Cycle Helmet

[martint235]

I'm more or less with Cunobelin on this one. I gave up wearing a helmet about 18 months ago but I think the choice is entirely up to you. I would say that looking like a d*** shouldn't really be an issue particularly if, like me, you walk through the office in full lycra twice a day!

Edit: I forgot to say that whatever your decision, don't try to force the same choice on to others. It's a personal choice

 

[Red Light]

Apart from getting the piss taken, what are the negative effects of wearing a helmet ?

According to the research data, a greater chance of being injured/killed in an accident and closer passes from motorists.

 

[simon.r]

According to the research data, a greater chance of being injured/killed in an accident and closer passes from motorists.

The problem with research on this sort of subject is that there are too many variables that can't realistically be taken into account.

Are the helmet wearing riders more experienced, faster and more prone to taking risks? Are the non-helmet riders slower and more cautious (and therefore less likely to have accidents and to have accidents at slower speeds)?

I don't know the answers, but I think it's dangerous to read too much into any research that's done in non-laboratory conditions.

 

[fossyant]

Do what you want.

I actually use mine as a very good 'cooling system' - I wear a scull cap under the helmet which absorbs all the sweat, which in turn is evaporated by the air flow through the helmet. Works exceptionally well, and I don't have sweat pouring into my eyes, even on the hottest of days. I only buy the well vented ones (which generally means they aren't cheap) Oh and it did stop me getting a gravel rashed scalp when I was knocked off 3.5 years ago - that would have been a little sore !

Also stops me getting ear ache (from the missus and kids).

 

[Red Light]

The problem with research on this sort of subject is that there are too many variables that can't realistically be taken into account.

Are the helmet wearing riders more experienced, faster and more prone to taking risks? Are the non-helmet riders slower and more cautious (and therefore less likely to have accidents and to have accidents at slower speeds)?

I don't know the answers, but I think it's dangerous to read too much into any research that's done in non-laboratory conditions.

Well the biggest study by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission looked at 8 million US cycling accidents so I am pretty sure that they covered all types of cyclists and cycling. But true it doesn't tell you whether you, wearing your clothing, cycling your particular make of bike on the specific route you cycle in your cycling style is going to be more or less at risk wearing a helmet. But then neither do the statistics tell you whether you are going to get lung cancer if you smoke your particular brand of cigarette in your particular way. They are though both a pretty good guide.

 

[Red Light]

Well the biggest study by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission looked at 8 million US cycling accidents so I am pretty sure that they covered all types of cyclists and cycling. But true it doesn't tell you whether you, wearing your clothing, cycling your particular make of bike on the specific route you cycle in your cycling style is going to be more or less at risk wearing a helmet. But then neither do the statistics tell you whether you are going to get lung cancer if you smoke your particular brand of cigarette in your particular way. They are though both a pretty good guide.

P.S. What little research there is on the subject also indicates helmet wearers ride faster and take more risks.

 

[NotthatJasonKenny]

Americans have the same arguments about wearing crash helmets on motorbikes where we have accepted it.

To me, it has to be better wearing something on your head rather than nothing when the thought of hitting tarmac with my head is concerned.

 

[Red Light]

Americans have the same arguments about wearing crash helmets on motorbikes where we have accepted it.

To me, it has to be better wearing something on your head rather than nothing when the thought of hitting tarmac with my head is concerned.

Yes, the good old cotton cycling cap is much underrated.

 

[mr Mag00]

Interestingly the programme the other night on Channel Four about Kings College Hospital A&E had one cyclist who came off without a helmet and got an upper head injury - much made of the lack of helmet during the accident account when she was bought in. One cyclist who came off with a helmet and got an upper head injury with some mention as he binned his helmet. One person who came in after falling 8ft head first off some scaffolding and got a very serious brain injury that required surgery. No mention of helmets whatsoever. All three recovered perfectly. Make of that what you will.

i notice you don't make any mention to the extent of those injuries, i too watched this program last night. you make use of this to bolster your 'i dont wear a helmet, they offer no protection ' argument. 'upper head injury' cover a multitude of injuries. it is worth noting that the chap wearing a helmet was concious and had a small brain bleed and a black eye and was under observation. The cyclist not wearing a helmet was sedated with serious brain damage and was at one point considered to be unlikely to survive and required a great deal of rehab and professional care, she was also travelling in the region of 20-30 mile an hour downhill and swerved to avoid a ped, he hit a branch and looking at the injuries probably went over the handlebars.

just to put the post in some perspective and not quite a selective view of the program. the professions who deal with this type of injury are in no doubt about the benefits of wearing head protection whilst cycling.

I wear a helmet as I believe in the benefit of head protection when the skull hits the floor and the helmet spreading the load of impact but understand that going under a vehicle it will offer me no protection.

 

[Alun]

The evidence that cycle helmets reduce head injury is limited and often criticized on this forum.
The evidence that cycle helmets cause or add to head injuries is far less convincing.

 

[Dan B]

I don't know the answers, but I think it's dangerous to read too much into any research that's done in non-laboratory conditions.

On which basis (at least given that I never cycle in laboratories) there is no evidence for any beneficial effect of helmets.

 

[StuartG]

Americans have the same arguments about wearing crash helmets on motorbikes where we have accepted it.

But not the same statistics. Arguing by analogy is stupid.

 

[snorri]

the professions who deal with this type of injury are in no doubt about the benefits of wearing head protection whilst cycling.

In order to better assess the risk it would interesting to know what percentage of casualties suffering "this type of injury" were cycling at the time they crashed. Also what percentage of cyclists suffer this type of injury and which branch of cycling they were engaged in at the time, eg on/off road, sport/leisure/utility, urban/rural.

 

[NotthatJasonKenny]

But not the same statistics. Arguing by analogy is stupid.

Who's arguing?

 

[StuartG]

The evidence that cycle helmets reduce head injury is limited and often criticized on this forum.
The evidence that cycle helmets cause or add to head injuries is limited and often criticized on this forum.

FIFY. (Comparing an objective and subjective statement doesn't get us anywhere ...)