The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[ufkacbln]

I always use a bash hat when I go out on a bike; but that's my choice. An interesting point made to me once by a non cyclist was 'If there was a pill / vaccination that would reduce the chance of your getting a potentially crippling / fatal illness, would you take that pill / vaccination - ?' He meant of course for 'pill / vaccination', read 'bash hat'. Interesting and valid comparison.

Another comparison works on the principle that most head injuries occur in groups other than cyclists

It is a bit like having a pill that prevents a serious illness in adults... then prescribing it for children

 

[Profpointy]

As others have said, neither a valid nor an interesting comparison at all. Vapid maybe - but certainly not valid...

Actually I'd argue it's a completely valid comparison, but as you say, drugs and vaccines are subject to strict scrutiny such that they are not encouraged or even allowed when the do no good or do harm.

I'm saying the same thing in a different way I guess but the poster had the right logic but wrong conclusion

 

[shouldbeinbed]

@simongt The question is a false equivalency:

Your non cycling friend: let's be honest, I think we can all draw conclusions from real life experience of the paucity of understanding and lack of any research that non cycling friends, family and colleagues do into helmet efficacy or any other aspect of cycling before forming solid and immutable opinions on the subject.

If they had asked you, would you take drug tested up to a level of alleviating cold symptoms as a potential cure for cancer?

would you be as keen to take or promote it?

 

[benb]

I'd say a better analogy would be with homeopathic remedies.
There is no shortage of people who claim, often fervently, that they help, but the actual evidence is clear that they do not.

 

[MontyVeda]

I'd say a better analogy would be with homeopathic remedies.
There is no shortage of people who claim, often fervently, that they help, but the actual evidence is clear that they do not.

oh i dunno... my chunk of Rose Quartz has really helped with my anger management issues.

 

[benb]

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/11/e008052.full.pdf

Results: In Canada, over the study period 2006–2011, there was an average of 3690 hospitalisations per year and an estimated 593 million annual trips by bicycle among people 12 years of age and older, for a cycling hospitalisation rate of 622 per 100 million trips (95% CI 611 to 633). Hospitalisation rates varied substantially across the jurisdiction, age and sex strata, but only two characteristics explained this variability. For all injury causes, sex was associated with hospitalisation rates; females had rates consistently lower than males. For traffic-related injury causes, higher cycling mode share was consistently associated with lower hospitalisation rates. Helmet legislation was not associated with hospitalisation rates for brain, head, scalp, skull, face or neck injuries.
Conclusions: These results suggest that transportation and health policymakers who aim to reduce bicycling injury rates in the population should focus on factors related to increased cycling mode share and female cycling choices. Bicycling routes designed to be physically separated from traffic or along quiet streets fit both these criteria and are associated with lower relative risks of injury

Interesting, as in Canada, some areas have helmet laws and some don't, so a good setup for comparison.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

A new Canadian study has found there is no link between compulsory helmet wearing and head injuries.

"Helmet legislation was not associated with hospitalisation rates for brain,head, scalp, skull, face or neck injuries."​

It suggests that those seeking to reduce cycling injuries would be better off addressing factors related to increasing the cycling modal share, such as segregated cycling routes.

Full BMJ report at http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/11/e008052.full.pdf

GC

EDIT: Beaten to it by @benb !

 

[snorri]

Text beside a pic of three Bern helmets , one black, one blue and one lime green in the Sustrans eNewsletter.........

'Guarantee a bit of colour and keep your head dry with this funky fashionable helmet.'

Nothing controversial there then

 

[swansonj]

Another possibly non-controversial claim for cycle helmets. As part of my day job (don't ask) i was reading the British Cochlear Implant Group Guidelines on Safety for Cochlear implant users and found this:
"Sports where a helmet is recommended (e.g. cycling, riding and sailing)
These sports are acceptable. A helmet will help to protect the cochlear implant site from any blows."

 

[swansonj]

'Unfortunately you will not be able to use the implant because of the helmet'?

Well, they recommend removing the external component for activities as diverse as bungee jumping, theme park rides, and children's ball pits, on the simple basis that it may come off and get lost, so they seem quite relaxed about people with these devices being unable to use them during specific activities. But actually they suggest that by shopping around you may find a helmet that still allows the external component to be worn. I've no idea personally how well that works.

 

[shouldbeinbed]

I'd say a better analogy would be with homeopathic remedies.
There is no shortage of people who claim, often fervently, that they help, but the actual evidence is clear that they do not.

Hmmm. maybe a tad too far the other way? I'm happy to concede to the pro-helmeteers that the evidence (is there really enough to merit the word on the whole range of helmet issues) on helmets is mixed rather than unequivocably clear that they do nothing good.

but that are still only a sticky plaster for a little cut and a total distraction to the true cycling safety debate

 

[mjr]

How can we overcome helmet advocates who try to stifle rational discussion with gory pictures and emotional blackmail? Is vigilant moderators like this thread the only way? What about when there aren't any?

 

[shouldbeinbed]

How can we overcome helmet advocates who try to stifle rational discussion with gory pictures and emotional blackmail? Is vigilant moderators like this thread the only way? What about when there aren't any?

its a battle the pro choice & common sense advocates can't compete in. I could post a picture of my ugly mug every day after being out for a ride saying, look, no helmet and perfectly ok but thats of no interest and has no lurid element to draw people in. but get a scuffed chin and black eye picture and its clickbait frenzy.

What those people are really saying though is : I rode beyond my capability and fell off and hurt myself but I can't admit to that so I'll create a distraction, hey guys a helmet saved me from a lot worse than these cuts and bashes (that would have happened with or without a helmet but) since I cut my nose I would clearly have turned my brain to pate too yes I would really and truly so wear one (and shhhhh don't mention the invariably lack of judgement or competence that saw me falling off in the first place)

 

[mjr]

What those people are really saying though is : I rode beyond my capability and fell off and hurt myself but I can't admit to that so I'll create a distraction [...]

Often the worst pictures are after they've nutted a motor vehicle and if I point out that helmets aren't designed for vehicular collisions, I get annoying appeals that it's common sense that anything must be better than nothing (it's not necessarily so) and even those who died had a better chance of surviving if they were wearing a helmet and so on. It's really frustrating.

Is there really nothing we can do? Do factual pictures help?

Does it help to highlight the other situations where the same argument SHOULD work and "save" even more souls?

Or to post pictures of famously clever people cycling without armour?

Can't we tug emotions the other way too, somehow?

 

[subaqua]

well I have done 2 weeks of Quasi scientific research

I rode one week with helmet on and noted close passes and aggro from vehicles, then repeated without helmet.

guess what I observed.