The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[mjr]

p.s. wearing a lid in the Paris-Nice professional bunch road race seems reasonable - they were falling off way above the national average for folks riding for leisure/fitness on open roads, and their average speed is probably close to double!

I'm not so sure. Their average speed is well over double, probably nearer treble on flattish days like that, plus they pretty rarely have non-collision falls, so they're not having the sorts of single-rider low-speed over-the-handlebar crashes that Euro Norm standard cycle helmets are designed and tested for.

At the very least, the pros probably should use helmets that meet tougher standards like Snell and MIPS (Multi-directional Impact Protection System), which some teams use (notably those sponsored by by POC and Giro) but isn't actually required by the UCI even at World Tour level.

Some analyses suggest that death rates have remained roughly constant and head injuries actually slightly increased since helmets became compulsory in top-level men's racing (ProTour then WorldTour), but it's a relatively small population and there are other variables which might explain it.

 

[Profpointy]

Lewis Hamilton wears asbestos pants when racing. I don't wear them driving to the office, but Inguess my car could still catch fire ; I've seen it happen after all

 

[Tripster]

So are you saying you use head-protection when driving that is similar to your motorcycle usage?

Seems a strange comment otherwise ...

p.s. wearing a lid in the Paris-Nice professional bunch road race seems reasonable - they were falling off way above the national average for folks riding for leisure/fitness on open roads, and their average speed is probably close to double!

No
your opinion
. So at speed you are saying the helmets work ?

 

[Tripster]

My method to avoid that sort of crash is not to sprint into a narrow fence-infested street with nearly 200 other cyclists with no stopping distances between us. It's not a situation likely to occur outside of closed-road racing, so not really terribly persuasive about general public helmet use.

Regardless of how it happened and the likelyhood of that particular event happening on the road, the discussion is about the use of helmets. An accident can happen causing you to land on your back and strike your head on the road, won’t be caused by the same but can still happen. All I’m saying is either way we cannot prove it did or didn’t help. I agree no real medical check done on the rider.

 

[matticus]

Do you not see that riding in a more dangerous fashion may influence your choice of PPE?
Surely the likelihood of a head-injury would influence your choice?

Glad you said this:

All I’m saying is either way we cannot prove it did or didn’t help.

...as it does nicely undermine the whole case presented by helmet evangelists

 

[mjr]

I think I would rather crack a helmet rather than the back of my head when landing on my back though wouldn’t you ?

I think I would rather not be wearing a heavy helmet which would mean my neck can better support my head and reduce the impact speed to within what my soft hat can cushion, or possibly hold my head off the ground entirely.

Regardless of how it happened and the likelyhood of that particular event happening on the road, the discussion is about the use of helmets. An accident can happen causing you to land on your back and strike your head on the road, won’t be caused by the same but can still happen.

Yes, this discussion is about helmet use but we must not disregard the causes of crashes when evaluating possible countermeasures. We can make helmets which are brilliant at preventing concussion but their size means that they would actually cause more collisions with trees, signs, some low bridges and so on, so that's one reason why nobody uses them. No amount of arguing that "a concussion-causing accident can happen and this reduces the effects so must be worth using" would make them worth using.

Also, eliminating the cause of the accident is always better than mitigating the effects.

And finally, in my long experience of far too many crashes, I never actually hit the back of my head. I think it is very very rare for my style of transport cycling.

All I’m saying is either way we cannot prove it did or didn’t help. I agree no real medical check done on the rider.

I'd agree with both of those, but it does appear to contradict what I thought was a claim above that the helmet helped.

 

[Tripster]

size means that they would actually cause more collisions with trees, signs, some low bridges and so on,

Disagree, never seen a bridge so low it would narrowly miss my head by 1” that wearing a helmet would cause a collision. I wear a Kask Protone and its small, very small and in 46 years have never seen a bridge or metal girder as someone said across a road so low it would hit my head.

 

[Tripster]

Do you not see that riding in a more dangerous fashion may influence your choice of PPE?
Surely the likelihood of a head-injury would influence your choice?

Glad you said this:

...as it does nicely undermine the whole case presented by helmet evangelists

The debate claims helmets do not work so why would how anyone rides influence choice of helmet ? I am neither for or against helmets. I wear through choice and for reasons stated further back.

 

[Cycling_Samurai]

Cycling is a safe activity. Cyclists can expect a severe head injury once every 8,000 years of average cycling.

Wearing a helmet can increase the risk of accident. Wearing a device that increases the risk of accidents may not be the most effective way to enhance safety. It is ironic that a cracked helmet is hailed as “proof” it saved a life, while the accident may not have happened without it.

