The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[Profpointy]

Well, you could be right in some respects however this is what you said 10 pages ago with reference to Justin side stepping;

Justin has failed to answer almost all questions put to him (reasonably or not), he has not responded to any of the links which posters have taken the time to put up for him and when it came to your questions regarding Australia he completely glossed over all and any results from that countries MHL because Australia isn't the UK. It makes for a pretty difficult debate.

being wrong-headed (see what I did there) doesn't make someone a troll, and some of the comments from the sceptical camp have been no better. Granted his repost to the Australia thing was extraordinarily weak ("Australia's different"), but little worse than the "shouldn't have accidents in the first place" argument.

 

[Mugshot]

being wrong-headed (see what I did there) doesn't make someone a troll, and some of the comments from the sceptical camp have been no better. Granted his repost to the Australia thing was extraordinarily weak ("Australia's different"), but little worse than the "shouldn't have accidents in the first place" argument.

I agree. However Justin is in the somewhat unfortunate position of being the only person here that is currently "arguing the other side" and, although it may be rather sad, I am actually genuinely interested in peoples thought processes when it comes to wearing helmets. So I can ignore some stuff that other people post as I'm sure people gloss over much of mine, but I don't want to ignore what Justin says as he's the lone voice. I want to hear what he has to say but he's not saying much.
I haven't called him a troll either, he called me one though

 

[Justinslow]

Most of you have conviently brushed aside any attempt by anyone who says a helmet helped in a crash (except @Profpointy) yet you say "they may be of some benefit in some circumstances"? That is not the message coming across, some even saying a "woolly hat" or a "ceiling tile" is just as effective.
You can throw all the evidence you like my way, I will still wear a helmet when i choose, it is my right, you have the right to not wear one, based on that same evidence.

 

[Profpointy]

Most of you have conviently brushed aside any attempt by anyone who says a helmet helped in a crash (except @Profpointy) yet you say "they may be of some benefit in some circumstances"? That is not the message coming across, some even saying a "woolly hat" or a "ceiling tile" is just as effective.
You can throw all the evidence you like my way, I will still wear a helmet when i choose, it is my right, you have the right to not wear one, based on that same evidence.

I'd still like to hear bit more on your thinking a bit more on why Oz is somehow different?
Ontario is someone different as well, strangely

EDIT should add, that was the key thing that changed my thinking

 

[Justinslow]

I accept that helmets will confer some benefits in some circumstances.

I merely wish to know the scale of the benefit and the range of circumstances.

Then I can make a better informed choice.

Because if the answer is "Grumpy, because of your size, and the way you ride, it is likely that this helmet will fail, catastrophically, in nearly every circumstance in which you might need it to protect your skull and its contents" then I'd rather continue to spend the money on beer.

You brought up some or other high-speed crash scenario. So. Quantify/define/explain the difference to the severity of head injury, any kind of head injury, that wearing a contemporary cycle helmet would make in a high-speed crash scenario.

Please.

Ok if you slid along the road on your head it could prevent the road grinding a hole in your head?

 

[MontyVeda]

...

This looks like it hurt... a lot. However, people who've fallen down steps could receive similar injuries. People involved in car crashes could receive similar. One question that many have put forward is why protecting one's head is seemingly important only for cyclists and not other groups that may injure their head?... I'm yet to hear/read a good reply. (And 'because this is a cycling forum' is not a good reply, @Justinslow )

 

[GrumpyGregry]

now that's better :-)

But prof, I get bored with typing the whole argument out every time a cycle helmet evangelist rocks up intent on converting folk to their pov.

My view...

If you want to wear a helmet, wear one. If you don't, don't.
If you want to convince me to wear one, at least demonstrate that you understand the applicability of the current technology.

(I always wear one off-road, I often wear one when riding in a group with strangers, I hardly ever wear one when cycling alone, I don't wear one commuting in cph or sthlm, and when I was doing my 20km rural commute in UK I only wore one as a convenient mount for lights in autumn/winter and latterly as camera mount.... but I have never claimed to be a rational being.)

 

[Justinslow]

This looks like it hurt... a lot. However, people who've fallen down steps could receive similar injuries. People involved in car crashes could receive similar. One question that many have put forward is why protecting one's head is seemingly important only for cyclists and not other groups that may injure their head?... I'm yet to hear/read a good reply.

Because for some people life is not like that, and is not seen as "everyday activities could result in the same result", for some people cycling IS seen as dangerous, based on personal views, people we know or experiences we've had.

 

[benb]

I wonder if it's anything to do with all the people telling them they could end up eating through a straw if they go for a bike ride and something awful happens, and that there's almost nothing they can do to reduce that risk to an acceptable level

Scaremongering BS like this makes be so angry.

 

[MontyVeda]

Because for some people life is not like that, and is not seen as "everyday activities could result in the same result", for some people cycling IS seen as dangerous, based on personal views, people we know or experiences we've had.

many also feel cycling isn't necessarily dangerous... go figure!

edit... actually. cycling IS* might be quite risky

*Islamic State

 

[Profpointy]

are we in danger of a consensus ? This won't do at all

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Ok if you slid along the road on your head it could prevent the road grinding a hole in your head?

I presume you mean scalp and not head. Any idea how long I'd have to slide along tarmac on my head to grind a hole in my skull? Any idea how long I'd have to slide along tarmac on my head to grind a hole in a helmet shell? Why aren't I lifting my head off the road or protecting it with my arms? Am I out cold, I guess I could well be.

So any idea of the likelihood of said helmet not suffering a catastrophic failure from its initial impact with the tarmac which renders me insensible in your high-speed crash scenario.

 

[Justinslow]

But prof, I get bored with typing the whole argument out every time a cycle helmet evangelist rocks up intent on converting folk to their pov.

My view...

If you want to wear a helmet, wear one. If you don't, don't.
If you want to convince me to wear one, at least demonstrate that you understand the applicability of the current technology.

(I always wear one off-road, I often wear one when riding in a group with strangers, I hardly ever wear one when cycling alone, I don't wear one commuting in cph or sthlm, and when I was doing my 20km rural commute in UK I only wore one as a convenient mount for lights in autumn/winter and latterly as camera mount.... but I have never claimed to be a rational being.)

Why didn't you say that in the first place?
I'm not preaching for you to wear one, or for it to be compulsory, just to accept that they can help sometimes, it's now coming out that some of you arnt quite as "hardcore" as you make out.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Because for some people life is not like that, and is not seen as "everyday activities could result in the same result", for some people cycling IS seen as dangerous, based on personal views, people we know or experiences we've had.

Here's the thing.

In places where cycling is seen as a normal, everyday activity, as natural and as mundane as walking, the overwhelming majority of cyclists

a) don't identify themselves as cyclists any more than they identify themselves as shoeists when they are walking.
b) don't wear special clothing to ride their bikes.
c) don't wear helmets.

Go figure.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Most of you have conviently brushed aside any attempt by anyone who says a helmet helped in a crash (except @Profpointy) yet you say "they may be of some benefit in some circumstances"? That is not the message coming across, some even saying a "woolly hat" or a "ceiling tile" is just as effective.
You can throw all the evidence you like my way, I will still wear a helmet when i choose, it is my right, you have the right to not wear one, based on that same evidence.

I am waiting for you to present evidence.

btw "ceiling tile" is a derogatory term for a contemporary helmet and isn't mean to be taken literally.