The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[srw]

It seems to me that on a personal level I could theoretically lose compensation in court.

Since you're in the UK that is very theoretical risk indeed. The "other" side would need to prove that on the balance of probabilities your decision to ride without a helmet contributed to your injury.

Since serious injuries to cyclists are extremely rare, and serious injuries to cyclists involving the bits of the head protected by a helmet extraordinarily rare, even before you get to the contributory negligence argument you'll have had to be seriously unlucky.

As @hatler says, over the 30 years or so of bike helmets being common not one person has lost compensation because of a decision not to wear one for ordinary cycling. (There is one, slightly odd, case, involving a race event, but that's not relevant to most of us.)

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Blame the guitar man


I've read all 200+ pages now (I feel one really should if one is to be taken seriously when commenting) and I fear I cannot add anything to the debate that hasn't already been said, bar one thing, namely:
It's one more person convinced by the arguments within to remove their helmet.

I *feel* safer with one however this has I believe been shown to be erroneous in this thread.

The only evidence I have been swayed by has been on the side that says for whatever reason wearing a helmet isn't safer and may in fact be less safe than not wearing one (Aus/NZ/Can data being the prime source). I can find no evidence here or elsewhere to the contrary (the oft quoted 'it's obvious innit' 'saved my life...' isn't evidence).

Once I have dispensed with the personal safety aspect, the only nagging doubt that remains is the one about 'victim blaming', I am still somewhat concerned about the consequences of this should I ever become a victim.

It seems to me that on a personal level I could theoretically lose compensation in court, be berated by the public and more worryingly the police and health professionals for not wearing one should the worst occur. Being berated I can live with, losing compensation or a court case is a concern. This worry would be obviated by my continuing to wear one, albeit at an increased risk of being injured in the first place.
Against this I must balance the increased risk of injury and also, crucially, the fact that the more people that wear helmets the greater the perception of cycling being viewed as dangerous and thence the commensurate increase in risks brought about by both less cyclists and an increased chance of compulsion (both of which make *my* cycling more dangerous).

At the end of the day, for me (personal choice, informed decision), the risk of being a blamed victim is insufficient - the helmet goes.

This is how I came to be a cavalier in regards to my non helmet wearing, according to colleagues and peers.

I do still have that little doubt of guilt, the victim blaming as you say. Only because, should the worst happen, my poor wife would have to deal with the 'why didn't he wear a helmet' at my funeral.

 

[mjr]

I do still have that little doubt of guilt, the victim blaming as you say. Only because, should the worst happen, my poor wife would have to deal with the 'why didn't he wear a helmet' at my funeral.

To try to help deal with that improbable outcome, I've published my reasons at http://mjr.towers.org.uk/proj/cyclynn/helmets so I can speak for myself and show that I felt I was being reasonably prudent.

 

[newfhouse]

should the worst happen, my poor wife would have to deal with the 'why didn't he wear a helmet' at my funeral.

My wife tells me she is already well aware of my views

 

[EnPassant]

I get what you're saying @EnPassant ...but where does it end?

You don the helmet as a legal failsafe, so the victim blamers ask if you were wearing hi-viz too... then they'd question your road position, whether or not you may have done a suicidal swerve... anything to worm out of a payout or claim. It's the thin end of the wedge when it comes to cowtowing to insurers.

Saying that, i'm not telling you not to wear a helmet. Your head, your choice.

I have done some searching about the hi-viz and in fact earphones on the same basis (though personally I am an infrequent user), and although there is no dedicated sticky for either what I have found out appears to bear this out precisely in that it's equally debateable which colours are most visible in which situation (and whether headphones make much difference either).

Until such time as they bring out a better specified and *certified* helmet (if ever), for me the decision is now made, the helmet is gone and it stays gone.

Since you're in the UK that is very theoretical risk indeed. The "other" side would need to prove that on the balance of probabilities your decision to ride without a helmet contributed to your injury.

Since serious injuries to cyclists are extremely rare, and serious injuries to cyclists involving the bits of the head protected by a helmet extraordinarily rare, even before you get to the contributory negligence argument you'll have had to be seriously unlucky.

As @hatler says, over the 30 years or so of bike helmets being common not one person has lost compensation because of a decision not to wear one for ordinary cycling. (There is one, slightly odd, case, involving a race event, but that's not relevant to most of us.)

This is excellent news from both of you, additionally since I know your profession from pages passim (@hatler yes I really did read them all, I paced myself over several days with frequent rest stops ), this is of considerable extra comfort, thankyou.

