The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[FishFright]

Sometimes, not always

View attachment 734990

Stock photo's aren't often seen as definitive.

 

[classic33]

Sometimes, not always

View attachment 734990

Just like cycling.
The choice is theirs. But French Chalk, I mean...

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

I wear a helmet
The main reason is the fact that it makes my wife happier if she knows I always wear one when I am out on my bike
the second reason is the thought of having an accident and waking up in hospital with her sitting at the bedside and the look on her face if she knows that I have a head injury and was not wearing a helmet

Whether or not I think that they are useful (which actually I do) is not relevant - I have to think of her opinion as well
and she doesn;t read bike forums and magazines so doesn;t get the "informed" opinions of people on here

A third reason is that I believe that there is a reasonable chances that I am less likely to get a serious head injury in many cases where I have an "accident" on my bike
not every case - but some - and the effect on my family if I do - due solely to me doing something for ME - is far too great to not take a simple step to protection
whether it works or not - she think it will



as a side note - if she thinks I am doing my best to stay safe when I am out on my bike then she is less likely to complain when the door bell goes and I come in with a parcel muttering about it being "something for my bike"!!!!

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Stock photo's aren't often seen as definitive.

Ok, from direct experience of rock climbing for over 30 years. Sometimes, not always.

 

[Alex321]

which is precisely my point. I don't get the obsession around protecting your noggin for just one activity, when other common activities present a similar or greater risk.

But they don't present a similar or greater risk.

Pedestrians don't fall as often as cyclist IME, and when they do it is usually at much lower speed, and certainly in my case, much less likely to hit the ground with head.

And many drivers will NEVER have an accident where they bang their heads.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Pedestrians don't fall as often as cyclist IME, and when they do it is usually at much lower speed

You’ll find the vertical speed component of hitting the ground if you trip when walking or running ia pretty much the same as from a bike. Gravity works that way funnily enough.

 

[classic33]

But they don't present a similar or greater risk.

Pedestrians don't fall as often as cyclist IME, and when they do it is usually at much lower speed, and certainly in my case, much less likely to hit the ground with head.

And many drivers will NEVER have an accident where they bang their heads.

Go back a page, to #5,717.
I've done more damage to my skull(head) as a pedestrian than I have as a cyclist.

What do you think the impact speed of your head in a straight "log fall" is?
Would you be surprised to know that it can be as high as 25mph. And that's from a stationary upright position, no other movement involved.

 

[MontyVeda]

But they don't present a similar or greater risk.

Pedestrians don't fall as often as cyclist IME, and when they do it is usually at much lower speed, and certainly in my case, much less likely to hit the ground with head.

And many drivers will NEVER have an accident where they bang their heads.

many cyclists will never have an accident where they bang their heads either. In nearly fifty years of cycling... my only head injuries have happened when not on a bike. In fact they happened in houses, where the vast majority of head injuries occur, i believe.

 

[mjr]

But they don't present a similar or greater risk.

Pedestrians don't fall as often as cyclist IME, and when they do it is usually at much lower speed, and certainly in my case, much less likely to hit the ground with head.

And many drivers will NEVER have an accident where they bang their heads.

Many cyclists will NEVER have a fall where they bang their heads (helmets aren't for collisions) too.

I have certainly injured myself far worse and more often as a pedestrian than as a cyclist. Three broken bones so far! There's no bike to hold on you as you fall to save you. Still no head injury yet, no helmet used.

 

[icowden]

I wear goggles if using a grinder or power washer. I was not wearing goggles when I poked myself in the eye with a credit card paying for my dinner in the works canteen necessitating a trip to casualty and the painful incident did not get me to wear goggles for everyday credit card transactions

But this is a false corollary. Of course you *might* injure your eye at any time. However when you undertake an activity where there is a much higher risk of injury, and where a particle could fly into your eye, then you wear goggles. Hence the idea of wearing a helmet when climbing, caving, white water kayaking, and balancing on anything that has two wheels. Helmets are not required in cars because - roofs, impact protection, airbags etc. Helmets are a good idea if riding a quadbike.

At the moment I haven't seen any decent evidence that wearing a helmet is more dangerous than not, but quite a bit of research and evidence from neurosurgeons, who really know quite a lot about heads.

 

[Profpointy]

But this is a false corollary. Of course you *might* injure your eye at any time. However when you undertake an activity where there is a much higher risk of injury, and where a particle could fly into your eye, then you wear goggles. Hence the idea of wearing a helmet when climbing, caving, white water kayaking, and balancing on anything that has two wheels. Helmets are not required in cars because - roofs, impact protection, airbags etc. Helmets are a good idea if riding a quadbike.

At the moment I haven't seen any decent evidence that wearing a helmet is more dangerous than not, but quite a bit of research and evidence from neurosurgeons, who really know quite a lot about heads.

Actually I suspect you haven't seen any evidence from neurosurgeons but merely lay persons' assumptions with a veneer of "I'm an expert". I'm happy to be proved wrong

 

[MontyVeda]

But this is a false corollary. Of course you *might* injure your eye at any time. However when you undertake an activity where there is a much higher risk of injury, and where a particle could fly into your eye, then you wear goggles. Hence the idea of wearing a helmet when climbing, caving, white water kayaking, and balancing on anything that has two wheels. Helmets are not required in cars because - roofs, impact protection, airbags etc. Helmets are a good idea if riding a quadbike.

At the moment I haven't seen any decent evidence that wearing a helmet is more dangerous than not, but quite a bit of research and evidence from neurosurgeons, who really know quite a lot about heads.

How many neurosurgeons will say to someone who tripped over a curb, shoelace or slipped on ice that they should have been wearing a helmet? None, I'll bet... despite the head being the same regardless of what the rest of the body was doing in the moments before a head injury.

And as i understand it, head injuries are also quite common in road traffic accidents, regardless of the fact that most motor vehicles have a roof and an airbag, etc.

Helmet logic is flawed logic.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

You’ll find the vertical speed component of hitting the ground if you trip when walking or running ia pretty much the same as from a bike. Gravity works that way funnily enough.

Not exactly true
well - yes it is - the vertical speed will be the same
BUT if you are moving forward at 10 mph (for example) and your head hits the ground then it is going to bounce along and not just stop dead

If, however, you are close to stationary then your head is more likely to hit vertically and harder - in effect anyway

Can;t find it now - but I did see (many years ago) something that showed that people simply falling off a bike often suffer worse head injuries at very slow speeds than at higher speed - where injuries involving bending and scraping at more common

Personally - the only time (so far!) I have caused damage to my helmet which would otherwise have happened to my head was at about 2 mph
I was on a narrow tarmac path that went sharp left over a narrow bridge then sharp right again - a walker was approaching and distracted me so I didn't realise that some leaves on the bend were on top of slippy mud - front wheel shot off sideways and I shot off downwards


Some weeks later I discovered a big dint in the padding of my helmet
If I had been moving faster I would have bounce, rolled and scraped along


Clearly - if you hit something (like a brick wall or kerb edge) while you are bouncing then that is different

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Helmets are not required in cars because - roofs, impact protection, airbags etc.

Despite all of this, more car occupants suffer severe head injuries than pedal cyclists in accidents every single year.

 

[icowden]

Despite all of this, more car occupants suffer severe head injuries than pedal cyclists in accidents every single year.

But isn't it weird how, since the 1950s, head injuries have massively been reduced by the introduction of airbags, side impact bars etc. It's almost as if someone spotted a problem and made cars a lot safer.