Congratulations, you are at least consistent.
Do you wear a helmet on your commute?
- Thread starter beany_bot
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Congratulations, you are at least consistent.
lb81
Senior Member
- Location
- Blaze'n'smoke, Hampshire
I have an HSE qualification as i was a H&S manager in a previous job.
If i had to make an objective assesment of cycling 20 miles to work in all types of conditions i would certainly stipulate a helmet should be worn as a hazard control measure.
You would need to consider the 'probability' of something happening and the 'severity' if it did happen.
If you considered all the available evidence including relevant statistics on some of the data sources allready mentioned here you would conclude 'A helmet must be worn at all times'.
However, as we all know that wearing one is not law (yet) and we are ultimately masters of our own destiny (Apparently) you can choose to wear one, or not, because its your head and your life which means that i wont be telling any of you that you should or should not be wearing one and i think some of you should be doing the same...
... Climbs from high horse, trips and falls on head (fortunately wearing a helmet).
lb81
Senior Member
- Location
- Blaze'n'smoke, Hampshire
Kill yourself.
Do it NOW!!!!!!!
Edited to add- just in case like
Hence 'used' to be.
It was a ******* HORRIBLE job!!
What would be your equivalent analysis for people walking to work or driving there? As a reminder remember that the accidents per km for pedestrians are far higher than for cyclists and more likely to produce a head injury as your starting points.
threebikesmcginty
Corn Fed Hick...
- Location
- ...on the slake
That's not fair, someone's removed my other repeat posts and this ruins my hilarious goldfish/memory joke.
lb81
Senior Member
- Location
- Blaze'n'smoke, Hampshire
Agreed. But the 'severity' of accidents involving cyclists would be a higher score due to the increased velocities involved.
They would probably come to the same overall score due to the increased 'probability' of a pedestrian accident, but that does not mean you should implement the same control measure for both activities.
I will think on it and come back with something more comprehensive.
Peter Armstrong
Über Member
How can my 1km 40mph decent down a busy road be less dangerous than walking it?
Peter Armstrong
Über Member
1997894 said:
but intuitive perception has to be correct over figures, its common sence.
Peter Armstrong
Über Member
But whats more dangerous?
[QUOTE 1997814, member: 45"]No it doesn't, and that point you make is valid.
But comparing the stats for the two groups isn't. So the response "well you're not advocating helmets for pedestrians" is unhelpful. That there are some groups of peds who may benefit more than some groups of cyclists is more correct to say, makes more sense, and is not going to produce a look of confusion from the man on the street.[/quote]
I will quite agree with you that some types of pedestrian are more at risk of falls than others, and the same is true of cyclists. Interestingly, no-one suggests helmets for frail old people or drunks, and hardly anyone differentiates between the different types of cyclist when suggesting helmets for cyclists.
The reason I find it illustrative to compare risks of cycling and walking, is that they are both low risk activities. That is, the likelihood of you suffering a head injury in either pursuit is very low.
There is a small risk of head injury in being a pedestrian, but it's so low that a helmet to try and prevent it is a ridiculous overreaction. I think the same is true of everyday cycling.
But comparing the stats for the two groups isn't. So the response "well you're not advocating helmets for pedestrians" is unhelpful. That there are some groups of peds who may benefit more than some groups of cyclists is more correct to say, makes more sense, and is not going to produce a look of confusion from the man on the street.[/quote]
I will quite agree with you that some types of pedestrian are more at risk of falls than others, and the same is true of cyclists. Interestingly, no-one suggests helmets for frail old people or drunks, and hardly anyone differentiates between the different types of cyclist when suggesting helmets for cyclists.
The reason I find it illustrative to compare risks of cycling and walking, is that they are both low risk activities. That is, the likelihood of you suffering a head injury in either pursuit is very low.
There is a small risk of head injury in being a pedestrian, but it's so low that a helmet to try and prevent it is a ridiculous overreaction. I think the same is true of everyday cycling.
Peter Armstrong
Über Member
Walking, I know its extreme
[QUOTE 1997914, member: 45"]The answer is that he's right, that there's a greater risk blasting down a busy hill on a bike than walking the same route on a safe pavement. And the blanket stats don't take this into account.
I'm not sure whether you're not getting this, or don't like it.[/quote]
No-one would suggest otherwise, but overall, cycling and walking carry similar risk of head injury: very little.
I'm not sure whether you're not getting this, or don't like it.[/quote]
No-one would suggest otherwise, but overall, cycling and walking carry similar risk of head injury: very little.
Factor these two aspects into your risk analysis. The pedestrian/cyclist velocity is largely irrelevant because its the velocity of the motor vehicle that hits them that is the dominant factor in both cases. The accident statistical systems already classify according to severity - minor, severe, fatal - and there is no evidence of increased severity for cyclists. Quite the opposite in fact. For the most severe category - fatal - pedestrians have at least a 50% greater risk per km than cyclists.
Second a helmet is designed and tested for a maximum of a stationary fall from a height (depending on which standard it meets) of between 1 and 2m. Is your proposed risk mitigation requiring the use of protective equipment well outside its specification and if so what validated mitigation are you going to use instead? Perhaps banning walking, cycling and driving to work?
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age 18 - Albert Einstein.
Peter Armstrong
Über Member
Albert Einstein? what does he know.
Common sense is the collection of knowing shoot from shoot - Peter Armstrong 22-08-12
- Status
