The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[growingvegetables]

It's probably more to do with the problem of secondary involvement. A DIY accident, or falling down the stairs is more likely to be a solo effort , "it was his own fault", etc etc etc. The bicycle related incidents, that are perceived to be in the majority, for the purposes of helmet debating, involve other people, and therefore the argument is becoming more about social responsibility, reducing the undoubted mental traumas inflicted on others / risk mitigation from an insurance standpoint.

I don't think you've thought through your logic ...











that DIYer's are a bunch of friendless loners with no kith and kin, whose loss will cause no mental trauma for others? And as for people who fall down stairs.

 

[martint235]

Well said, but you have to look at the fact that the proportion of bicycle riding, in situations where the head injuries occur is relatively low anyway, so the fact that the actual number of bicycle accidents / recordable head injury, is not that high, in comparison to the number of other situations that result in the head injury. That coupled with the fact that no one is willing to front the cash to enable the scientific studies required, leaves the whole thing a bit messy from a numbers / stats point of view. For example, if a cyclist is in a big accident and they wear a lid, they injure all sorts of things, but they don't sustain a head injury, it's unlikely that anyone records the injury they didn't suffer, over the injuries they did suffer. Also, there are so many things that have happened to me, whilst riding a bike, with a lid ( which I actually don't always, dependent on my assessment of the likely risks I face on the ride), which ( in my opinion) would have had a very different outcome, if they had happened without the presence of the lid, makes me think.

There's no cash because there's no need for any. Helmet manufacturers have convinced the gullible to part with their cash without having to resort to things like extensive research, testing, evidence, peer review etc. Why would they waste money on an R&D bonanza when you've already convinced the customer that what is important is the colour and the number of vents.

 

[martint235]

I'd be more concerned about the other people's insurance company's attitude.

I still don't understand who is actually suffering the mental trauma?

 

[Racing roadkill]

Goodness you have had a lot of incidents

I'm like a bloody magnet to them.

 

[Mugshot]

That coupled with the fact that no one is willing to front the cash to enable the scientific studies required, leaves the whole thing a bit messy from a numbers / stats point of view.

You would have thought there was at least one group with nice deep pockets that would be willing to stump up the cash for independent research to sort the whole mess out wouldn't you?

 

[growingvegetables]

... I've been hit square on the section of my forehead, protected by a lid, flicked up off of the road, by ( for example) a truck coming in the opposite direction...

You protect your head ... with a lid flicked up off the road?

 

[Wobblers]

I've had situations where I've been hit square on the section of my forehead, protected by a lid, flicked up off of the road, by ( for example) a truck coming in the opposite direction. These were substantial impacts, which ( I believe) would have at least stunned me momentarily, without the lid being there. Now suppose, the stunning had resulted in me wobbling under the truck's trailer. Chances are I wouldn't get away with it, but the injuries would have been recorded in such a way, as to not be overly concerned as to whether I was wearing a lid or not, they certainly wouldn't record notes to the effect, that a lid would have prevented the accident, because they wouldn't have realised that going under the truck, was a secondary incident, caused by a primary incident, which ( in my opinion) would have been negated, by the lid, and they would only have seen the result of the secondary incident, which "a helmet couldn't have helped in". Because the lid took the sting out of the initial incident, I didn't have the serious secondary incident. No one records the avoidance of the big incident, because the lid prevented it, why would they?

Ahem. The impact energy necessary to cause concussion or other minor brain injury is in the hundreds of joules - with accelerations of 50-250 gees (depending on impact duration, shorter durations allow for higher accelerations to be endured). The momentum transfer alone from such an impact as to cause "temporary stunning" would likely be sufficient to cause most cyclists to lose control - simply because a bike is not a stable object. And that is a supposition based on physics, unlike your rather lengthy chain of suppositions.

 

[Racing roadkill]

Ahem. The impact energy necessary to cause concussion or other minor brain injury is in the hundreds of joules - with accelerations of 50-250 gees (depending on impact duration, shorter durations allow for higher accelerations to be endured). The momentum transfer alone from such an impact as to cause "temporary stunning" would likely be sufficient to cause most cyclists to lose control - simply because a bike is not a stable object. And that is a supposition based on physics, unlike your rather lengthy chain of suppositions.

