Be prepared for an accident

[Profpointy]

And yet if you look at medical research, doctors always seem to think that helmets reduce head and facial injuries even if helmets are only styrofoam and plastic.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7025438/

At the risk of generalising, the medical profession are often pretty innumerate, despite the fact that assessing the efficacy of treatment is highly dependant on a deep understanding of statistics. It isn't entirely surprising as I suspect relatively few medics have even done A level maths. One notorious and tragic example was when a cot-death "expert" testimony in a murder trial led to the distraught mother being imprisoned for murder. She was later exonerated but the expert doctor's understanding of stats was worse than you'd expect of someone doing their O-levels.

Granted a minority of doctors, particularly researchers or epidemiologists would have learnt enough to get by with stats, but it's (clearly) far from true for the majority. There are a lot of pitfalls with stats, so merely being very intelligent and knowledgable about medicine generally is far from enough to be a competent statistician.

Whilst I've not (yet) followed your link, every single paper supporting helmets that I've read so far has been flawed; in many cases not just subtle nuances but ridiculous things. For some it looks like they are out and out mendatious, as the "errors" looks as if they are contrived to get the desired answer.

I'm not sure doctors per se have any particular expertise in the matter. If anything someone with a numerate background, ideally statistics, or failing that, an engineer, physical scientist or even an economist might be far better placed to look into this.

 

[boydj]

Don't think I've ever prepared for an accident in all my years of riding.

I have - in the second or so before I hit the van that turned across my path as I sped downhill. I actually had time to think this is going to hurt' as I managed to get partially side-on before the big bang. It's amazing how much of a dent you can put into the side of a van. Finished my cycle to work after straightening the handlebars, but then the adrenaline wore off and I was sent home - and of course I cycled back home.

 

[ianrauk]

I have - in the second or so before I hit the van that turned across my path as I sped downhill. I actually had time to think this is going to hurt' as I managed to get partially side-on before the big bang. It's amazing how much of a dent you can put into the side of a van. Finished my cycle to work after straightening the handlebars, but then the adrenaline wore off and I was sent home - and of course I cycled back home.

Oh don't get me wrong, when it comes to those situations like you have described, I have been there, unfortunately a few times.
My quote was more for the fact that when I do get on my bike I don't go out prepared for an accident.

 

[matticus]

I'm not sure doctors per se have any particular expertise in the matter

Quite.

The common suggestions that hospital staff CLEARLY have strong knowledge of injury mechanisms, PPE etc is like saying
Panel Beaters will be experts in preventing car crashes.

 

[presta]

Another point I wonder about. How exactly does the wearing of a helmet stop a person driving a car carelessly/dangerously?

The whole point about Risk Compensation is that wearing a helmet reduces the incentive for both cyclist and passing drivers to be careful.

surely any kind of protection how ever slight is better than none

Only if wearing the helmet doesn't affect the probability of having a crash.

its impossible to know for certain if helmets offer protection

It's not impossible to find out, but nobody seems interested in doing research that asks the right question.

the medical profession are often pretty innumerate

See Reckoning With Risk by Prof. Gerd Gigerenzer. His research has found that ~70% (IIRC) of doctors can't correctly interpret risk statistics.

 

[berty bassett]

as it seems there is no clear evidence that helmets help in anyway to prevent injury to head then it is surprising that races, sportive and insurance companies all want you to wear them especially when some believe that they will be paralysed from neck down if they have an accident wearing one ! best we can hope for on this topic is to agree to do what you personally think is best to avoid injury

 

[Andy in Germany]

as it seems there is no clear evidence that helmets help in anyway to prevent injury to head then it is surprising that races, sportive and insurance companies all want you to wear them

Not really: Insurance companies have long been notorious for adding conditions, so they have legal reasons for delaying or refusing payment if at all possible, so helmets are a gift for them, especially in a car vs. cyclist collision.
Race and Sportive organisers need insurance, because they understandably don't want to be liable for any accidents and injuries, so they will follow the insurance company's rules.

 

[berty bassett]

Not really: Insurance companies have long been notorious for adding conditions, so they have legal reasons for delaying or refusing payment if at all possible, so helmets are a gift for them, especially in a car vs. cyclist collision.
Race and Sportive organisers need insurance, because they understandably don't want to be liable for any accidents and injuries, so they will follow the insurance company's rules.

