Having to wear a helmet to do a sportive

[nickprior]

I must be one of the few people in this thread to have fallen on his head during a sportive! Skidded on a greasy bend at the start of the 3 Counties ride last year, thought I'd caught the slide by steering into it but over cooked the correction and got flipped over the handlebars at about 12 mph. Went down like a sack of spuds on my shoulder and hips, then my head touched down. I got some good road rash on my chin, some good cuts from where my glasses were forced into my face by the helmet, and some impact marks from the helmet itself. The helmet was somewhat dented over my right temple and has since been replaced.

The extent of the superficial grazing and the impact of my head hitting the road (sufficient to give me concussion for 2-3 days afterwards) has convinced me that without the helmet, the consequences of the crash would have been far more uncomfortable. I don't think I would have died but head injuries are funny things. I would however have been kept in Lancaster Infirmary for observation much longer than I was.

This incident was exactly the type of crash I was hoping the helmet would protect me from - low speed with some forward momentum. The helmet protected me from severe abrasion damage to my scalp, and, given the extent of the gravel rash on my face, minimised the consequences of a hard impact on my skull.

So for particular types of incident a helmet for me has worked. None of the sportives I have participated in recently have made helmets mandatory (3 Counties, Pendle Pedal, Brian Robinson, Roses Round). I would vehemently defend anyone's right not to have to wear "safety" equipment of any sort, especially where the the safety case is not well made, statistically.

However, when there's potential for litigation I can understand the desire to minimise any organisation's exposure especially to vexatious claims. People are getting funny about injury claims these days. "But no one told me I should have worn a helmet" - there may well be no case to answer but the cost and inconvenience of preparing to defend an action would make any organizer think twice about their position on helmets.

BTW painful but not yet fatal incidents in helmet-less climbing, canoeing, skiing and cycling incidents over the years have led me to wear helmets for all these activities these days. Anecdotal empiricism in action!

 

[threebikesmcginty]

Dress for the accident not the journey.

That's the kind of 'always look on the bright side' attitude this thread's been missing.

 

[screenman]

I must say this posting thing is hard work, nickprior that is the very sort of incident that I wear a helmet for.

 

[Dave5N]

A point.

After a minute or two, I genuinely forget I have a helmet on. It fits well, is light and comfortable.

A question.

I have personally witnessed a good many horrendous crashes where helmets have been in pieces, yet the riders escaped serious head injury.

Why not wear one?

(I don't always, depends if it is a 'transport' ride or a 'sport' ride.)

 

[4F]

Why not wear one?

(I don't always, depends if it is a 'transport' ride or a 'sport' ride.)

If cycling is so dangerous why do the countries with a high cycle usage such as Holland, Denmark and China not insist on wearing them ?

 

[4F]

I have on 50 years of cycling in varying conditions, this may explain why I decide to wear a helmet and you do not.

I have 45 and having not fallen off as many times as you is why I decide not to

 

[lukesdad]

How long you have ridden a bike or, how many miles you do has nothing to do with the likelihood of having an accident don t be so smug. I have a number of accidents every year mainly due to some of the type of riding I do, hence I wear a helmet during these disciplines.
Its about time the anti s who, campaign so much against them came clean and, declared their real reason for doing so. Its got nothing to do with the flimsey evidence. Its becuase they are afraid that at sometime in the future it may become mandatory, and they are trying to whip up support to fight it.
Its a personal choice as has been said many times before,why dont you leave it at that.

 

[ufkacbln]

I have worked for many years with Casualty and A/E departments...



A question.

I have personally witnessed a good many horrendous crashes where helmets would have saved pedestrians and car occupants

Why not wear one?

 

[ufkacbln]

18 pages and still no picture of a thudguard? Your slipping Cunobelin ;-)

Don't know many two year olds in Sportives!

 

[ufkacbln]

Have we any event organisers on the forum who could give their opinion on this.

Firstly about 10 pages ago the organiser of one Sportive was asked if they accepted EN1078 helmets when these was banned in other countries as unacceptably poor in performance. I also asked if there was any scrutineering of helmet standards, condition or fitting (Given Rivara's paper on increased injuries with poorly fitting helmets)

Neither got the courtesy of an answer - so don't hole your breath

Dress for the accident not the journey.

Couldn't agree more

When do these become compulsory - after all they are in professional events!

 

[lukesdad]

I have worked for many years with Casualty and A/E departments...



A question.

