The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

martint235

Dog on a bike
Location
Welling
Including neurosurgeon's?
Yes including neurosurgeons. A neurosurgeon spend 14+ years doing medical training. During that time, they may or may not have time to ride a bike. Almost all of their focus is on reactive work ie what to do when something has gone with the brain like how to fix it. They will also probably be able to tell you based on the accumulated evidence of generations of neurosurgery (that they have access to during training) of just what kind of impact will cause what kind of injury. Get one drunk and they will go on for hours about the evolutionary design of the skull and surrounding tissue and how good it is.

What they won't be able to do is provide similar evidence of what impact a cycling helmet is of use against because no one has ever done the tests to produce that evidence.
 
 
It's someone who's desperately out of their depth scrabbling around Google.

@CyclistStaffs - whether you choose to wear one is up to the individual, but our staff have to pick up the pieces of those who weren't

CONCERN TROLL, one of those that demonstrate their deep concern for cyclists by describing their deaths in detail. So, having basically said it was the child's fault for getting hit by the driver, we would expect the same professional detachment with regard to drivers. Oh:

WMAS ‏@OFFICIALWMAS Feb 11
WMAS Retweeted Ben Pallante

Ca7MvxAW8AANsBC.jpg


See, we told you it was icy :sad: This poor motorist ended up upside down #Redditch earlier. Thankfully no injuries.

Go home West Midlands Ambulance Service, you're drunk.
 

martint235

Dog on a bike
Location
Welling
Interesting stuff!
Before I go to the trouble of checking the references, have you?

I'm particularly looking forward to the Cochrane Database one as I've used them before. They are world recognised experts. In health care and evidence based treatment of illness and injury. Recognise something in there?
 

newfhouse

Resolutely on topic
Why is it so wrong to have the opinion that I or @fossyant or others have on here?
1. It's not supported by the available evidence.
2. It encourages the erroneous belief that cycling for normal everyday reasons is so dangerous that it requires special 'safety' equipment.
3. It promotes the idea that responsibility for safety rests mostly on the shoulders of the more vulnerable road users.
4. They look a bit crap.
 

martint235

Dog on a bike
Location
Welling
Just watched an interview with the press officer for Met helmets on the launch of a new model for Dimension Data pro team. Colour is nice. Check. Well vented. Check. Light. Check. Protection level, nope not a mention
 

Justinslow

Lovely jubbly
Location
Suffolk
1. It's not supported by the available evidence.
2. It encourages the erroneous belief that cycling for normal everyday reasons is so dangerous that it requires special 'safety' equipment.
3. It promotes the idea that responsibility for safety rests mostly on the shoulders of the more vulnerable road users.
4. They look a bit crap.
I don't know about that I think I look quite dapper in mine.
 

martint235

Dog on a bike
Location
Welling
What some people choose their bikes on the basis of......
I know. Some people take it really seriously and buy these really expensive aero bikes in the belief they will gain an aerodynamic advantage over a standard road bike based on absolutely no evidence to support.... Oh wait.
 
Top Bottom