Giro helmets - huge appreciation

[david k]

Why the on on earth do people feel the need to repeatedly justify their decision either to wear or not wear a bicycle hat.

What the hell is wrong with you people?

Step away from the keyboards folks. Life is passing you by.......

a thought that had crossed my mind, it appears those who believe that wearing a helmet is beneficial are not allowed to make the decision without hard evidence to justify the decision. Life must be hard for those who seek hard evidence for such a simple choice. But as previously said people thought the earth was flat, this is supposedly proof that you shouldnt wear a helmet

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I claim this is too dam close to Godwins Law

 

[Red Light]

so i am a fool for wearing a helmet because it isnt compulsory?

Cycling isn't compulsory either. Are you a fool for cycling or did you just make a non-sequitur?

 

[Red Light]

a thought that had crossed my mind, it appears those who believe that wearing a helmet is beneficial are not allowed to make the decision without hard evidence to justify the decision. Life must be hard for those who seek hard evidence for such a simple choice. But as previously said people thought the earth was flat, this is supposedly proof that you shouldnt wear a helmet

Why do you need to continually lie about what people have said? Nobody said you need hard evidence if you want to wear a helmet. You have been told many many times that what you choose to wear on your head is your decision. What has been said is if you want to promulgate your belief to others that helmets will save you a serious head injury, then you need either need hard evidence to back your claims or should be prepared to be challenged on them. Its either going straight over your head, which I can't believe, or you are deliberately saying things you know to be untrue.

And the earth not being flat is proof that common sense and personal experiences is unreliable, nothing more. Its only link to helmets is suggesting that common sense is not a reliable guide and you should seek more objective and reliable evidence. But again you seem to think it helps you to deliberately distort it.

There really is no point in discussing anything further with someone who is so willing to lie and dissemble.

 

[david k]

Why do you need to continually lie about what people have said? Nobody said you need hard evidence if you want to wear a helmet. You have been told many many times that what you choose to wear on your head is your decision. What has been said is if you want to promulgate your belief to others that helmets will save you a serious head injury, then you need either need hard evidence to back your claims or should be prepared to be challenged on them. Its either going straight over your head, which I can't believe, or you are deliberately saying things you know to be untrue.

And the earth not being flat is proof that common sense and personal experiences is unreliable, nothing more. Its only link to helmets is suggesting that common sense is not a reliable guide and you should seek more objective and reliable evidence. But again you seem to think it helps you to deliberately distort it.

There really is no point in discussing anything further with someone who is so willing to lie and dissemble.

why do you get so angry? No lies here, your once again getting so frustrated that you cannot convince me of your views that you resort to abuse

if you dont want to wear a helmet dont, i do and i dont need hard evidence for that. i believe it is of benefit, i dont need hard evidence for that, i believe if you wear a helmet it will be beneficial for you, i dont need hard evidence for that, shame you do need hard evidence before you can have an opinion

i await your next onslaught of abuse because yet again you have failed to force your opinion on me, not sure why you cannot accept my opinion on the matter. I accept that you think helmets are worthless and i disagree with you

 

[david k]

Yes, I give up, it just isn't worth it. You are not looking to understand the issues. You have made your mind up based on that which you find intuitive and are doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la, I can't hear you". The claiming the moral high ground is just taking the piss.

A reply based on many of your assumptions, funny how you claim i dont understand the issues when your refusing to consider mine?

If you dont want to wear a helmet fine, i do, just because you cannot force your opinion on me doesnt mean i am wrong or taking the moral high ground and as for taking the p1ss, your attempt at that failed miserably

 

[ianrauk]

A reply based on many of your assumptions, funny how you claim i dont understand the issues when your refusing to consider mine?

If you dont want to wear a helmet fine, i do, just because you cannot force your opinion on me doesnt mean i am wrong or taking the moral high ground and as for taking the p1ss, your attempt at that failed miserably

How do you know if he wears a helmet or not?

 

[threebikesmcginty]

If you dont want to wear a helmet fine

How do you know whether Adrian wears a helmet or not?


Edit: beat me to it!

 

[david k]

dont need to know to tell him he can wear one if he wants

 

[david k]

if he does he is a hypocrite

 

[Ravenbait]

I have personal anecdata that wearing a helmet made the outcome of an accident worse. I don't wear one. I don't go around telling people they shouldn't wear one, in a ZOMG YOU ARE SO GOING TO DIE YOU IDIOT kind of way. I do get narked when people say I should wear one because they are beneficial, or suggest that any injury sustained while not wearing one is my own damn fault and if I end up a vegetable because I get hit by a truck well, I had it coming.

