickle, I don't automatically assume that helmets should be worn when driving our everyday cars, just because they wear them in Formula 1. The basis for this is that I don't do 200mph and naturally don't have the same vehicle with others doing 200mph around me.

What I do think is that we are far closer to the equipment used by pro cyclists and do often use similar roads and hit high speeds also. Arguably, we are closer to the damaging speeds than your everyday car is to a Formula 1 car. Unfair comparison, although I do follow where I was being led.

If you're asking my own opinion on whether we should all wear helmets, then I think it's clear that I fall into being an advocate of wearing a helmet when cycling. I don't see any negatives that outweigh the positives.

Would like honest replies to my thread though. I think that's fair before posting unrelated questions.

No problem.
With regards to the speeds you are quite right of course that Formula 1 cars do travel much more quickly than the average family hatchback. However that does not prevent many many more car occupants suffering head injuries than cyclists. If we were really interested in reducing the amount of head injuries suffered then it would make far more sense to try to convince car occupants of their benefits than cyclists.
I'll give you what I believe to be a major negative when it comes to helmet wearing and its one which affects every cyclist. It stops people cycling. It creates the impression that cycling is dangerous and it really isn't and there is continual pressure to conform and put a helmet on. This prevents people cycling. It is my opinion that by far and away the most effective way to improve both my safety and the safety of every other cyclist is for there to be more cyclists, lots more, but that isn't going to happen if we continue to try to convince people that unlike just about every other everyday activity cycling is so dangerous that you have to wear special protective equipment.

 

[broadway]

Finally. I do appreciate an honest reply, so thank you for that. This is the answer I suspect many of the above posters would honestly answer, but won't. I also suspect that most would actually think it is more likely that the helmet saved his life than caused more injury.

To answer @mickle, I don't automatically assume that helmets should be worn when driving our everyday cars, just because they wear them in Formula 1. The basis for this is that I don't do 200mph and naturally don't have the same vehicle with others doing 200mph around me.

What I do think is that we are far closer to the equipment used by pro cyclists and do often use similar roads and hit high speeds also. Arguably, we are closer to the damaging speeds than your everyday car is to a Formula 1 car. Unfair comparison, although I do follow where I was being led.

By your reckoning, as banger racers need helmets so should drivers..

 

[snorri]

On the rare occasion that I might hit my head on descending at speeds of 40mph, that I regularly hit where I live, I am pretty certain that I would like to have a helmet on. .

In the example you quote I would prefer to adopt a more effective injury avoidance measure than wearing a helmet.

 

[Trembler49]

This thread is just like some of the politics thread, the beliefs are entrenched and no matter what evidence is put up, anecdotal, scientific or otherwise, on no account will any opinion be changed.

 

[Mugshot]

They don't rate helmets for speed, that I can find anyway, and you don't know what helmet I have either to comment.

This is from Googles first result for "How are cycle helmets tested"

The lab technician raises the helmet and headform up until the top of the helmet is a specified distance from the anvil below. A trigger lets the helmet drop in free fall until the helmet hits the anvil. The velocity of the drop is checked just before the impact to ensure that the speed was correct. An instrument called an accelerometer measures g's in the center of the headform. If the helmet works well, the g's are low--probably below 200, and in the better helmets below 150. If the g's exceed 300, the helmet fails. The testing is on three anvils of different shapes:

• The flat anvil is used with a 2 meter drop. The helmet and headform are traveling at 14 mph at impact.
  
  
  
• The hemispheric anvil shown below, about the shape of a grapefruit, is used with a 1.2 meter drop. (The point load makes it a severe test.) The helmet and headform are traveling 11 mph at impact.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• The hazard or curbstone anvil is rounded like the edge of a curb. It is another severe test, and the drop is 1.2 meters (11 mph).

If the drop speeds seem too low to you, please see our page on limits of helmet protection, where we explain them. We think they are adequate. If improvement can be made, lowering the g's permitted would reduce injuries more than raising the drop height, but you may need to review the phyisics of a fall to see why.

http://www.bhsi.org/testing.htm

 

[totallyfixed]

Finally. I do appreciate an honest reply, so thank you for that. This is the answer I suspect many of the above posters would honestly answer, but won't. I also suspect that most would actually think it is more likely that the helmet saved his life than caused more injury.

To answer @mickle, I don't automatically assume that helmets should be worn when driving our everyday cars, just because they wear them in Formula 1. The basis for this is that I don't do 200mph and naturally don't have the same vehicle with others doing 200mph around me.

What I do think is that we are far closer to the equipment used by pro cyclists and do often use similar roads and hit high speeds also. Arguably, we are closer to the damaging speeds than your everyday car is to a Formula 1 car. Unfair comparison, although I do follow where I was being led.

If you're asking my own opinion on whether we should all wear helmets, then I think it's clear that I fall into being an advocate of wearing a helmet when cycling. I don't see any negatives that outweigh the positives.

Would like honest replies to my thread though. I think that's fair before posting unrelated questions.

Do you think it should be mandatory for children especially to wear helmets?

 

[Mugshot]

This thread is just like some of the politics thread, the beliefs are entrenched and no matter what evidence is put up, anecdotal, scientific or otherwise, on no account will any opinion be changed.

That's not true, there are people on this site that have changing their minds as a result of reading through these threads.