Has your helmet saved your life poll

How has the cycle helmet preformed for you


  • Total voters
    188
Status
Not open for further replies.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Bed time i think. Most likely dream about odd looking creatures with mushroom heads that appear to glow as if extremely visible.

Good night all. Look forward to the 30 odd notifications in the morning from the "has your helmet saved your life poll". Like a hole in the head.
 
When you are sick i take it you don't put your trust in internet chatrooms??

Actually you would be surprised how many medical decisions are taken following advice in internet chatrooms!

It is often the first thing we do if there is a need for an opinion on an updated procedure, finding out about an unusual presentation or a quick answer to a query.

So the honest answer is that I would not be adverse to seeking such advice.


However you didn't answer the question - If the medical profession says something should we simply sit up and obey?

Care to actually answer?

Although I suspect that will not happen.
 

Pat "5mph"

A kilogrammicaly challenged woman
Moderator
Location
Glasgow
Being rude was the point, but it was obviously far too subtle for you. Don't tell me what to do thanks very much.
Ahemm ....
@User13710 you were not rude to me, you were dismissive and condescending.
You are forgiven :hugs:

@Pedrosanchezo :rose:
('tis all your fault, I only entered the stupid debate because they were ganging up on you, and we are an ethnic minority on the forum, well, we both live in Scotland and wear helmets, plus I'm a foreigner and you have a foreign username, anyway look what happened to me because of watching Braveheart 10 years ago :B))
:laugh:
 
How it fails i am sure is only visible to you and your cronies.

If you really need to have this explained then I will take the time and explain it to you...


1. You made the spurious claim that ;

Wiggins (snip) recently came out claiming helmets had played a part in saving their skin.

2. I then pointed out that this was not the case and that:

Nice try - Wiggins hurt his ribs, and dislocated a finger.....and has not commented on helmets in connection with this accident!

3. You then put up this article to try and justify your unfounded and erroneous claim that Wiggins had said that wearing a helmet had saved his skin


4. It was then pointed out that the article FAILED to substantiate your claim:


Care to explain why you have posted that one as justification of your claim?

This article fails miserably and unequivocally to support the claim you made, care to try again?

SImply it fails because you made an untrue claim, then tried to justify this claim with an article that in no way, shape or form comes close to proving your claim.

Does that make it clear enough why it fails?
 
I worked in bike shops for nearly twenty five years. I've sold literally thousands of helmets - and yet, somehow, I've come to believe that helmets (not just compulsion) are bad for cycling.

I know how they're made, I've followed their technological evolution over the last thirty years, iI've even seen an ANSI test rig in operation and I know how theyre intended to work. And yet, I'm against them.

If youre going to post on here in support of their use you'd better have a decent argument - or some evidence - but i remain steadfastly unconvinced. Because I've yet to read a decent argument in support of helmets. And crucially, I've yet to see any evidence that helmets work.

The evidence in support of cycle helmets is so entirely absent that even their manufacturers make no claims about the protective abilities of their products (beyond whatever test they've been designed to pass).

I can make the claim - that cycle helmets deliver no net benefit to cyclists - 100% safe in the knowledge that no one can prove me wrong. Proper, scientific evidence. Anyone?
 
we both live in Scotland and wear helmets, plus I'm a foreigner and you have a foreign username, anyway look what happened to me because of watching Braveheart 10 years ago :B))
:laugh:

If I had known you wear a scot then I could have added being racist as well!
 
Actually you would be surprised how many medical decisions are taken following advice in internet chatrooms!

It is often the first thing we do if there is a need for an opinion on an updated procedure, finding out about an unusual presentation or a quick answer to a query.

So the honest answer is that I would not be adverse to seeking such advice.


However you didn't answer the question - If the medical profession says something should we simply sit up and obey?

Care to actually answer?

Although I suspect that will not happen.
Haha, the thing i like about you Cunobelin is that you have an answer for everything. It may end up being unrealistic, trivial and blatantly biased, but the tenacity you show is bordering impressive .

In answer to your question, in this instance, i would rather listen to the experts (who also happen to be cycling fanatics) than listen to someone who tries at every turn to discredit valid safety equipment. All of this without credible evidence.
 
Being rude was the point, but it was obviously far too subtle for you. Don't tell me what to do thanks very much.
Subtle?? Yeh that's what it was.............

You have been rude on other posts. I personally think it's out of order.

"Don't tell me what to do thanks very much". ?? It's an internet forum! You clearly use rudeness at a whim so why can't i tell you what to do?? Is it too rude??

If you are going to start an argument please go and stand in front of the mirror and do so there. It will lead to a longer exchange than this one.
 
Ahemm ....
@User13710 you were not rude to me, you were dismissive and condescending.
You are forgiven :hugs:

@Pedrosanchezo :rose:
('tis all your fault, I only entered the stupid debate because they were ganging up on you, and we are an ethnic minority on the forum, well, we both live in Scotland and wear helmets, plus I'm a foreigner and you have a foreign username, anyway look what happened to me because of watching Braveheart 10 years ago :B))
:laugh:
You are too kind in both cases. I do though appreciate the sentiment and feel you have taken some shrapnel on the front line for me and the small minority who stand up to the rebuttal squad. ;)
 
If you really need to have this explained then I will take the time and explain it to you...


1. You made the spurious claim that ;



2. I then pointed out that this was not the case and that:



3. You then put up this article to try and justify your unfounded and erroneous claim that Wiggins had said that wearing a helmet had saved his skin



4. It was then pointed out that the article FAILED to substantiate your claim:




SImply it fails because you made an untrue claim, then tried to justify this claim with an article that in no way, shape or form comes close to proving your claim.

Does that make it clear enough why it fails?
Okay i will change that to Sutton claimed a helmet saved his skin and Wiggins claimed helmets will save your life. Happy enough?? I noticed you brushed past the part where you said Wiggins never mentioned helmets in regards to his crash??

Either you were wrong or your spam bot cpu made an error.
 

Dan B

Disengaged member
They might not be a suit of armour but if they even provide 1% more protection then that could be the difference between life and death. That is my opinion.
They probably provide about that 1% if worn while walking downstairs. But I don't wear one in that situation either and for the same reason: the risk is simply too small to be worth the hassle.

Besides, I like to feel the wind in my hair as I descend the stairs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom