The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[mjr]

Who but yourself is suggesting that armour is required for cycling to the shops. And would it need to be a full suit?

Everybody who dons a helmet for anything where it's not required by race regs.

And no but I don't really understand how people decide to protect only the top of their skulls against impacts but device it's not necessary to protect other critical body parts like the torso, or even the front or lower back of their skulls. I feel that shows that the top of the skull doesn't need it either, yet it's donned saying that it can't hurt, yet there are big variations in helmet use rates while the injury rates stay remarkably unchanged but the numbers of users reportjng crashes that they were "saved" from seem to increase. Helmets seem to be the cycling equivalents of those dangerous socket covers pushed to misguided parents.

 

[classic33]

Everybody who dons a helmet for anything where it's not required by race regs.

And no but I don't really understand how people decide to protect only the top of their skulls against impacts but device it's not necessary to protect other critical body parts like the torso, or even the front or lower back of their skulls. I feel that shows that the top of the skull doesn't need it either, yet it's donned saying that it can't hurt, yet there are big variations in helmet use rates while the injury rates stay remarkably unchanged but the numbers of users reportjng crashes that they were "saved" from seem to increase. Helmets seem to be the cycling equivalents of those dangerous socket covers pushed to misguided parents.

Those who choose to wear helmets haven't said you need to don armour for a ride to the shops. There's only you advocating that.

And I'm speaking as someone admitted with thirteen clear cracks to the skull, complaining the head still hurt a week after a simple fall.

 

[I like Skol]

Those who choose to wear helmets haven't said you need to don armour for a ride to the shops

Am I missing something here? Surely a helmet is a form of armour?

 

[classic33]

Am I missing something here? Surely a helmet is a form of armour?

Which doesn't cover any of the parts of the body mentioned in his reply.

Body armour for cycling is available that will cover and protect those parts of the body mentioned. Normally only worn in downhill mountain biking, he's advocating cycling to the shops requires it.

 

[mjr]

Those who choose to wear helmets haven't said you need to don armour for a ride to the shops. There's only you advocating that.

No, I am not. I say it is unnecessary.

Also, I note the change from "suggesting" to "said" here - some may not say it but they suggest it with their action.

 

[mjr]

Am I missing something here? Surely a helmet is a form of armour?

It is indeed. I don't understand people who decide to wear one bit of armour (helmet) but not others. It seems rather inconsistent, doesn't it?

 

[Salty seadog]

Three weeks ago I was doored by a parked driver and briefly knocked unconscious when my head hit the ground. My head is OK now but I also sustained a broken collarbone in the impact. I was wearing a buff at the time, so I can confirm that the buff saved my life. Get a buff, people!!!!!*


*Or don't, and be resigned to having your brains splattered all over the road. Not to mention cold ears. Do ride well clear of the door zone tho.

It's all I ever use.....

 

[tamiya]

If everybody was made to drive only Mini Mokes = No Doorings!

Them MOKE drivers on Prisoner look pretty cheerful too, usually smiling. Puttering around in a MOKE might starve off depression & avoid the blues.

 

[Fab Foodie]

It's all I ever use.....

I like cycling in the buff too....

 

[Salty seadog]

Three weeks ago I was doored by a parked driver and briefly knocked unconscious when my head hit the ground. My head is OK now but I also sustained a broken collarbone in the impact. I was wearing a buff at the time, so I can confirm that the buff saved my life. Get a buff, people!!!!!*


*Or don't, and be resigned to having your brains splattered all over the road. Not to mention cold ears. Do ride well clear of the door zone tho.

Whilst being glad that my head wear of choice (a nice versatile buff) has been irrefutabley proved to save lives I must confess there are days when I don't wear one. I see this as a personal choice and would never castigate anyone for their choice. If the government ever makes wearing a buff compulsory I may stop wearing one altogether and get a skullcap.

 

[simongt]

I was hit from behind last April and must have been knocked unconcious, as I still have absolutely no recollection of my fall from the bike. I remember the impact, next thing I knew, I was lying flat on my back with a broken right femur, surrounded by concerned folk. My bash hat was damaged, so just as well I was wearing one eh - ?
As in my case, you can't always see whats coming to be able to take any sort of evasive action.

 

[briantrumpet]

It is indeed. I don't understand people who decide to wear one bit of armour (helmet) but not others. It seems rather inconsistent, doesn't it?

No.

After two months off work with post-concussion syndrome, despite no visible damage to my brain, and the sobering thought that the 129 slices of my scanned brain contain everything I know to be me, wearing something that might reduce severe trauma to the thing that defines me doesn't strike me as the slightest bit inconsistent. I'd still be me if I lost any other part of me, but losing a brain is in a rather different order. Once you've felt your brain sending weird signals round your body for a couple of months, and realised how both fragile it is and how slow it is to heal (if you're lucky), you might end up with a different perspective. I hope you never do.