Here's my opinion:

Are helmets beneficial? Maybe, sometimes, in limited circumstances, for limited definitions of "beneficial".

Can helmets make things worse? Yes, definitely, in limited circumstances.

Is it guaranteed that I will hit my head in such a way that a helmet would have helped should I fall off? Absolutely not.

Is the chance of falling off and hitting my head in such a way that a helmet might help greater than the combined chance of falling off and either not hitting my head at all or hitting my head in a manner that means the helmet makes things worse? No. Not even close.

So there you go. What you put on your head is up to you. I have made an informed decision and anyone who tries to tell me I am an idiot, or that I've made the wrong decision, based on flawed assumptions and an inadequate risk assessment, can shove their plastic casquette somewhere damp and moist.

This isn't, for those who are slightly disabled in the comprehension department, about being anti-helmet. It's about being anti-compulsion. It is perfectly possible to be pro-helmet and anti-compulsion. Those of us who choose not to wear helmets have no problem with whatever anyone else puts or doesn't put on his or her head. The problem arises when people argue (incorrectly) that they are 100% beneficial, because that's the start of the slippery slope to compulsion.

Sam

 

[david k]

I can totally understand people wanting to fight against compulsion, thats fine.
If you dont want to wear one fine, i think they are beneficial, is there anything wrong with that? if i think they are beneficial for me it stands to reason i think they are beneficial for you eh? whats wrong with me thinking something is better for you?

an extreme argument is one that states helmets are not 100% beneficial and therefore are useless, rarely any safety precaution is 100% beneficial but that does not mean it is of no benefit.

 

[david k]

I have made an informed decision and anyone who tries to tell me I am an idiot, or that I've made the wrong decision, based on flawed assumptions and an inadequate risk assessment, can shove their plastic casquette somewhere damp and moist.

youve made your informed decision which is not to wear one, this is respected as an informed decision by those who dont value helmets. When we make an informed decision to wear one the same courtesy is not afforded to helmet wearers, hence it is selective when it suits, there in lies the issue of the bloody minded

 

[Ravenbait]

I can totally understand people wanting to fight against compulsion, thats fine.
If you dont want to wear one fine, i think they are beneficial, is there anything wrong with that? if i think they are beneficial for me it stands to reason i think they are beneficial for you eh? whats wrong with me thinking something is better for you?

an extreme argument is one that states helmets are not 100% beneficial and therefore are useless, rarely any safety precaution is 100% beneficial but that does not mean it is of no benefit.

youve made your informed decision which is not to wear one, this is respected as an informed decision by those who dont value helmets. When we make an informed decision to wear one the same courtesy is not afforded to helmet wearers, hence it is selective when it suits, there in lies the issue of the bloody minded

The two points quoted above illustrate where the problem lies.

I have made an informed decision. You are not respecting my informed decision because you nevertheless insist that wearing one is beneficial for me. You are wrong. Based on my experience, which is at least as valid as yours, you are very wrong. I have not told you that you should stop wearing a helmet, now kindly stop telling me, or anyone else who has made a similar informed decision, that we should. Then we'll all get along much better.

Sam

 

[tigger]

Well we can. Where are the major abrasions and impacts damage on the helmet shell that would have been on your head if the helmet had not been in the way? Its a bit like coming out of a car accident with an undamaged car and swearing the body shell had protected you from serious injury. If it saved your head from major damage, your helmet would have suffered major damage itself, if it doesn't have major damage then no major damage would have happened to your head.

OK. So you were saying earlier that if a helmet is cracked it can't be doing its job. Now you seem to be saying that if a helmet shows limited damage, it still isn't doing a useful job as a helmetless head would also have experienced the same level of minor damage? So regardless of the fact that helmets and heads are made up of different materials you are saying there must be a linear relationship with regard to resulting damage from the same impact?

So using the same scientific principle, I am reposting the picture of my injured hip to you my learned friend. This hip was not in direct contact with the road but was in fact covered by cycling bib shorts. As you can see, the bruising extends to an area of size approximate to a medium sized plate. It is very swollen and sore. However, the shorts themselves only have a small abrasion and tear approximately the size of a 50 pence piece. You could say the shorts were hardly damaged at all. Indeed, you could say the level of damage to my shorts is similar to that of my helmet, yet my head has no damage whatsover. My hip is a mess and gives me great pain.

This is a real mystery to me, given the clear scientifically proven fact you have established. Can you shed some light on this?