Deaths when not using helmet

[david k]

Here's the problem as I see it.

The majority of people who have decided not to wear a helmet started from the position that helmets must do something. They just must. Then, when they examined the evidence, they found that there was no evidence that cycle helmets reduced head injuries. Furthermore, that cycle helmets may in fact increase injuries. The decision not to wear a helmet is a rational decision based on the available facts.

The majority of people who do wear helmets are not fully informed or aware of the evidence. Like the first group, they assume that helmets must have a protective effect, but have not been made aware of the evidence that shows this not to be the case. This is not an irrational decision, but it is not fully informed.

There is a minority of people who have looked at or been shown the evidence, but nevertheless insist that helmets have a protective effect - usually along the lines of "I crashed, my helmet split. If it wasn't for the helmet my head would have split for sure." These people are holding an irrational faith-based position, and we have had people say as much - something along the lines of "I don't care what the evidence says, I will always believe that helmets are protective, and no matter what evidence I am shown, I will never change my mind"

Now if the first group were not under the constant background threat of prohibition, it wouldn't matter so much. But we have real examples of creeping prohibition:
-training courses (which definitely do have a protective effect) being denied to people who do not wish to wear a helmet
-many sportives and other events now state that a helmet is mandatory
-lobby groups and some politicians proposing legislation to make helmets mandatory

There is no prospect of helmets being banned, none. So the people in groups 2 and 3 will always be free to exercise their choice (whether that choice is informed or not) to wear a helmet, but the people in group 1 are always having to justify their choice, as if they are the irrational ones!

Now if you want to wear a helmet, that's up to you, but you cannot pretend the evidence shows them to be effective, and if you make claims that cannot be backed up, expect to be challenged on it - because these are exactly the same claims that compulsionists use, and they need to be challenged wherever they are made.

Very good post, very well thought through and you took a lot of time to compose it.

I dont see were evdience suggests that wearing a helmet can increase injuries? Unless you apply the flawed risk compensation argument. Even if this were true it is not an individual choice to wear a helmet that makes it more dangerous, just people without understanding of a helmets limits. As i am fully aware of the limits and ride no differently with a helmet on it does not apply to me. So when i make the decision to wear a helmet in my opinion it is there to protect as a informed justifiable reason.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Where is your evidence that wearing gloves cuts down raod rash? this is just your opinion and not an informed one. People like you must be challenged as without hard evidence to back up your claims we could have glove wearing compulsion

There is a very simple test for this. Put a sander to your hand without a glove on. Now get somebody else to put a sander to your other gloved hand.

 

[david k]

There is a very simple test for this. Put a sander to your hand without a glove on. Now get somebody else to put a sander to your other gloved hand.

you could try that with your head, with and without a helmet

 

[Angelfishsolo]

you could try that with your head, with and without a helmet

Indeed you could. I'm sure the helmet would prevent superficial damage such as skin loss.

Also gloves are sold with purposes in mind. To keep hands warm, to prevent hand slip due to sweat, to limit nerve discomfort by padding sensitive areas and to limit the amount of road-rash one will suffer in the event of an off.

These claims are easily tested.

Helmets are sold with the sole purpose of preventing head injury (setting aside the aerodynamics of TT helmets)

These claims have been put under scrutiny and found wanting.

 

[twobiker]

Where is your evidence that wearing gloves cuts down raod rash? this is just your opinion and not an informed one. People like you must be challenged as without hard evidence to back up your claims we could have glove wearing compulsion

My hands after I was knocked of were enough evidence for me, I have photos of the road rash from below the knee caused by sliding down rutted tarmac at 10mph in cycle shorts, wish I had had my tracksuit trousers on that day.

 

[benb]

Very good post, very well thought through and you took a lot of time to compose it.

I dont see were evdience suggests that wearing a helmet can increase injuries? Unless you apply the flawed risk compensation argument. Even if this were true it is not an individual choice to wear a helmet that makes it more dangerous, just people without understanding of a helmets limits. As i am fully aware of the limits and ride no differently with a helmet on it does not apply to me. So when i make the decision to wear a helmet in my opinion it is there to protect as a informed justifiable reason.

