The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[Justinslow]

Why not? It is almost as though you have decided that cycling is way more dangerous than it really is, whilst everything else is way less dangerous than it really is, and you have absolutely no interest in examining this issue at all.

Actually in certain circumstances you could be right - oap perhaps can cycle really well at 8 mph but they struggle to walk down the street, trip on a slightly raised slab and fall on their head. Yep, got you.

 

[Justinslow]

No one is telling you what to wear or what not to wear. If that is your issue, consider it settled. You can leave the thread satisfied if you wish.

No I like it here.

 

[benb]

You could explain all the evidence from far flung countries you like to me, it would make no difference, I hold my anecdotal evidence in higher regard than yours and will do what I like whilst riding my bikes, you will not tell me what to wear and what to not wear.

At least you admit it's a matter of faith for you, and you don't care that the evidence (not anecdotal on my part, only on yours BTW) shows helmets are ineffective at reducing head injuries.
No one has told you what to wear, so you can drop that put-upon attitude.

 

[Justinslow]

That wouldn't explain why rates of head injuries remain the same after a significant increase in helmet wearing.

But you don't seem to understand evidence, despite lots of people having patiently explained it to you several times.
It's almost as though you don't want to understand.

Explain to me why thousands, millions even, of cyclists cycle in the UK wearing helmets, are we all stupid?

 

[martint235]

Well not quite.....

Ok what does "Helps to manage impact energy" mean? It's hardly strong wording is it? Not like "Manages impact energy efficiently and effectively away from the skull"
And to translate "Patented Aramid-Reinforced Skeleton provides internal EPS support." = Our very own design uses expanded polystyrene."

 

[Justinslow]

At least you admit it's a matter of faith for you, and you don't care that the evidence (not anecdotal on my part, only on yours BTW) shows helmets are ineffective at reducing head injuries.
No one has told you what to wear, so you can drop that put-upon attitude.

I said mine was anecdotal.
Many on here push the opinion that helmet wearing is wrong (without actually saying it) that is obvious.

 

[Justinslow]

Do you understand how marketing works, and what peer pressure to conform is?

Yes, are we all idiots?

 

[martint235]

Explain to me why thousands, millions even, of cyclists cycle in the UK wearing helmets, are we all stupid?

Because SpeciTrekBellKask have superb marketing departments that have managed to convince many people that their helmets are way more effective than they actually are. These people then drip feed it to millions of others with lines like "My friend crashed but thankfully he was wearing a helmet and didn't die". This is in itself so effective that I have people in work or in the pub who know nothing about cycling, cycling safety or helmet effectiveness that then say "What? You don't wear a helmet? Are you mad?". It should be used in Business Study and Marketing degrees as an example of how you can sell stuff to people without providing any actual evidence around it

 

[MontyVeda]

No I like it here.

so you're just trolling then?

 

[benb]

Explain to me why thousands, millions even, of cyclists cycle in the UK wearing helmets, are we all stupid?

No, not stupid, just misinformed and misled. You have consciously or subconsciously bought in to the idea that cycling is a dangerous activity which requires PPE when for normal cycling that's demonstrably untrue.

And stop claiming that people have told you not to wear a helmet, or that people have said wearing a helmet is wrong: your constant self-portrayal of a persecuted victim is getting tiresome.

 

[Justinslow]

No one has said that. It's just that a helmet has gradually become 'part of the uniform' without people noticing. It's a triumph for the manufacturers, who are coining it. When people see me riding bare-headed they are shocked, as it isn't what they are expecting. One person said, 'I didn't realise you could cycle without a helmet. I never even thought about it.'

It's beyond me why you feel so persecuted about this, when in fact it's the other way around. I get comments and even mild abuse for not wearing a lump of polystyrene on my head. It is ludicrous.

I'm not feeling persecuted about it, of course it's your absolute right not to wear one just as it is mine - to wear one. Yes you're right it is part of my cycling "uniform", I slant more to the "sporting" side of cycling so for me it's something I don't think about, everybody involved in cycle sport wears a helmet, I compete in TT's ride in sportives reliability rides etc, for me there is no issue. I do take issue with people blathering on about how cycling is not dangerous, when in some cases it clearly is and a helmet may be useful (and I'm not just talking about preventing serious injury, preventing minor injury is a good enough reason for me to wear one).

 

[Justinslow]

Because SpeciTrekBellKask have superb marketing departments that have managed to convince many people that their helmets are way more effective than they actually are. These people then drip feed it to millions of others with lines like "My friend crashed but thankfully he was wearing a helmet and didn't die". This is in itself so effective that I have people in work or in the pub who know nothing about cycling, cycling safety or helmet effectiveness that then say "What? You don't wear a helmet? Are you mad?". It should be used in Business Study and Marketing degrees as an example of how you can sell stuff to people without providing any actual evidence around it

Or according to you any techno blurb regarding their effectiveness in preventing injury, fascinating isn't it that so many people buy and use helmets without any of that info in the ads?

 

[Justinslow]

You wear elbow and knee guards as well then?

No but maybe I should

 

[martint235]

Or according to you any techno blurb regarding their effectiveness in preventing injury, fascinating isn't it that so many people buy and use helmets without any of that info in the ads?

It is. And it goes to show how effective the continuous drip feed of "my mate didn't die" is. Just because people buy them, it doesn't mean they are getting what they think they are getting.

 

[totallyfixed]

Nothing sells so well as perceived danger.
That's me I think, arguing with one person who cannot understand how a whole nation across the North Sea can ride sans helmets without banging their heads is a waste of time.