The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[Justinslow]

that won't sway him since he firmly believes that cycling is dangerous.

The type of riding I partake in can be considered dangerous - fast road, close proximity to others and fast mtb for which I wear a dedicated mtb helmet.

 

[ufkacbln]

By the way when talking of pub helmets, shouldn't you be focusing your attentions on the reasons why people fall over and bang their heads - excessive alcohol, after all helmets are only a last line of defence.

... or to rephrase:

Shouldn't you be focusing your attentions on the reasons why cyclists bang their heads - after all helmets are only a last line of defence.

 

[Justinslow]

some good in some cases does not mean good overall. The stats indcate nit good overall, so if we accept they are good in some cases (which I do) then it logically follows they are bad in other cases else we would see good on average, and we don't. Plausible reasons are bigger head = more hits, risk compensation by wearer and passing cars, and extra leverage increasing likelihood of neck injuries. All these are perfectly plausable - and the bigger head thing is quite obviously true. Hence balancing good and bad is quite reasonable. Also seeing as we know there's some extra risk, the sceptics need to accept (not all do I fear) that they must do some good occasionally.

Good fair post.

 

[martint235]

@Justinslow

The arguments are very much circular and nothing new has surfaced. You are also not going to convince them. You probably know this but you will find that what is listed below is quite a challenge to dispute.

1. A 30 min video clip of morning commuting cyclists crossing either London Bridge or Waterloo Bridge will show you that the vast majority are helmeted.
2. All those who are undertaking the current distance challenge such as Steve Abrahams, Kurt Searvogel, Kajsa Tyler, Bruce Berkeley are all wearing the plastic hat (helmet)
3. UCI and all sports events that I have seen in cycling all wear helmets
4. On the other hand on weekends and away from built up areas or running short errands you would see less people wear helmets.

I suppose people do make assessments. There will be always be claims that helmets are worn for marketing reasons or that people are misinformed.

It can be reasonably assumed that Cyclechat cannot be the sole brains trust in this debate and the majority out there are wrong. Once people ask you to wear a helmet for gardening its called clutching at straws and it time to move on.

So because so many people copy other people for no scientific reason, that in itself is a reason to join them?
The UCI made helmet wearing mandatory against the wishes of those best able to assess the risk, the riders. It was a knee jerk reaction to an event where it is unlikely a modern helmet would have made a discernable difference. Surprisingly they haven't come up with a way to protect collarbones.

But carry on wearing a plastic hat and then bemoan that there aren't enough people cycling to achieve critical mass necessary to change how infrastructure is developed

 

[ufkacbln]

All those who are undertaking the current distance challenge such as Steve Abrahams, Kurt Searvogel, Kajsa Tyler, Bruce Berkeley are all wearing the plastic hat (helmet)

Nothing to do with teh fact that they all have helmet companies paying them?

UCI and all sports events that I have seen in cycling all wear helmets

The RAC/ ACU also insist the same for sports driving, is that an effective argument for all drivers to wear them

 

[Justinslow]

OK, I'll play: no, they're not liars but they are mistaken. They are crashing, smashing a helmet and taking that as confirmation, which has various problems, not least that the helmet may have helped cause the impact (by some combination of the various possible methods already mentioned - this would explain why there is no significant population-level benefit) and that it's often difficult to tell if a smashed helmet compressed and absorbed energy before breaking up.

If you want a really vexing puzzle, try to find full crash test dummy tests of cycle helmets. The standard test is a disembodied head. The most I've seen publish is tests with a limbless torso. Why?

I looked because I was wondering whether a dummy with real flailing limbs launched from a bicycle (say a classic over-the-handlebars front-wheel-jam crash) is more likely to suffer a head impact if a helmet is strapped to the head, thereby slightly enlarging and weighting it. Isn't that a fairly obvious thing to wonder? Shouldn't the car industry test rigs be able to do this fairly easily? So why isn't anyone trying it? (Conspiracy theory: a motoring firm has done it and not published unhelpful-to-motoring results.)

The other thing I would note is that NZ is indeed a different road environment to the UK - it's far MORE dangerous, based on their road casualty statistics. So helmets should be more important there, not ineffective as it seems. (I have never visited Australia.)

Another good post, thanks.
NZ being more dangerous I wonder if it could be to do with the isolated nature of some accidents and poor response times due to very rural locations (outside of the cities and towns)

 

[ufkacbln]

The type of riding I partake in can be considered dangerous - fast road, close proximity to others and fast mtb for which I wear a dedicated mtb helmet.

Been here before

Your decision to ride in what YOU consider a dangerous manner and as a result wear a helmet

However why not recognise that someone else can with equal validity decide that they are not choosing to ride in a dangerous manner and decide NOT to wear a helmet?

 

[Mugshot]

Nothing to do with teh fact that they all have helmet companies paying them?

I don't know about the helmet companies paying them, however it is as far as I'm aware in the rules, so wear one or be disqualified.

 

[Mugshot]

HERES a link to Steves official challenge page, have a look at the picture of him in the top right.

 

[Justinslow]

Lets make it very, very simple for you?


Having parked my bike, I was walking down the street and slipped on ice, banging my head

My helmet protected my head, is this claim a lie?

My injury was less severe because of the helmet - is this claim a lie?

If I claim this as evidence that pedestrians would benefit from helmets ... Is this a lie?

Not at all, I'd say you were really lucky you still had your helmet on, except you don't wear a helmet so you couldn't say that, instead you'd have a really sore head.

 

[Justinslow]

... or to rephrase:

Shouldn't you be focusing your attentions on the reasons why cyclists bang their heads - after all helmets are only a last line of defence.

The type of riding I partake in can be considered dangerous - fast road, close proximity to others and fast mtb for which I wear a dedicated mtb helmet.

 

[ufkacbln]

Not at all, I'd say you were really lucky you still had your helmet on, except you don't wear a helmet so you couldn't say that, instead you'd have a really sore head.

So, apart from the fact that you are showing total ignorance in your assumption of my helmet wearing habits.........

I love the reply

In a cyclist such an anecdote is life-saving

Yet in a pedestrian it isn't?

People die in such falls, are you genuinely saying that helmets have no place in preventing such an injury

 

[Justinslow]

Been here before

Your decision to ride in what YOU consider a dangerous manner and as a result wear a helmet

However why not recognise that someone else can with equal validity decide that they are not choosing to ride in a dangerous manner and decide NOT to wear a helmet?

Absolutely fair post and absolutely 100% agree with that, and way back I think it was yourself who told me I was riding in a dangerous way inches from the rear wheel of other bikes.
So therefore don't try to tell me what to do.

 

[Justinslow]

So, apart from the fact that you are showing total ignorance in your assumption of my helmet wearing habits.........

I love the reply

In a cyclist such an anecdote is life-saving

Yet in a pedestrian it isn't?

People die in such falls, are you genuinely saying that helmets have no place in preventing such an injury

Are you genuinely saying pedestrians should wear helmets even though they are near ineffective (not totally ineffective though, we know that)?

 

[ufkacbln]

Absolutely fair post and absolutely 100% agree with that, and way back I think it was yourself who told me I was riding in a dangerous way inches from the rear wheel of other bikes.
So therefore don't try to tell me what to do.

Care to justify this absurd claim that you are being told what to do?