The risk compensation argument is not flawed. Even if you personally do not cycle any differently with or without a helmet, many people do. Risk compensation is very subtle and largely unconscious.
There is also the evidence that drivers tend to overtake helmeted cyclists closer than non-helmeted.
Also, there is some evidence to suggest that cycle helmets can increase rotational injuries.

I don't have the published studies to hand, but if I know RLJ, he'll be able to post links directly from his brain!

But all this has been gone over many times already, no?

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I don't have the published studies to hand, but if I know RLJ, he'll be able to post links directly from his brain!

Freudian slip?

 

[benb]

Freudian slip?

Yes, very much so.
Sorry, RL.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Yes, very much so.
Sorry, RL.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

Where is your evidence that wearing gloves cuts down raod rash? this is just your opinion and not an informed one. People like you must be challenged as without hard evidence to back up your claims we could have glove wearing compulsion

Prevention of hand injuries in cycle accidents
Hems TE, Simpson H
Oxford 1992

They found that over 20% of cyclists presented to the EM dept at Radcliffe had hand injuiries. Their recomendation was better gloves and more use of them.


You see? THAT is how you present evidence when asked to , no arm waving, no opinion, belief, thoughts or views. You asked for evidence ( No doubt hoping to prove a point) and you were presented with it. If you would like to proceed in this part of the debate I suggest you find and read the paper, before , you pop up with your opinons , views, or beliefs on the subject.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

Very good post, very well thought through and you took a lot of time to compose it.

I dont see were evdience suggests that wearing a helmet can increase injuries?

But you have already stated that you will not accept evidence that conflicts with your beliefs or other's experiences?

I wonder if Asher Meyers 's parent's expereince would sway you?

 

[david k]

Prevention of hand injuries in cycle accidents
Hems TE, Simpson H
Oxford 1992

They found that over 20% of cyclists presented to the EM dept at Radcliffe had hand injuiries. Their recomendation was better gloves and more use of them.


You see? THAT is how you present evidence when asked to , no arm waving, no opinion, belief, thoughts or views. You asked for evidence ( No doubt hoping to prove a point) and you were presented with it. If you would like to proceed in this part of the debate I suggest you find and read the paper, before , you pop up with your opinons , views, or beliefs on the subject.

i do not need to have evidence before 'popping' up with belief and views. My beliefs and views are my beliefs and views whether backed up by evidence or not

the fact you cannot trust or even have an opinion without hard evidence is worrying

 

[david k]

But you have already stated that you will not accept evidence that conflicts with your beliefs or other's experiences?

I wonder if Asher Meyers 's parent's expereince would sway you?

arrh, back to the old misquote and twisting of words, nice work.

now lets clear it up for you, i said i haven't accepted your evidence as supporting non wearing of helmet wearing, quite different to saying i will never accept any evidence

you seem anoyed that i do not agree with your views, this must be restrictive in everyday life

 

[Angelfishsolo]

But you have already stated that you will not accept evidence that conflicts with your beliefs or other's experiences?

I wonder if Asher Meyers 's parent's expereince would sway you?

I'm happy to admit that the evidence has changed my thinking. I still wear a helmet but for different reasons.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

i do not need to have evidence before 'popping' up with belief and views. My beliefs and views are my beliefs and views whether backed up by evidence or not

the fact you cannot trust or even have an opinion without hard evidence is worrying

Oh dear, you really weren't expecting anyone to prick your bubble with evidence were you? The gnashing and foaming must be at incredible levels!

Your reply (above) is evidence indeed of your thought processes , and will I'm sure, come to haunt you every time you pretend to have an open mind about , well, just about everything!

By now you are probably regretting confirming that you don't need evidence to come to an opinion, and you may even be thinking of deleting your post, this reply should make that thought pointless.