So the same could be said that if there was a shred of evidence that helmets cause paralysis the insurance companies would immediately not pay out because you were wearing one
Again I say do what you want to make you feel safe , think I have said it 3 times now and still can’t see the issue with saying it , if you believe the earth is flat or god exists or aliens live amongst us that’s fine , it’s a free world and your own believes are not hurting anyone else

 

[I like Skol]

Again I say do what you want to make you feel safe , think I have said it 3 times now and still can’t see the issue with saying it , if you believe the earth is flat or god exists or aliens live amongst us that’s fine , it’s a free world and your own believes are not hurting anyone else

Nobody is arguing with you.

 

[Andy in Germany]

Again I say do what you want to make you feel safe , think I have said it 3 times now and still can’t see the issue with saying it , if you believe the earth is flat or god exists or aliens live amongst us that’s fine , it’s a free world and your own believes are not hurting anyone else

That's what most of us say, but for some reason there's always someone who starts lecturing us online, or occasionally while we are cycling, telling us that we should be wearing a polystyrene hat because they believe it makes cycling safer.

 

[icowden]

The common suggestions that hospital staff CLEARLY have strong knowledge of injury mechanisms, PPE etc is like saying
Panel Beaters will be experts in preventing car crashes.

I'm not convinced by the analogy. No-one is asking hospital staff. Medical researchers have reviewed medical evidence and drawn the conclusions that on the evidence presented, wearing a helmet is better than not in terms of medical outcomes. Medical outcomes are something that medical researchers excel in.

 

[presta]

as it seems there is no clear evidence that helmets help in anyway to prevent injury to head then it is surprising that races, sportive and insurance companies all want you to wear them especially when some believe that they will be paralysed from neck down if they have an accident wearing one ! best we can hope for on this topic is to agree to do what you personally think is best to avoid injury

Racing is an activity in which people do all they can to ride as fast as possible, including taking more risks, this isn't very relevant to typical day to day cycling. Compared to the average man on the street, racers have more scope for hurting themselves in a crash and less scope for increasing their risk taking behaviour when they put a helmet on.

do what you want to make you feel safe

People do, they're more interested in feeling safe than in being safe. If they want to be like that, it would be fine, but it doesn't stop there, they want laws that force everyone else to do the same. People campaign for helmets to be compulsory, nobody's campaigning for them to be banned.

Progression of a typical safety debate:

One day someone comes up with an idea for a new safety device, and at this point society divides into two camps, those whose interest is piqued enough to want to do some research and find out how beneficial it is, and those who start campaigning for it enthusiastically because the benefit seems so self-evident. There are advertising campaigns and fund-raising charities etc: “look, everyone, what a great idea!” Soon it becomes a matter of moral rectitude: look how many lives it will save, why would anyone be so wicked as to oppose it.

Then the results of some research start to come in, and they’re either inconclusive, or perhaps the idea may not even be beneficial at all. Cue the moral outrage: how dare anyone stand in the way of safety improvements! This, of course, is blatant question begging, but the ability to see that gets lost in the red mist, and so the war starts. Anyone questioning or opposing the measures must be discredited at all costs, lives are at stake, after all. They’re labelled immoral, or penny pinchers, they get smeared, disingenuous counter-research is conducted, data cherry picked, anything at all to ensure nobody stands in the way of such an important safety improvement. And all the time they’re oblivious to their own question begging: is it actually an improvement, or are people campaigning for a measure that will cost lives instead of saving them. Only objective research will provide the answer, but that’s the very thing they’re now campaigning against.

 

[Alex321]

People do, they're more interested in feeling safe than in being safe. If they want to be like that, it would be fine, but it doesn't stop there, they want laws that force everyone else to do the same. People campaign for helmets to be compulsory, nobody's campaigning for them to be banned.

I don't think there is any significant campaign in the UK to make them compulsory, even for children.

 

[Andy in Germany]

I'm not convinced by the analogy. No-one is asking hospital staff. Medical researchers have reviewed medical evidence and drawn the conclusions that on the evidence presented, wearing a helmet is better than not in terms of medical outcomes. Medical outcomes are something that medical researchers excel in.

Where is this research?

 

[Andy in Germany]

Racing is an activity in which people do all they can to ride as fast as possible, including taking more risks, this isn't very relevant to typical day to day cycling. Compared to the average man on the street, racers have more scope for hurting themselves in a crash and less scope for increasing their risk taking behaviour when they put a helmet on.

That's a good point. The argument of the "racing cyclists wear helmets, therefore it's beneficial, therefore so should everyone who rides a bike" could equally be applied to cars: "Rally drivers wear helmets, therefore they must be beneficial, so everyone travelling by car should wear a helmet." As the helmets worn by drivers in motorsports are generally agreed to be effective, the case for using a helmet in a normal car is arguably stronger than on a bicycle.