The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[Justinslow]

This is quite often the case Justin, the "well it's obvious innit" argument. I think you are to be congratulated for saying what you have, far too often the default setting is to have a strop and then flounce off having told everyone how stupid they are (usually with a side order of when you die don't come running to me thrown in for good measure).

Cheers, I've tried to keep it polite despite some rather impolite responses to some of my posts, and I've tried to listen. Maybe I've responded sarcastically too at times! What good would it do to shout and scream and start name calling.
It just shows what a difficult subject this is and that "one size" does not fit all.

I don't do mtb riding, but I wonder what off-road riders used to wear on their heads in, say, the 1970s? Did off-road head injury rates plummet when plastic helmets became commonplace, whenever that was? There must be some data somewhere.

I don't know, but just because we didn't do something over 30 years ago doesn't mean we shouldn't aim to improve safety nowadays. Taking the motorcycle angle, helmets and leathers have come on leaps and bounds with new "air bag" style leather suits inflating when required in a crash. Modern materials such as Kevlar and titanium being woven into leather too. Go back to the 70's and see how poor the kit was then!

 

[benb]

I don't know, but just because we didn't do something over 30 years ago doesn't mean we shouldn't aim to improve safety nowadays

But there's no evidence to suggest that helmets do anything to improve safety.
If you really want to improve the safety of cyclists, spending any energy at all in promoting helmets is energy wasted that could be used to actually promote measures that demonstrably work. Helmets are a distracting red herring from cyclist safety.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

Cheers, I've tried to keep it polite despite some rather impolite responses to some of my posts, and I've tried to listen. Maybe I've responded sarcastically too at times! What good would it do to shout and scream and start name calling.
It just shows what a difficult subject this is and that "one size" does not fit all.

yes but if you have a look at threads here or elsewhere you will find they are all started by the 'come on wear one' brigade or the anecdotalists 'helmet saved my/mates life - if you don't wear one after me telling you then then you're clearly an idiot' lot.

never are they started by someone randomly saying 'stop wearing your helmets now' or passing off an anecdote of ' I/mate just fell off and didn't die, hahah that puts that argument to bed forever'

One side doesn't fit all but it is only ever one side that keeps lighting the fire under it. TBH I think you'll have to look very hard indeed to find a true anti helmet person, pretty much everyone not frothing at the mouth to make people wear one advocates personal choice in the matter but is pushed to appear extreme by the genuinely myopic determination of a great many people keen to have us all in them not to listen. You have come around to a bit more cetralised position, and fair play to you but you are a rarity.

I don't know, but just because we didn't do something over 30 years ago doesn't mean we shouldn't aim to improve safety nowadays. Taking the motorcycle angle, helmets and leathers have come on leaps and bounds with new "air bag" style leather suits inflating when required in a crash. Modern materials such as Kevlar and titanium being woven into leather too. Go back to the 70's and see how poor the kit was then!

And there is the big difference and ongoing problem, as i said earlier today and @benb says just above, the fallacy of helmets made of polystyrene packaging = safety that is widely peddled, prevents that improvement or better material being found. you look at bike helmet adverts in terms of 'innovation' it is all about airflow and weight, not about incorporating new tougher materials and structural rigidity.

It is the helmet fans ironically amongst the cycling community are a hinderance to genuinely safety and innovation with their lurid rhetoric of 'saved my life' and even 'what harm can it do to wear one' because they validate the manufacturers 'do nothing, the mugs are still sucking it up' attitude which is further reinforced by lazy retailing and an ignorant (again as in uninformed) victim blaming 97-98% that don't ride a bike

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

The other question about responsibility

There are tests for vehicles that show "safety"

The Euro NCAP is typical

One of the tests is about pedestrians
The vehicles gain points if there are features that reduce injury in a pedestrian impact

Some vehicles score a big fat Zero
Is the fact that a driver has decided to drive a vehicle that they know will increase pedestrian injuries really acceptable

Should manufacturers be allowed to produce these vehicles when the technology and design is there to reduce injury ?

If a cyclist impacts a vehicle with a low safety rating and suffers an increased injury ... Is there a moral responsibility with the manafacturer or owner

Sorry to bump this up after a few days but I'm only just catching up on the thread. The Euroncap stats have worried me. For a start there are no figures for cyclist safety, you have to class them as roughly the same as pedestrians. Next, I've yet to find a model of car or van that scores as high for pedestrian safety as it does for driver and passenger safety. They all have red (=poor) zones on parts of the windscreen. I believe that there's a strong moral case for health and safety legislation in the workplace - where there's an equal responsibility for self and others - in car manufacture, design and choice of vehicle. After all, behind the wheel is effectively many people's place of work. When that place of work introduces dangers to other people the responsibility for the risk incurred should fall on the driver.