Not really 'suppositions', I've actually found out the hard way what happens when you get a fist sized lump of debris in an unhelmeted forehead, with a truck in close vicinity. I managed to avoid going under the wheels, but it was close, I don't recommend it.

 

[velovoice]

I've had situations where I've been hit square on the section of my forehead, protected by a lid, flicked up off of the road, by ( for example) a truck coming in the opposite direction.

Not really 'suppositions', I've actually found out the hard way what happens when you get a fist sized lump of debris in an unhelmeted forehead, with a truck in close vicinity. I managed to avoid going under the wheels, but it was close, I don't recommend it.

Sorry but I'm confused. I understand you've had a close call and didn't die or suffer serious injury - but were you wearing a helmet? Or not?

 

[ufkacbln]

In another thread there was the point that if you looked at the number of cycle accidents that required admission (Hospital Episode Statistics), it is 3 times the number of accidents recorded by the Police on. STATS19 reports

So there must be major doubts about any data

 

[mjr]

So I should wear a helmet so that the person with no control of their vehicle feels less bad about causing the accident? Or have I misunderstood what you are referring to by mental trauma?

I think that's backwards: if you want to make the injuring motorist's life easier, surely cyclists shouldn't use helmets and then society will let the motorist salve their conscience by blaming the cyclist for not taking sufficient care? Whereas if you use a helmet and then a motorist still injures you, they've fewer options for not blaming themselves. So please think of the motorists' consciences - don't use helmets.

I'd be more concerned about the other people's insurance company's attitude.

I'd be concerned about that if they were able to make helmets stick in court much, which they can't because of the unproven outcome benefit.

The insurers would probably offer a reduced payout for not using a helmet, but they'd find some reason to offer a reduced payout even if you use one, so helmet use won't help you but it would help disadvantage all other cyclists in several ways by making helmet use seem normal.

 

[martint235]

Ahem. The impact energy necessary to cause concussion or other minor brain injury is in the hundreds of joules - with accelerations of 50-250 gees (depending on impact duration, shorter durations allow for higher accelerations to be endured). The momentum transfer alone from such an impact as to cause "temporary stunning" would likely be sufficient to cause most cyclists to lose control - simply because a bike is not a stable object. And that is a supposition based on physics, unlike your rather lengthy chain of suppositions.

Not really 'suppositions', I've actually found out the hard way what happens when you get a fist sized lump of debris in an unhelmeted forehead, with a truck in close vicinity. I managed to avoid going under the wheels, but it was close, I don't recommend it.

I read McWobble's post as saying "If you're on an inherently unstable bicycle and get hit by that level of impact, it won't matter whether or not you were wearing a helmet"

 

[Milkfloat]

Picking up on the insurance comments - am I right in thinking that not wearing a helmet has never reduced the injuries payout in the UK? I am sure I read that somewhere.

 

[martint235]

I think that's backwards: if you want to make the injuring motorist's life easier, surely cyclists shouldn't use helmets and then society will let the motorist salve their conscience by blaming the cyclist for not taking sufficient care? Whereas if you use a helmet and then a motorist still injures you, they've fewer options for not blaming themselves. So please think of the motorists' consciences - don't use helmets.
.

I don't know!!!! But will someone please think of the children of whoever has, or hasn't been (I've lost track), traumatised!! I'm starting to think it's the children of the insurance exec who has had to pay out when beachball sized lump rock was kicked up by the rear wheels of one truck travelling at speed which was then deflected into the path of cyclist by a following truck with toughened windscreen. *




* I could be wrong though

 

[mjr]

In another thread there was the point that if you looked at the number of cycle accidents that required admission (Hospital Episode Statistics), it is 3 times the number of accidents recorded by the Police on. STATS19 reports

So there must be major doubts about any data

If I remember correctly, the underreporting is overwhelmingly skewed towards single-vehicle and minor injuries appearing in HES but missing from STATS19. The police reports cover almost all fatalities and most serious injuries. How much do we care about the effect of helmets on minor injuries anyway? You can trap your finger in part of a bike and it'll often show up in HES as a minor cycling injury - it seems like it introduces a lot of noise and I feel I've seen HES cycling figures used to mislead more than illuminate.

Nevertheless, it would probably be helpful to have an interface at least as good as https://www.cyclestreets.net/collisions/ is for STATS19... but for now, STATS19 still seems useful for investigating Killed/Seriously Injured.