I have personally witnessed a good many horrendous crashes where helmets would have saved pedestrians and car occupants

Why not wear one?

Car occupants in motorsport do. I have competed in off road motorcycle sport XC downhill and Road Racing all my life, and have witnessed many accidents, Helmets do save lives. In some cases unfortunately they can t. Its all about perceived risk. As Ive said I don t wear a helmet for casual cycling or training. As I consider the risk of having a serious "off" to be greatly dimminished.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Car occupants in motorsport do. I have competed in off road motorcycle sport XC downhill and Road Racing all my life, and have witnessed many accidents, Helmets do save lives. In some cases unfortunately they can t. Its all about perceived risk. As Ive said I don t wear a helmet for casual cycling or training. As I consider the risk of having a serious "off" to be greatly dimminished.

So where were all the lives that were lost before helmets became commonplace twenty years ago? People fell off as much as they do now, but the number who died from head injuries were so low that it would be classed as a statistical zero. No one ever seems to come up with an answer to that.

 

[screenman]

Times have changed in 20 years, more traffic, more road signs, more complete idiots and numpties. Can you absolutely say and on heart that you can see no benefit whatsoever in a helmet? can you say that wearing a helmet will not protect you in some way from some head damage in the case of some accidents. Of course helmets do not protect completely in the case of some high speed impacts, but I would have thoughts most off's were slow speed one's.

Come who is going to be post 200.

I must warn you that I have been called an idiot before now.


Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

 

[Crackle]

So where were all the lives that were lost before helmets became commonplace twenty years ago? People fell off as much as they do now, but the number who died from head injuries were so low that it would be classed as a statistical zero. No one ever seems to come up with an answer to that.

Show me the stats that prove the opposite, that before cycle helmets head injuries didn't exist. Certainly I'm not one of them. 30 years of cycling I've hit my head once, I fractured it, it hurt and I suffered with the effects for a good 18 months.

Both sides of this debate irritate me, it's a curious conundrum. On the one hand there's the luddite uninformed approach coupled with irrelevant statistical comparisons of entirely different risk groups (you all know who you are ) and on the other hand there's the other uninformed, a helmet will save your life, your culpable for not wearing one, my God how can you contemplate such a dangerous sport without a helmet group. I think the latter irritate me more but only slightly.

I'm fairly sceptical about what a helmet can actually do but it costs me little to wear one and I know from experience I'd prefer to hope it will help. If you don't want to wear one you won't find me pulling a bunch of irrefutable evidence out my back pocket or regaling you with emotive anecdotes.

In our family I wear one, my wife wears one, my kids no longer do in most circumstances. One of them finds it irritating and won't cycle with it, he ends up scratching his scalp as he's riding along, so for him it's less safe to wear one. Mostly they scrat about on their bikes, they don't need a helmet for that, mtn biking on trails is different, I just want them to use their bikes. I've gone to some lengths to explain the protection and limitations of helmets, I fear for anyone in authority who blithely tells them they should wear a helmet, they're likely to be blinded with informed opinion.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Show me the stats that prove the opposite, that before cycle helmets head injuries didn't exist. Certainly I'm not one of them. 30 years of cycling I've hit my head once, I fractured it, it hurt and I suffered with the effects for a good 18 months.

Both sides of this debate irritate me, it's a curious conundrum. On the one hand there's the luddite uninformed approach coupled with irrelevant statistical comparisons of entirely different risk groups (you all know who you are ) and on the other hand there's the other uninformed, a helmet will save your life, your culpable for not wearing one, my God how can you contemplate such a dangerous sport without a helmet group. I think the latter irritate me more but only slightly.

I didn't say there were no instances of head injuries prior to the introduction of helmets. What I said was if you looked at head injuries in racing, particularly professional racing where crashing is a regular occupational hazard that the number would statistically come up as zero, unless you were to start the figure with a decimal point. That's hardly an irrelevant statistic, but a very valid one.

There is no "Anti Helmet" brigade. I've never known anyone who chose to ride without one have a go at a helmet wearer by questioning and ridiculing their choice, those of us who chose not to don't care what you wear, we just want the same respect in return. We get irritated with the emotional blackmail from the evangelists who want to force everyone to wear one, and especially those who favour compulsion. This is why these threads run and run, you have to wonder why many of the pro helmet lobby try to force everyone into their way of thinking. Why not just live and let live and mind your own business at something that has no effect on you at all? (Not directed at you btw Crackle as you are not trying to force your views on anyone, but at those who are).