Nice to have the concise summary of the Rodger Geffen article posted by mcshroomHelmet's do look rubbish.
That's why I don't wear one.
Nice to have the concise summary of the Rodger Geffen article posted by mcshroomHelmet's do look rubbish.
That's why I don't wear one.
30 years ago similar debates raged about car seat belts.....and I guess many contributors to this thread still resent that the law now dictates that they wear one
do you remove the airbags and brakes from your car? no , but arn,t they safety devices?
Dearie me – the fundies are out in force todayall the people who object to helmets object to seat belts, air bags , crumple zones and all the other safety devices they have in thier cars
Another analogy.The expanded polystyrene liner is intended to crush
Pop down to your local Asda, and head for the egg counter. Stand and watch for five minutes – and what's the first thing most shoppers do? Pick up the egg carton, open it, and check none of the eggs are broken.
Best done late in the day – on a bad one, you may have to open half a dozen “egg safety devices”, before you find “an expanded polystyrene liner intended to crush” that has actually done what was expected of it.
Bottom line - if you choose to wear a helmet, that's fine by me. For whatever reason rocks your boat. But please – don't try to preach at me, without any reliable/viable evidence.
Dearie me – the fundies are out in force today
Airbags, vehicle brake systems, crumple zones, seat belts – all highly designed and engineered, manufactured and installed to extremely high standards of precision and effectiveness.
And people insist that cycle helmets should be considered on the same basis? That is just bonkers, misguided, deluded. Whatever.
Another analogy.
Pop down to your local Asda, and head for the egg counter. Stand and watch for five minutes – and what's the first thing most shoppers do? Pick up the egg carton, open it, and check none of the eggs are broken.
Best done late in the day – on a bad one, you may have to open half a dozen “egg safety devices”, before you find “an expanded polystyrene liner intended to crush” that has actually done what was expected of it.
Bottom line - if you choose to wear a helmet, that's fine by me. For whatever reason rocks your boat. But please – don't try to preach at me, without any reliable/viable evidence.
and a safety helmet that has in fact be extensively researched, designed and tested to protect your head against a blunt force.
Helmet's do look rubbish.
That's why I don't wear one.
I guess that's not completely true?
You probably also perceive the risk to yourself as being extremely small and the efficacy of a helmet in reducing the risk of suffering a head injury to be even smaller?
I'm not wishing to put words into your mouth (and if you feel I am, I apologise now!)......but if you perceived yourself to be at significant risk and believed that helmets might mitigate that risk it would be foolish not to wear one on the grounds of it looking rubbish - as sitting in a wheel chair, dribbling following a head injury would look even more rubbish.
......and as with so many Cycle Chat threads - that is why there are 2 opposed views - we all have different perceptions, belief systems and values. (and some of us just love a good row!)
Ha Ha love the comparison between a 2p egg box that has in fact be extensively researched, designed and tested to protectyour headeggs, and a safety helmet.
Have you ever seen a serious head injury - they don,t look very cool either.
Do you know what the design parameters for cycle helmets are? And a 'blunt force' what?
From that response I can safely assume you're talking from a position of ignorance...