Funnily enough, I've been cycling over 50 years, and never hit my head. The one time I did could have easily killed me. That's why I'll not be returning to being lidless now. But each to his own.

 

[I like Skol]

No.

After two months off work with post-concussion syndrome, despite no visible damage to my brain, and the sobering thought that the 129 slices of my scanned brain contain everything I know to be me, wearing something that might reduce severe trauma to the thing that defines me doesn't strike me as the slightest bit inconsistent. I'd still be me if I lost any other part of me, but losing a brain is in a rather different order. Once you've felt your brain sending weird signals round your body for a couple of months, and realised how both fragile it is and how slow it is to heal (if you're lucky), you might end up with a different perspective. I hope you never do.

Funnily enough, I've been cycling over 50 years, and never hit my head. The one time I did could have easily killed me. That's why I'll not be returning to being lidless now. But each to his own.

Been there, done that! I was knocked off my bike and suffered a head injury with unconsciousness. I didn't experience the same medium term symptoms as you but the impact was hard enough to not only fracture my skull but also shatter 2 vertebra in my neck. I wasn't wearing a helmet and have essentially walked away unscathed (not in reality, but to the casual observer it would appear so), but this is kind of indicative of the whole helmet wearing debate and tribalism. The chance of the serious accident is slim, the chance of suffering a life changing head injury as a result is many, many times less, to the point of being almost fleetingly insignificant when combined. This doesn't make it any less catastrophic for the poor person that does suffer one of the rare unfortunate outcomes where a helmet may have actually helped (I'm sure such situations could occur), but you have to wonder what level of risk is actually removed when one decides to wear a cycle helmet? This is the reason for the polar views. The fear of the serious injury makes the helmet choice a no-brainer (no pun intended) while the reality of the risk makes the decision to lid up one of irrational paranoia.
Personally, and without any widely approved and accepted statistics to back this up, I suspect you are probably more likely to die from food poisoning, or suffer a fatal heart attack, or (and I don't quite know how to put this tactfully so please don't be offended) be rendered incapable as a result of suffering a stroke! In fact, if it weren't such a serious subject, I would almost wager good money that you are more likely to win the lottery than be saved from life changing head injuries by wearing a cycle helmet.

 

[tom73]

Wear a lid or don’t wear a lid in the end it’s personal choice. I do it’s none negotiable in our house Mrs 73 has seen too many bashed in heads over the years. To be fair it’s the only thing she laid down long before I even got a bike. She’s more than happy to leave the rest of my cycling to me. So for peace of mind and a happy Mrs 73 l’m happy to wear one.

I’ve worn enough PPE over the years to know that they all have limits and a cycling helment will be little use in a large scale accident. Equally I have over the years treated many a very minor head injury which often are the once to watch. Which a lid will help minimise the risks. A few years a ago I was hit by a car when I was crossing the road I ended up 1/2 way up the windscreen in fact I bulls-eyed it. If I had hit my head a few mm either way it would have been game over. Head injuries many a time are like that will wearing a lid swing it more in your favour who really knows. Like I said it’s personal choice I’ve never been a member of every one should wear one club.

The big problem as I see it is that the lid , no lid has become such a red rag to a bull debate within cycling it’s now become yet another thing to bash us with by the anti brigrade yet another smoke screen coving thevreally issues. Yes as cyclists we have a duty to be safe and keep others safe when out on the road but equally everyone else has too. Wearing all the PPE and flashing lights in world won’t change attitudes or stop the knob in a tin box we all know are out and about. But if we draw a line under it and leave it to personal choice and focus on the real issues that can and will make everyone safer then maybe we stand a chance to change attitudes and stop our other halves wondering if your coming home in one piece.

 

[briantrumpet]

Personally, and without any widely approved and accepted statistics to back this up, I suspect you are probably more likely to die from food poisoning, or suffer a fatal heart attack, or (and I don't quite know how to put this tactfully so please don't be offended) be rendered incapable as a result of suffering a stroke! In fact, if it weren't such a serious subject, I would almost wager good money that you are more likely to win the lottery than be saved from life changing head injuries by wearing a cycle helmet.

That might well all be true, but in each case I will examine if there is something I can do to reduce the risk, and whether that risk mitigation is proportionate to the improvement in outcomes. The latest statisitics from a meta-analysis of data suggest over a 50% improvement in outcomes for traumatic brain injury (TBI) through wearing a helmet: that's a not-insignificant reduction, and potentially life-saving choice I'm happy to make, especially given my recent experience.