The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[mjr]

I have come to the reluctant conclusion that there are a lot of drama queens in the UK.

How do we wake the helmet fanatics up to this? People are unsurprisingly hostile if you challenge them quite that directly and remain unconvinced with arguments like "the number of people who claim to be saved by helmets far exceeds the numbers with injured heads pre-helmet".

What about medications? I have seen enough literature to suggest that the side effects are not worth it but do we follow these?

We don't follow blindly, but we read the evidence, consider it and each actor (patients, doctors, regulators...) does what they consider to be best. I hope you never suffer an illness where you take some of the disputed drugs, but if you do then you know that there aren't a load of people screaming about how you're selfish and evil if you don't take the drugs that seem to have hurt you - well, except for maybe the Daily Mail and its ilk. I fully support my relative who stopped taking the now-withdrawn cerivastatin and with what we now know after Bayer was sued, that was a smart move.

Now compare that with the massive public health screwup that is cycle helmets...

 

[Licramite]

OK, lets give the benefit of the doubt and assume that when you said cycling at speed you meant cycling in a close group TT, not just cycling quickly. Now what about the rest of them?

Maybe you could help me out with this one too, unfortunately Licramite hasn't been back to let us know how a helmet helps.

I never said a helmet would help - I was saying cycling on public highways - is dangerous .... MOD EDITED

 

[martint235]

I never said a helmet would help - I was saying cycling on public highways - is dangerous MOD EDITED

Sorry but I disagree. Cycling on public highways isn't dangerous. If it was dangerous, I wouldn't do it every day. Yes there are risks but those risks can be mitigated as shown by the fact I don't get knocked off and injured on a daily basis.

Rather than get tied up in semantics I would suggest that danger = a risk that cannot be mitigated against happening, only against the consequences.

However there is absolutely nothing to suggest that a helmet would help to mitigate those risks or to serve much of a purpose should the risk become a reality.

 

[MontyVeda]

Sorry but I disagree. Cycling on public highways isn't dangerous. If it was dangerous, I wouldn't do it every day. Yes there are risks but those risks can be mitigated as shown by the fact I don't get knocked off and injured on a daily basis.

Rather than get tied up in semantics I would suggest that danger = a risk that cannot be mitigated against happening, only against the consequences.

However there is absolutely nothing to suggest that a helmet would help to mitigate those risks or to serve much of a purpose should the risk become a reality.

i wouldn't bother... @Licramite claims people are idiots because they don't wear the same type of hat as he ...it speaks volumes.

 

[snorri]

I despair again, again and again

Cut and paste from a regional newspaper........
The Year 11 pupil, from Brookfield School, was lucky to walk away with just bruises. He was not wearing a helmet.
His school has since issued a warning to all cyclists to wear helmets
‘We’ve always placed an emphasis on our pupils being safe and wearing helmets and we’re using this incident to reinforce that. It’s something we’re very rigid about.’
The school has sent out safety information to all its parents and is doing nightly checks at the school gates.

 

[MontyVeda]

I despair again, again and again

Cut and paste from a regional newspaper........
The Year 11 pupil, from Brookfield School, was lucky to walk away with just bruises. He was not wearing a helmet.
His school has since issued a warning to all cyclists to wear helmets
‘We’ve always placed an emphasis on our pupils being safe and wearing helmets and we’re using this incident to reinforce that. It’s something we’re very rigid about.’
The school has sent out safety information to all its parents and is doing nightly checks at the school gates.

Were the bruises on his head though?

 

[martint235]

I despair again, again and again

Cut and paste from a regional newspaper........
The Year 11 pupil, from Brookfield School, was lucky to walk away with just bruises. He was not wearing a helmet.
His school has since issued a warning to all cyclists to wear helmets
‘We’ve always placed an emphasis on our pupils being safe and wearing helmets and we’re using this incident to reinforce that. It’s something we’re very rigid about.’
The school has sent out safety information to all its parents and is doing nightly checks at the school gates.

Wouldn't it be better to check in the morning?

But aside from that, what are they going to do? Stop a child cycling home if he/she doesn't have a helmet? Confiscate the bike? How does the child then get home?

Some people shouldn't be allowed to run schools. They shouldn't really be allowed out in to the community.

 

[srw]

Doesn't that stem from a reduction in soft road user numbers, for instance more children driven to school than walking or using public transport?

