How can wearing a helmet offer no protection from injury?

[mcshroom]

[QUOTE 2156980, member: 45"]It's not a straw man at all. It's very, very simple. Hiding behind all-encompassing statistics doesn't help anyone except those desiring to misinform.
[/quote]

The point of statistics is that the sample set is broad enough to remove noise caused by individual circumstances to determine the actual overall trend. Your approach to the data here is akin to determining a General election result by picking one seat and then excluding all the others as they may not give the answer you desire.

 

[lukesdad]

You could actually try reading the evidence put in front of you.

You havn t come up with any wtf has a pedestrian got to do with me wearing a lid when im mtbing........waits < this should be good>

 

[mcshroom]

[QUOTE 2156986, member: 45"]Would wearing a helmet while downhill MTBing be more beneficial than when riding leisurely along the Camel Trail with the family?[/quote]

Are you more likely to injure your head while mountain biking or hiking? About as relevent.

 

[lukesdad]

The point of statistics is that the sample set is broad enough to remove noise caused by individual circumstances to determine the actual overall trend. Your approach to the data here is akin to determining a General election result by picking one seat and then excluding all the others as they may not give the answer you desire.

No sorry thats not good enough I need to know if my 5 year old should wear a helmet while riding in the local park.

 

[lukesdad]

Are you more likely to injure your head while mountain biking or hiking? About as relevent.

Ah hiking pedestrians now is it ?

 

[mcshroom]

Btw:

The overall injury rate of 1.54 injuries per 1000 biker exposures suggests that recreational mountain biking compares favourably with many other popular sports. Studies looking at indoor and outdoor soccer have found injury rates of between 4.0 and 18.0 injuries per 1000 player exposures, while rates in competitive rugby union often exceed 100.0 per 1000 player games.

BMJ 2009

Pretty safe then, so why the concentration on helmets?

 

[mcshroom]

Ah hiking pedestrians now is it ?

Well I was waiting for User to try and explain that we should strip the hikers out of the pedestrian stats without any evidence myself.

 

[lukesdad]

Btw:


BMJ 2009

Pretty safe then, so why the concentration on helmets?

would it be safe because of the protective equipment used or in spite of it ?

 

[classic33]

I'm now going to throw this whole helmet deate of kilter.
Suffer from/with epilepsy. Result &/or side effect of this has been the many head impact injuries received when contact has been made with the ground. I have spilt/cracked my skull in 13 seperate places in one fit/seizure. Easily seen on the X-ray to the untrained eye. Another time "log fall" face first into the floor, no head injury.
In nether case was a helmet being worn.

Hit whilst cycling, wearing a helmet when hit, & I'm told that the helmet being worn at the time actually added to the injuries. This from the doctors in the A&E, who treated me. Helmet had to be removed, by me in the road at the request of the police, so that they could take my details. Not so they could check for any injury to the head. Normal medical advice is not to remove the helmet.

So, should I wear a helmet for walking/day to day use & not use one when cycling. From personal experience, more ihead njuries have been sustained when not wearing a helmet, whilst not cycling than have been sustained whilst cycling without one. It even increased the injury when in collision.

 

[mcshroom]

There's very little in it, and both risks are so low as to be trivial. Any evidence for deviation from the staus quo Mr P?

 

[growingvegetables]

If you wear a helmet your at least saying - I am taking safety seriuosly.

And that's my problem with your arguments. That statement is just plain wrong, wrong, wrong. You're suggesting I don't take safety seriously? For me ... aye, and for my children?

Far. far, far too many drivers take yours at face value, and "assume" the cyclist is protected. Cue close passes and worse.

• YOUR safety choice - you choose to trust the (limited) protection your helmet will give. Fair enough - your call. No probs.

• MY safety choice - I prefer to have drivers give me the extra space. I deliberately, and in full consideration of the evidence, specifically choose NOT to trust drivers' complacent assumptions. That's my SAFETY choice and decision. And it's backed up by research based on actual, real-life observation (rather than playing with statistics).

The only difference between us, is that I respect, understand, and defend your choice, while you do not accord me the same respect, understanding, or defence.

 

[lukesdad]

There's very little in it, and both risks are so low as to be trivial. Any evidence for deviation from the staus quo Mr P?

Well im trying to think of an mtber that doesn t wear a helmet but Im struggling, of course if you don t believe me you could go to the local trail park and count for yourself.

 

[growingvegetables]

Because cars do not usually travel on pavements.

Next ?

Tell my brother that.

 

[mcshroom]

Well im trying to think of an mtber that doesn t wear a helmet but Im struggling, of course if you don t believe me you could go to the local trail park and count for yourself.

Which proves what exactly?

 

[lukesdad]

Which proves what exactly?

Thats the point dear chap it proves most mtbers wear helmets nothing more nothing less, but unfortunately with your low injury figures its the only real evidence to go on when it comes to mtbing would you not agree ? Of course you could come up with some other evidence...