Pro-helmet article on BBC One Show right now

[ufkacbln]

1% of head injury admissions are cyclists, 40% are falls and 60% alcohol related...............

What a load of crap, any 10 year old will tell you that percentages are 100 not 101 .......................

I could also point out that 12% are car drivers, 34% car occupants etc.


You can be a cyclist and have a fall, you can be drunk and have a fall, drink and drive........ or is that too difficult?

The elephant in the room (sorry Arch) is still your avoidance of the fact that cyclists form a small minority of head injury admissions, yet are the only ones for whom helmets are advocated.





Lets take two patients, one a cyclist, and one a pedestrian...... They both have identical falls, two identical injuries, both equally preventable, yet you advocate preventing one and allowing the other!

Is a head injury to a pedestrian less traumatic, less painful, less debilitation and therefore more acceptable?

 

[raindog]

Another thread from hell.

 

[totallyfixed]

Here's my theory, non helmet wearers have greater awareness and cycle craft and therefore are better cyclists and less prone to accidents.

 

[yello]

Is that a theory or a hypothesis? I never know the difference. Either way I encourage unsubstantiated conjecture (be it theory or hypothesis), the wackier the better. More please.

 

[Crackle]

Care to expand on that one?



How on earth is what I'm saying emotional blackmail? My argument is that having one on is better than not when in a crash. At no point have I mentioned family members or anything like that.
From what I'm read in this thread so far the anti-helmet argument seems to consist of either

1. It's someones personal choice if they do or don't wear a helmet
2. A helmet will make a crash worse
3. A helmet won't make enough of a difference in a crash so there is no point wearing one
4. There is no research to suggest helmets make things safer and any numbers quoted by pro-helmet people are pulled out of their arse.

1) It is your choice yes, but if you did fall of and crash, and got hurt through not wearing a helmet then it would be your loved ones who would be dealing with the brunt of the emotional trauma, not you.

2) Now who's pulling stuff out of their arse?

3) As I think it was stated earlier with some suspiciously round numbers, a helmet might be able to withstand 100 joules of forces, and a human skull 700 joules, that means that with the helmet you have 800 joules of resistance, without 700, for the sake of an unnoticeable weight and having to put it on I'd rather have that extra 12.5%. It would be interesting to see where those figures came from though...

4) Mainly its the assumption that having an inch of hard polystyrene and some plastic, between your head and the ground when you hit would be overall beneficial.



edit: for some reason my font sizes are messed up

My mistake, I mixed you up with another poster.

I can't quite work the rest out. You seem to have condensed other peoples arguments to your synopsis and then answered it without actually answering any of the points raised. So I'll leave that for the mo.

Presumably you've seen this site. There's a lot there to read but it's worth the effort and will lead you on to a lot of other studies as well.

 

[downfader]

I hate pro-helmet articles like this. Not because of the idiot comments on both sides, not because of the evidence on both sides, no...

..because it causes HUGE arguments in my family who refuse to listen to reason over evidence and say that I deserve not to get NHS treatment if I didnt wear one.

Nobody wants to accept responsibility. That dealing with the causes of a crash is the issue and that we'd be defering responsibility to a peice of polystyrene with little forensic testing and analysis.

I might as well give up cycling. The battle is lost.

 

[Andy_R]

Can somebody point me to the FACTS! that say a helmet does not help at all, as I am having trouble finding that bit.

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

Anyone got any Wurthers Originals

 

[Dan B]

I wonder how many of the people saying "I don't even notice I'm wearing a helmet" have theirs correctly fitted. The advice I've read says that the chin strap should be tight enough that you can't get more than two fingers between strap and chin - now, I know we're all different shapes and sizes and some people may find that comfortable, but I like being able to open my mouth without having it dig in.

 

[evilclive]

On a slightly more neutral note - why are helmet debates so long and bitter?

Probably the same reason why complete strangers will tell me I ought to be wearing a helmet. The difference here is that there is the time to explain why not, and that time gets used.

 

[Peter91]

Probably the same reason why complete strangers will tell me I ought to be wearing a helmet. The difference here is that there is the time to explain why not, and that time gets used.

I wouldn't go out of my way to tell someone they should be if I saw someone not wearing one in real life, however this is a forum for discussion, so I'll take part.

 

[evilclive]

I wouldn't go out of my way to tell someone they should be if I saw someone not wearing one in real life, however this is a forum for discussion, so I'll take part.

So you agree with my answer to your question :-)

 

[User169]

I wonder how many of the people saying "I don't even notice I'm wearing a helmet" have theirs correctly fitted. The advice I've read says that the chin strap should be tight enough that you can't get more than two fingers between strap and chin - now, I know we're all different shapes and sizes and some people may find that comfortable, but I like being able to open my mouth without having it dig in.

A colleague of mine discovered his wasn't fitted properly after having been strangled by the strap. He had to have quite a bit of surgery to reconstruct his windpipe.

 

[screenman]

AndyR how can that count it is Australian.

Blimey he must have done it up very tight.

 

[abo]

Leaving aside the pros and cons, why do we seem to be subjected to weekly chat show/ phone-in discussions/ newspaper articles about this? Often conducted by/ contributed to/ edited by, by people who know little or nothing about the subject. The elephant in the room is the possibility of COMPULSION, and not only in regard to helmets, but also hi-viz, cycle lanes, bells, day-lights and so on, and so on, imposed on cyclists by those with very little knowledge or experience.

Meh if they start on hi-viz then the bike goes in the skip and stays there. Flourescent looks as stupid as traditional bike helmets IMHO and should never be seen outside a building site

 

[Dan B]

Better to look stupid than to get hit by a car driver though, eh? I mean, there's no point being dead right if you're dead. And it's not just about the effect on you, think about the effect on your loved ones and even on the poor driver