That's certainly one suggestion, but I believe (I'm going from memory) that when you normalise for that factor it proves to be incorrect.

 

[MontyVeda]

How would these 141 pages best be summarised I wonder?

As far as i can tell, there seems to be several popular lines of discussion;

1. It's no big deal popping a helmet on and I generally feel safer with it than without... it's just part of the 'kit' and I like it.
2. Wearing a helmet gives the impression that cycling is dangerous when it isn't and promotes a negative image of a healthy activity.
   
3. Cycling is dangerous so some form of head protection is better than nothing
4. The polystyrene hat they call a 'helmet' is badly designed and they need to design something more effective
5. If you don't wear a helmet you're an idiot
6. If you do wear a helmet you're wearing it because you're ignorant and/or have been brainwashed.
7. A helmet saved a life because I or someone else said so (often includes photos of battered heads and broken helmets)
8. How can you possibly know if it saved a life?

There's many more points of view but those above seem to crop up more frequently:

Regarding the first point... 'it's no big deal and it's part of the kit'... i can live that. folk are free to wear what they want.
The second point is possibly closest to my POV, but I don't think that the existence of cycle helmets puts that many off cycling.
The third... 'cycling is dangerous' is an argument that's never going to end... is all a case of how one perceives danger. Each to their own.
The forth... 'we need better helmets if they're going to be effective' is my least favourite line of debate
The fifth... that only comes from idiots
The sixth... well... I've used it but it's patronising, rude, and best avoided if possible
The seventh and eighth go hand in hand and like whether cycling is dangerous or not, is an argument that'll never end.

that's my overall take on it anyway

 

[martint235]

The first is fine, people can wear what they want but I would prefer they did so with the full facts about how the helmet will behave in real world scenarios.

 

[MontyVeda]

The first is fine, people can wear what they want but I would prefer they did so with the full facts about how the helmet will behave in real world scenarios.

That'll be closer to the sixth point.

edited to add... my preferred choice of cycling headwear was and still is a gut feeling. I don't feel i need to seek the 'full facts' to make my choice so why should others who make different choices? Go with your gut, i say.

 

[martint235]

That'll be closer to the sixth point.

Not sure. Ignorance to me suggests you could do something to rectify it but the information just isn't available for an informed choice

 

[RichardB]

Truly an illuminating thread. Now we want to make seat belts and airbags illegal. Again everyone else got it wrong.

Not quite. I said that as a kind of thought-experiment (a bit like the 'spike in the steering wheel' idea) to consider a way of protecting the innocent road user (including car passengers) while making the person with most influence over the risk face the full consequences of his/her actions. There's a difference between thinking aloud and calling for a change in the law, and I thought you might have spotted that.

How would these 141 pages best be summarised I wonder?

As far as i can tell, there seems to be several popular lines of discussion;

1. It's no big deal popping a helmet on and I generally feel safer with it than without... it's just part of the 'kit' and I like it.
2. Wearing a helmet gives the impression that cycling is dangerous when it isn't and promotes a negative image of a healthy activity.

I do wear a helmet for my commute, and may or may not for leisure rides. It depends - being quite frank here - on whether my wife is around when I set off. She would worry if I didn't wear one, and I don't feel the need to alarm her unnecessarily, so I stick it on. For my own preference, I probably wouldn't bother for normal road riding, but I suppose I calculate that not upsetting my wife is more important to me than the minor inconvenience of wearing a helmet. Wearing a helmet (and hi-viz at night) means that she supports my cycling, and that's worth a lot to me.

We will have The Conversation one day, but for now ... meh. Number 2 I fully endorse.

 

[growingvegetables]

Some people shouldn't be allowed to run schools. They shouldn't really be allowed out in to the community.

+1001.

And I'm a teacher!

 

[ufkacbln]

I despair again, again and again

Cut and paste from a regional newspaper........
The Year 11 pupil, from Brookfield School, was lucky to walk away with just bruises. He was not wearing a helmet.
His school has since issued a warning to all cyclists to wear helmets
‘We’ve always placed an emphasis on our pupils being safe and wearing helmets and we’re using this incident to reinforce that. It’s something we’re very rigid about.’
The school has sent out safety information to all its parents and is doing nightly checks at the school gates.

We had a child killed locally last year after a fall on ice anf a head injury


Somehow the School did not feel any need to offer advice on helmets