Helmets stop people cycling

[ufkacbln]

In the end its going to be insurance companies that dictate the 'need' to wear cycling helmets.

Only if allowed to do so.

They have tried a couple of times and ended up red-faced and out of pocket.

 

[Tango]

You might want to consider these two statements.

Fair shout Adrian, but I don't like wearing a seat belt, but understand the reasons for being dictated to do so

 

[mcshroom]

Here's a link to one reason I quoted earlier in this thread

link

 

[Tango]

Here's a link to one reason I quoted earlier in this thread

link

Which seems to be based around the benefits of cycling compared to not cycling if you were made to wear a helmet but didn't want to

 

[Tango]

Would that be the solid evidence that they are effective?

I think most protective devices are there for a proven purpose that would be open for debate

I did the Norwich 100 a week ago and saw two guys oldie with each other and end up grazed and dazed on the floor as a result of bashing heads

I can't say they came to any great harm, but would imagine (yes, you're right, I don't know for certain) helmets old have made team less dazed

 

[Tango]

Which is the subject of this thread

And for going off topic slightly I apologise

 

[ufkacbln]

Making comparison to pedestrians or car drivers is fair enough, but still a bit strange when cycling associations, racing associations, etc recommend them.

Another misunderstanding?

The RAC/ ACU recommend helmets and they are also compulsory for all motor sports. So there is nothing strange at all sports association sin BOTH motor and cycling sports have an identical stance and make helmets compulsory!

Your argument rather supports car drivers wearing helmets!

I am not aware of many organisation advocating pedestrian head gear, so implying pedestrians don't have to wear them so why should why is non sense.

The point is missed entirely!
Cycle helmets are more suited to the low impact falls that pedestrians tend to have. Given that pedestrian head injuries are more frequent, a far greater public health benefit would be achieved by the consequent had injury reduction.

What is nonsense is taking a sample of one hundred patients in adjacent beds with similar injuries. Five are cyclists and "at fault" for not wearing a helmet , another 16 will be car drivers and their head injuries are perfectly acceptable. Another 43 will be pedestrians and again it is acceptable for them to injure themselves and there is no fault apportioned.

Then look at the 60 where alcohol is involved and ask why helmets were not being worn whilst drinking alcohol

Personally I just enjoy getting out and riding, but when I do see a cyclist dazed as a result of a crash it does make me question their common sense. (That's a polite question, no offence intended and no names called)

On a lighter note, great weekend for pedalling

.. and could you explain why would you not question the common sense of a pedestrian in the same circumstances

 

[bianchi1]

Only if allowed to do so.

They have tried a couple of times and ended up red-faced and out of pocket.

Red faced maybe, but out of pocket? Higher premiums to pay for losses?

 

[Tango]

Dear oh dear

If Bradley wiggins has to wear a helmet, then so should I

If Usain bolt doesn't have to in his sport, then I am happy that the powers that be believe that his sport is less likely to cause head injury

My question, that ain't been answered sufficiently just skated round a bit, is this.

Does wearing a helmet offer more protection than not wearing one?

Yes, I accept I may have missed the original crux of the thread, but a simple answer to the above would be great

 

[Tango]

Imagine being the key word there

Yep, imagine, because I am no expert, but surely the clash of helmets is better than the clash of noggins ?

 

[ufkacbln]

Red faced maybe, but out of pocket? Higher premiums to pay for losses?

I was referring to the original cases where they ended up out of pocket.

The fact that they will reclaim this from policy holders is a given.

 

[mcshroom]

There are threads ad nauseum on that topic here in the helmet dungeon, and this thread is about whether helmets stop people cycling. It would be more senible to go back and read them (and more polite to at least read this thread).

With respect to your comment about Bradley Wiggins wearing one (I assume you mean the UCI mandating helmet wearing), the number of pro-cyclist deaths since the rule was brought in has risen, so there's no evidence of it having had an affect on pro-cycling safety (I also posted this with a link on about page 5).

 

[mcshroom]

Lewis Hamilton wears a helmet - just saying like

 

[Tango]

If you want to understand the evidence around the efficacy of cycle helmets, I suggest you readwww.cyclehelmets.org - then you might be in a position to contribute to the conversation from a point other than ignorance.

And as a result of my ignorance I have asked a question regarding better with or without helmet ?

Still awaiting an answer

 

[Tango]

And if Bradley Wiggins jumped off a bridge would you follow suit?

What non sense

Bradley wiggins wears a helmet as a result of him being required to do so if he wishes to ride, even he must think they are a good idea