This is how I came to be a cavalier in regards to my non helmet wearing, according to colleagues and peers.

I do still have that little doubt of guilt, the victim blaming as you say. Only because, should the worst happen, my poor wife would have to deal with the 'why didn't he wear a helmet' at my funeral.

As I will no longer be a mushroom head, one might say I will join the ranks of those who are both perceived as cavalier but also in actuality a roundhead .

 

[Mugshot]

As it was a pleasant all be it windy evening yesterday I decided to put a few extra miles on the clock. As I was negotiating a roundabout a cyclist joined from my left and sat in behind me for about half a mile or so. Eventually he went past and as he did he said;
"You should wear a helmet, it could save your life one day."
"Maybe you should read up on the subject a bit." I replied,
"Pardon?" he said;
"I said maybe you should read up on the subject a bit."
I think he told me to "fark off" then, although I can't be sure. He had moved ahead of me and it was a pretty strong head wind. I could have asked him about two miles further down the road when I caught him and overtook on account of his having gassed, but I couldn't be arsed.
However, I was once again reminded of the kindness of strangers.

 

[mjr]

"You should wear a helmet, it could save your life one day."
"Maybe you should read up on the subject a bit." I replied,

You're far too polite. Next time, suggest that the Bad Samaritan should stop wearing one because it could break their neck one day?

 

[Mugshot]

Ah @mjray glad you're here. I was having a little look at your blog that you linked to earlier and I wondered if I could make a little observation. It may just be me but I found it a little frustrating that when I clicked on a link it opened in the same tab rather than a new one which meant I then had to go back to continue reading your blog. It's not going to change the world or anything but I thought I'd mention it, you know, in the spirit of strangers sticking their noses in and all that

 

[mjr]

It may just be me but I found it a little frustrating that when I clicked on a link it opened in the same tab rather than a new one which meant I then had to go back to continue reading your blog.

I'll leave that in your control. In most browsers, if you middle-click or long-click on a link, it opens/can-open in a new tab. It irritates me when clicking a link opens a new window/tab like CC does by default - and that's common enough that browsers like Firefox have a preference setting that can stop it.

 

[Mugshot]

I'll leave that in your control. In most browsers, if you middle-click or long-click on a link, it opens/can-open in a new tab. It irritates me when clicking a link opens a new window/tab like CC does by default - and that's common enough that browsers like Firefox have a preference setting that can stop it.

It's that choice thing again isn't it.

 

[dellzeqq]

Woman whose breast implants exploded when a kangaroo knocked her off her bike - but they 'acted like airbags and saved her life'

• 
  
• Cyclists were attacked on the Riesling Trail in Clare Valley, South Australia
• Kangaroo sprang onto one's bicycle from a ledge before hitting the other
• Sharon Heinrich, 45, ruptured her breast implants in the Wednesday attack
• Helen Salter, 47, was left with cracked ribs and internal injuries

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-concussed-South-Australia.html#ixzz4AIqBYxve
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Breast implants for all cyclists!

but, dear Snorri, was the kangaroo wearing a helmet?

 

[mjr]

In case anyone reading this missed it, a poll about helmet use has been closed/locked because it seems helmet-wearers seem unable to stop themselves posting illogical advocacy (and some more offensive I-hope-you-get-hurt type threats that were deleted). Does wearing make one more likely to suffer something like Helmet-advocacy Tourette's?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

In case anyone reading this missed it, a poll about helmet use has been closed/locked because it seems helmet-wearers seem unable to stop themselves posting illogical advocacy (and some more offensive I-hope-you-get-hurt type threats that were deleted). Does wearing make one more likely to suffer something like Helmet-advocacy Tourette's?

Do you know the final result of said poll? I didn't vote so couldn't see it. (Although @summerdays helpfully posted an interim result)

GC

 

[mjr]

Do you know the final result of said poll? I didn't vote so couldn't see it. (Although @summerdays helpfully posted an interim result)

I voted before realising I wasn't meant to (badly-phrased question IMO) and couldn't delete my vote, so I can see it:

Would you cancel your ride if it meant riding without your helmet?

Yes don't ride.
9 vote(s)
15.5%

No
49 vote(s)
84.5%

 

[snorri]

The words "your helmet" were confusing and made the poll useless.
Non wearers are often asked "Where's your h'", so presumably there are a lot of helmets bearing our names and gathering dust on cycle shop shelves somewhere.