How can wearing a helmet offer no protection from injury?

[Red Light]

Now back to my initial post; I stated that I believe in the adage that ‘prevention is better than cure’ and that I would always wear my helmet when cycling. I still stand by that.

Prevention of the accident or prevention of the injury? Are you better wearing a helmet and have 25% more close passes but hope that it will reduce any resulting injuries or better off reducing the risk of an accident in the first place by not wearing one and having fewer close passes? I was always taught that PPE was at the bottom of the hierarchy of provision and prevention of the accident at the top. YMMV.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

I'm not sure about impossible, but certainly improbable.


Then of course there are the vested interests, who wants to rock the boat when they can sell a 50p piece of plastic for >£100?

You are talking about vesting interests from helmet manufacturers. If the accreditation bodies changed the test requirements it may well shake up the industry. Just look how far MTB's have come in since the 1980's (and they cost less in real terms now than they did then)

 

[Angelfishsolo]

LUCKY????


He lives in Aberdare! He deserves all the luck he can get!

Cwmbach actually!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

You have to appreciate that I am so lucky I don't even understand that one.

It is a run down South Wales Valley town with a huge drinking and fighting culture and with insurance premiums for cars not that far off London rates!

 

[Red Light]

Were did I mention cheep?

Not sure helmets built using the materials of £10-20k Formula 1 helmets are going to be popular.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Not sure helmets built using the materials of £10-20k Formula 1 helmets are going to be popular.

Once again assumptions are being made. Until manufacturers actually try we will never know.

 

[Red Light]

The fit of a helmet cannot be emphasised enough, and the "so long as you are wearing one" argument is unacceptable.

Research from the US is scathing about the issue

Not sure if it was that paper or another one but research in the US showed 96% of helmets were badly fitted or worn.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

You are talking about vesting interests from helmet manufacturers. If the accreditation bodies changed the test requirements it may well shake up the industry. Just look how far MTB's have come in since the 1980's (and they cost less in real terms now than they did then)

But the MTB market is driven up by market forces, build a better product and you can charge more for it or sell more of it. The helmet market has a ceiling which is the standards there is no point a manufacturer offereing anything more than the standard. You can see that in the advertising, it's full of weight,fit, style, colour, ventilation, nothing at all about how well they work.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

But the MTB market is driven up by market forces, build a better product and you can charge more for it or sell more of it. The helmet market has a ceiling which is the standards there is no point a manufacturer offereing anything more than the standard. You can see that in the advertising, it's full of weight,fit, style, colour, ventilation, nothing at all about how well they work.

Standards thank you. I am saying raise the safety ceiling for those standards.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

I work in the construction industry and am employed as a Health and Safety Advisor. The worst part of my job is to investigate accidents,and believe me I have seen some really nasty injuries, and sadly two fatalities, over the years. In the majority of cases, injured employees who have worn / used the prescribed PPE fortheir job roles have usually come off lighter, and in some cases walked away with their life.



To answer your question about whether I was trained to wear my helmet? The answer is no. However, I do not need to be told that I must not wear the helmet back to front. Also to ensure that the helmet is of the correct size and fits properly, and that the strap is secure.



Now back to my initial post; I stated that I believe in the adage that ‘prevention is better than cure’ and that I would always wear my helmet when cycling. I still stand by that.

without trying to insult you, but you are talking bollocks about ppe training. you have to be by law as employees (self employed people are classed as employees) be trained on how to use ANY ppe. i employed 14 electricians and it was part of my duties to ensure all personal were trained on how to use ppe. i suggest you go away and read up on this, before you, as a h&s advisor / policy maker (company scapegoat), you end up in court under the 'duty of care' section. 'no win no fee' injury lawyers would love to come up against a h&s advisor who makes stupid stupid statements like that.

i stand by my opinion that your statement is naive, there is evidence based research papers showing that tear drop helmets with open vents and externally fixed straps cause injury, ergo in the case of those designs, 'prevention is not better than the cure'.

 

[Red Light]

Once again assumptions are being made. Until manufacturers actually try we will never know.

Experiential assumptions though. If you are going to increase the performance of the helmet over its current levels and maintain the same weight you are going to have to use more expensive materials than EPS which is cheap as chips. Manufacturers are heading in the opposite direction and dropping standards and protection levels. It seems being able to sell helmets is more important to them than actually protecting people.

 

[Red Light]

It is a run down South Wales Valley town with a huge drinking and fighting culture.

Sounds like a prime candidate for pedestrian helmets

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Experiential assumptions though. If you are going to increase the performance of the helmet over its current levels and maintain the same weight you are going to have to use more expensive materials than EPS which is cheap as chips. Manufacturers are heading in the opposite direction and dropping standards and protection levels. It seems being able to sell helmets is more important to them than actually protecting people.

Hence me saying improve the safety requirements helmets have to offer along with them meeting riders needs (weight and coolness, et al). New materials can be created. Bakerlight is a great example. When it was first created no one knew what to do with it. As it was exclusive it was used inside Rolls Royse cars. You are making an assumption that nothing new can be created/discovered.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Sounds like a prime candidate for pedestrian helmets

Many of the locals are helmets I assure you

 

[Kleban]

Prevention of the accident or prevention of the injury? Are you better wearing a helmet and have 25% more close passes but hope that it will reduce any resulting injuries or better off reducing the risk of an accident in the first place by not wearing one and having fewer close passes? I was always taught that PPE was at the bottom of the hierarchy of provision and prevention of the accident at the top. YMMV.

You are correct when you say that preventing the incident comes first and that PPE is last on the hierarchy provision.
In order for 'prevention of the incident' to be realised, due care and consideration would need to be exercised by both the cyclist and other road users.

The wearing of the helmet (PPE) is the last resort to reduce the risk of serious head injury.