The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[Justinslow]

You may well be right Justin, there may be certain cycling scenarios where the risk of falling is increased and therefore the wearing of a helmet may be beneficial provided the boxes where a helmet may help are ticked. However, the fact that certain scenarios present more opportunties to fall off should not be used as a stick to beat every other bare headed cyclist. The people that want a mandatory helmet law (and I suspect there's an awful lot that say they are pro-choice when they are nothing of the sort) would have you believe that the family having a pootle down the canal path on a Sunday afternoon are as likely to be involved in a pile up and be at risk of a head injury as a 25mph chain gang.
BTW Cunobelin is being a little disingenuous, we know he wears a helmet on his bike when it's icy for example as the risk of falling is greater, the obvious way to prevent the accident would be to not use the bicycle.

That's a good post. But, how many accidents has Steve Abraham had in all his miles - not many apart from the ankle? A family "pootling" as you call it are just as likely to have some or none if my kids are anything to go by! My son practicing his skids, my daughter not so brave wobbling about, other cyclists coming the other way, a canal path could be a very dangerous place! I just don't think the world is "black or white" and accidents can happen anywhere and at any time. Nice post though.

 

[martint235]

But again, where's the evidence that it helped? Where is the evidence that the situation was one which the helmet has been designed for and much more importantly rigourously tested against?

In any other field, for example I used to work with vaccines, you have to prove that you have tested your product and that it does what you say it will do and that it won't cause harm. Take anecdotal evidence into this field. I inject 10 people with water, none of them get measles so I start to sell water as a measles vaccine. There would be uproar. It's the same with helmets, 10 people crash and walk away. There is absolutely no evidence too suggest the helmet helped, it was just present.

 

[Justinslow]

But again, where's the evidence that it helped? Where is the evidence that the situation was one which the helmet has been designed for and much more importantly rigourously tested against?

In any other field, for example I used to work with vaccines, you have to prove that you have tested your product and that it does what you say it will do and that it won't cause harm. Take anecdotal evidence into this field. I inject 10 people with water, none of them get measles so I start to sell water as a measles vaccine. There would be uproar. It's the same with helmets, 10 people crash and walk away. There is absolutely no evidence too suggest the helmet helped, it was just present.

Go back to the original 1st post in this thread, evidence is not required and you should not be asking for it.

 

[mjr]

BTW Cunobelin is being a little disingenuous, we know he wears a helmet on his bike when it's icy for example as the risk of falling is greater, the obvious way to prevent the accident would be to not use the bicycle.

Or to fit spiked tyres. But maybe he learned from his past mistakes? I feel I have after wearing a helmet to enable going out when it was too icy and crashing (no head impact, just an aggravted neck injury). I am fully aware of risk compensation and still fell for it.

 

[Justinslow]

But again, where's the evidence that it helped? Where is the evidence that the situation was one which the helmet has been designed for and much more importantly rigourously tested against?

In any other field, for example I used to work with vaccines, you have to prove that you have tested your product and that it does what you say it will do and that it won't cause harm. Take anecdotal evidence into this field. I inject 10 people with water, none of them get measles so I start to sell water as a measles vaccine. There would be uproar. It's the same with helmets, 10 people crash and walk away. There is absolutely no evidence too suggest the helmet helped, it was just present.

Maybe we should start attaching helmets to mice and monkeys and inflict some severe impacts then.......

 

[mjr]

Go back to the original 1st post in this thread, evidence is not required and you should not be asking for it.

Go back to it yourself. It says not to demand it or insist on it, not that it shouldn't be asked for ever.

 

[martint235]

The first post is slightly contradictory in that it says that I can't insist on evidence but it also says that the efficacy of helmets is up for discussion. Without testing its would be difficult to establish efficacy.

As to using mice, if you think that's the limit of 21st century testing, knock yourself out. Pun intended

 

[Mugshot]

Or to fit spiked tyres.

I don't think I said there was only one solution. My point was that (sorry Cunobelin if I have this wrong) he seemed to be suggesting that rather than wearing what you believe will offer you some protection should things go pear shaped in a given scenario, you avoid the scenario.

 

[Justinslow]

Go back to it yourself. It says not to demand it or insist on it, not that it shouldn't be asked for ever.

Ok, there is no scientific evidence for this crash, just facts as I know them-
There was a crash,
The rider was wearing a helmet,
His head hit the ground,
He was knocked out,
He was concused,
Everybody in attendance including the emergency services said his helmet saved his life.
That is all.
Had his chin hit the ground first I expect nobody would have said his helmet saved his life.

As an aside, a medical consultant, friends with my wife, once said - if your children ride bikes make sure they wear full face protection not just on the top of their head, due to the number of jaw and teeth related injuries they had seen caused by bicycle accidents.

 

[Dan B]

As to using mice

How do you get them to stay put? And don't they mess up your hair?

 

[Mugshot]

Had his chin hit the ground first I expect nobody would have said his helmet saved his life.

I'll bet they would have, they would have said it if he'd grazed his knee.

 

[Justinslow]

The first post is slightly contradictory in that it says that I can't insist on evidence but it also says that the efficacy of helmets is up for discussion. Without testing its would be difficult to establish efficacy.

As to using mice, if you think that's the limit of 21st century testing, knock yourself out. Pun intended

I was being sarcastic mate the last thing I would want to do his hit some poor little fluffy sweet mouse over the head with a hammer to prove that something placed Inbetween said hammer and head offers some level of protection!

 

[Profpointy]

(snipped)...

As an aside, a medical consultant, friends with my wife, once said - if your children ride bikes make sure they wear full face protection not just on the top of their head, due to the number of jaw and teeth related injuries they had seen caused by bicycle accidents.

Although I dare say a full face helmet would indeed give more protection - I wear one on my motorcyle - you have to wonder at so say intelligent people thinking it's remotely practical / comfortable on a bike. As it happens I don't wear a cycle helmet these days, but didn't particularly find wearing one uncomfortable - but full face? No !

A mate of mind broke his jaw caving - full face caving helmets, or building site helmets - just nonsense. How about leather suits for cycling - gravel rash can be nasty you know. You have to wonder how people come out with guff like this without though, never mind practical experience

 

[Justinslow]

I hit some black ice and fell off my bike.
I hit my head on the road.
I was wearing a woolly hat.
I just had a bruise.
Which proves a woolly hat saved my life.

Just asking, did you get knocked out and were you concused?

 

[Profpointy]

I hit some black ice and fell off my bike.
I hit my head on the road.
I was wearing a woolly hat.
I just had a bruise.
Which proves a woolly hat saved my life.

a yes but woolly hat is the wrong answer - you shouldn't have fallen off in the first place rather than compensating with a dubios piece of safety equipment..


(sorry, couldn't resist)