 

[ufkacbln]

Cheers, I've tried to keep it polite despite some rather impolite responses to some of my posts, and I've tried to listen. Maybe I've responded sarcastically too at times! What good would it do to shout and scream and start name calling.
It just shows what a difficult subject this is and that "one size" does not fit all.

Which is exactly why advocating that people should wear helmets as opposed to championing informed decisions that do fit the individual is wrong

I don't know, but just because we didn't do something over 30 years ago doesn't mean we shouldn't aim to improve safety nowadays. Taking the motorcycle angle, helmets and leathers have come on leaps and bounds with new "air bag" style leather suits inflating when required in a crash. Modern materials such as Kevlar and titanium being woven into leather too. Go back to the 70's and see how poor the kit was then!

See the previous posts

Ironically cycle helmets have not improved and are in fact far less effective than 30 years ago

Even more ironic is the avid promotion of this inferior product and the lack of any interest in improving helmet efficiency, or even reverting to the much more effective and safer designs

 

[ufkacbln]

r BOBIBABIBABIBA)

Wasn't that one of those one hit wonder Summer songs by Joe Dolce,Black Lace or their ilk?

 

[Justinslow]

Not much of a debate, is it?
I think people with my views (and I know many people share my views) know what they are going to get when the come into a thread like this, which is a shame.

 

[martint235]

Not much of a debate, is it?
I think people with my views (and I know many people share my views) know what they are going to get when the come into a thread like this, which is a shame.

To be fair, if you went on a medical website and started promoting homeopathy you'd have got much shorter thrift

 

[Dan B]

I think people with my views (and I know many people share my views) know what they are going to get when the come into a thread like this

The facts, you mean ? Beats me why they bother if they're not willing to listen to them (present company excepted)

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I struggle to come up with a realistic scenario where a helmet would turn a severe head injury into a slight one, or where it would turn a death into "only" a severe head injury. It's just not plausible IMO - the forces within a helmet's design parameters are just too low, except in a tiny number of freak occurrences.

I'll happily admit they are quite effective in preventing bruises, cuts, scrapes, road rash and the like, but no one ever says "wear a helmet, it will stop you getting a small cut" they say "wear a helmet it could save your life"

If someone were to drop a certain weight of a certain shape from a certain height on a certain head and that head were wearing a certain helmet I am almost certain said lid might help. Possibly.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Could be, maybe you are wearing me down! I've still got my anecdotal evidence though from my mate to fall back on, however you view that. And I'm not sure I ever said it will save your life, other people said that regarding my mate, but nobody can prove that it won't save your life either.

What I do find strange is the "I won't wear a helmet under any circumstances" view. I know some - @GrumpyGregry and others have said they wear them off road, well that's wearing a helmet then.
Our local off road trail centre is Highlodge at Thetford Forest, I can't recall ever seeing a rider without a helmet, now we are all either sheep following along or we wear them because we know the riding (at speed, which is fun) through the forests has its hazards. It would be great if a "serious" MTB rider would give us their views?
I think what I'm getting at is - you can't really say helmets are cr#p if some sections of the biking community actually find them quite useful.

I will be honest, this is not something I've really thought about massively before, it's just a default setting nowadays for me to put one on, I am seeing a different side to it thanks to some of the informative posts on here and the evidence from other countries is interesting, but not enough to stop me wearing one, I don't feel it's a hindrance to my riding, I don't even think about it once I've started a ride.

At trail centres I wear knee and elbow pads, and shin guards, and armoured snow-boarding undershorts... I could be tempted to go full face if there is an uplift.... at a trail centre if you aren't falling off you aren't trying hard enough.

It doesn't quite work like that on the road, unless you are racing.

 

[Shaun]

I've deleted some posts and temporarily excluded a couple of members for three days to give others a chance to respond.

 

[classic33]

Is that not a "trading standards" issue then?

How'd you go about proving the claim made in a nursery ryhme though?

 

[benb]

Not much of a debate, is it?
I think people with my views (and I know many people share my views) know what they are going to get when the come into a thread like this, which is a shame.

A realistic evaluation of the effectiveness of helmets you mean? Why is that a shame?

 

[Profpointy]

Not much of a debate, is it?
I think people with my views (and I know many people share my views) know what they are going to get when the come into a thread like this, which is a shame.

well to be fair, I think you've given as good as you've got. Granted you're a little isolated. You have engaged with the discussion - and been treated mostly ok in return ie argued with but by and large not flamed.

I (a sceptic these days) dared to express my view on a non-cycling forum and got flamed - which is what happens in the wider world, and suggesting evidence (eg Australia - sorry !) tantamout to idiocy.