Gordon Ramsay down.

[Ming the Merciless]

Unless you believe that gravity and momentum can be ignored and heads would magically stop an inch or two above the floor if they were not wearing helmets.

The dynamics do mean you are far more likely to hit your head harder and faster if wearing a helmet. Often times a helmet will contact the ground where a head would not have. Unless you ignore physics and biology.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

you'd have probably/possibly been worse off without one.

Maybe, maybe not. Helmets are shown to increase the risk of serious brain injuries from shear forces from rotational injuries. They have pluses (such as minor scratch reduction you mention) and minuses (brain injury).

 

[classic33]

Maybe, maybe not. Helmets are shown to increase the risk of serious brain injuries from shear forces from rotational injuries. They have pluses (such as minor scratch reduction you mention) and minuses (brain injury).

Brain injury is going to happen with or without a helmet. The damage is done by the sudden decrease in speed, causing the brain to "bounce" within the skull.

 

[Rusty Nails]

The dynamics do mean you are far more likely to hit your head harder and faster if wearing a helmet. Often times a helmet will contact the ground where a head would not have. Unless you ignore physics and biology.

I have read that the human head weighs around 5 kilos. Physics tells me 250 grams (my helmet) is not going to make a huge difference to the velocity or impact force, and biology tells me the slight extra force will be more than compensated for by hitting your head on a piece of expanded polystyrene rather than a rock or tarmac.

How often are often times?

 

[Ming the Merciless]

How often are often times?

A 40% higher probability wearing a helmet.

 

[Rusty Nails]

Maybe, maybe not. Helmets are shown to increase the risk of serious brain injuries from shear forces from rotational injuries. They have pluses (such as minor scratch reduction you mention) and minuses (brain injury).

I think this sums up the whole debate on helmet use.

Everyone here will continue doing what suits them wrt to helmets, maximising their own arguments and minimising the opposite view.

Still, it passes time when there's nothing on the TV, and is a lot more interesting than arguing about the arrogance/unfriendliness of mamils on expensive bikes

 

[Rusty Nails]

A 40% higher probability wearing a helmet.

Genuinely would be interested in reading the source.

 

[mjr]

Because what this is about is a cyclist, who you may or may not like, being involved in a collision. But you're not bothered about that.

Except, you know, in my earlier post. Once again, if you are telling someone else what they think, unsupported by anything, you're probably incorrect.

 

[classic33]

Except, you know, in my earlier post. Once again, if you are telling someone else what they think, unsupported by anything, you're probably incorrect.

Possible, but from your own posts in this thread, I very much doubt it. Your own selective quoting proves my point.

It's another person we're talking about.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Genuinely would be interested in reading the source.

I was hoping to dig out the research paper link. But my search failed. I did post it in the helmet thread years back. But it’s as lost in there as my search efforts. Shame as it was genuinely interesting to read and not at all obvious why till you read it.

 

[mjr]

Possible, but from your own posts in this thread, I very much doubt it. Your own selective quoting proves my point.

The only thing it proves is that I won't waste time on the rest of your nonsense.

 

[matticus]

the chances are that if you'd had concussion following a head bang while wearing a helmet you'd have probably/possibly been worse off without one

You might want to read about my most recent vvvvv minor head injury:

There is an arched underpass on my nearest Sustrans route - if you don't like traffic then this route is a no-brainer for getting out of town.
There is only room to stand up straight across about half the path/track. I once got a bit blasé and caught my head on the roof. Bit of a shock, but no real harm...
Now if you'd added a couple of cm to my head-size with a helmet, I doubt I'd have stayed upright. Probably a load of other minor injuries (including possible banging my head on the railing, even a drowning risk!). And quite possibly would have hit it hard enough for a concussion.

(My other two head impacts as an adult were caused by drivers. A lifetime of riding on many surfaces.)

 

[matticus]

There seems to be a common delustion that heads strike solid objects in isolation; but your head is attached to your body. If it isn't, I suggest you are past worrying about concussion.

Probably because we have a body to protect ourselves, you can fall off a lot of times without your head striking the floor. And when it does happen, its probably more complicated than having your arms strapped to your sides, then fired from a catapult to hit a solid object head-first.

 

[classic33]

The only thing it proves is that I won't waste time on the rest of your nonsense.

Makes more sense than fastening a bag of sugar* at the highest point of your body, claiming it equates to a wearing a cycle helmet.

*You've reduced the weight to match the helmet weight given in your most recent post.

 

[SpokeyDokey]

Mod note:

Closed. This has now become a full-blown helmet thread and we already have one for this purpose.