It is easy to be mislead, especially after a traumatic experience. It is important to be realistic about helmets capabilities, and to base that assessment on facts. Overestimating their protection can be dangerous. After a serious accident, it is too late to discover that bicycle helmets are not designed to protect in a serious impact.

Bicycle helmets can be insidious:

At first, they seem to protect.
They tend to increase the risk of accidents.
They do not offer adequate protection in a serious accident.
Does the protection compensate for more accidents?

That's plain rubbish. Helmets do not cause accidents. 3 out of 5 bicycle accidents involve injury to the head. Granted the number of actual bicycle accidents is relatively low. Your argument on the need to wear a helmet based on the number of actual head injuries is sound. I'll still wear a helmet to potentially avoid a more serious injury. Wearing a helmet doesn't make me more likely to have an accident.

 

[mjr]

Disagree, never seen a bridge so low it would narrowly miss my head by 1” that wearing a helmet would cause a collision. I wear a Kask Protone and its small, very small and in 46 years have never seen a bridge or metal girder as someone said across a road so low it would hit my head.

Firstly, I was discussing an anti-concussion helmet, which would be much thicker than an EN cycle helmet, maybe 6" or more, but it would reduce injuries so must be worth wearing according to all the "if it ever helps" arguments beloved by helmet users. The Kask Protone is not an anti-concussion helmet. I bet its manual includes a warning that it does not protect against concussion.

Secondly, there are definitely bridges low enough that 1" could make the difference. There's definitely one across NCN Route 51 in Bedford and I think there's another one near Walthamstow possibly on NCN 1. Some canal bridges feel that low, too. But these are much rarer than the sorts of everyday protrusion that an 6" hat would snag.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

’I watched the Paris-Nice race yesterday and the Jumbo Vista rider coming off as the street narrowed 500m after a sprint. Not going at any massive speed really but his helmet was cracked in two at the back and he looked a bit wobbly. Assessed as good to carry on. Now who can medically say on here that had he not had the helmet on he would have been exactly the same without any further injury ? No split head needing multiple stitches or a fractured skull ?

We tend to look at a cracked helmet and assume it is “proof” it saved a life.
Actually, a cracked helmet has failed to work as intended:

“The next time you see a broken helmet, suspend belief and do the most basic check – disregard the breakages and look to see if what’s left of the styrofoam has compressed. If it hasn’t you can be reasonably sure that it hasn’t saved anyone’s life.“

Polystyrene-based helmets protect by absorbing the energy of the impact through compressing the polystyrene. In a serious accident, polystyrene helmets tend to break into pieces. If the polystyrene has broken into pieces but not compressed, it has failed to work as intended.

We have a tendency to attribute causality from the timing of events. If we notice a cracked helmet and we do not have a head injury, we tend to attribute the lack of head injury to the helmet. Yet, cyclists fall with and without helmets, and rarely get a serious head injury in either case.

 

[Profpointy]

Disagree, never seen a bridge so low it would narrowly miss my head by 1” that wearing a helmet would cause a collision. I wear a Kask Protone and its small, very small and in 46 years have never seen a bridge or metal girder as someone said across a road so low it would hit my head.

I can think of one low bridge on the tow path just outside Bath, but really that misses the point. I've come off my bike after somersaulting over a car (which had pulled in front of me), and landed on my shoulder as evidenced by a bruise and friction burn. Thinking back on it and where I landed my head can't have missed the ground by much - maybe by about the thickness of a helmet.

 

[Milkfloat]

Disagree, never seen a bridge so low it would narrowly miss my head by 1” that wearing a helmet would cause a collision. I wear a Kask Protone and its small, very small and in 46 years have never seen a bridge or metal girder as someone said across a road so low it would hit my head.

Never ridden on a canal towpath?

 

[classic33]

I think I would rather not be wearing a heavy helmet which would mean my neck can better support my head and reduce the impact speed to within what my soft hat can cushion, or possibly hold my head off the ground entirely.

Are you saying that in final part of a parting of the ways with your bike, you actively move your neck so that your head will impact at just the right angle to minimize the damage to your head. And without damage to the neck.
What exercises do you do to keep the neck so strong?

You've previously claimed that the helmet wearing was the cause of your crashing. You stopped wearing a helmet, you stopped crashing. Therefore it was the helmet, an inanimate object, atop your head that was the problem not the actions of you the wearer.

 

[matticus]

. 3 out of 5 bicycle accidents involve injury to the head

Forgive me good Sir, but I really must insist you specify your source for this.

Thank you.