Uni Research Project - helmets?

[Licramite]

Please, please, please tell me that you realise the amount of work that went into this before it got that far?

Having organised and participated in just such work, there is a whole load of simulation, testing, modification, retesting, ethics approval and a whole plethora of very scientific research that goes before this, something of which you seem naively unaware.
.. and you can actually smash people's and animal's heads in if the experiment is justified and ethically approved. It is far more common than you would think.

yes i do, an I apologise I didn't mean that bit about having no idea about experiments, in came out oddly harsh and personnel.- not intended. sorry.
I did see film/photos of another experiment were live pigs were shot / blown up with military weapons so medics and surgeons could practice how to deal with such wounds. -
My point was (poorly put I admit) experiments involving the real thing are far more valid than simulation - hench my head/wall/helmet test is far more valid than the helmet tests of dropping it or hitting it with a hammer, which only tests the strength of a helmet and not what happens to the head inside it.
(unless your wearing the helmet at the time of course)

 

[Profpointy]

One factor which doesn't seem to get all that much mention is the increased risk of hitting your head; specifically your helmeted head is bigger, turning a near miss or mere graze into a proper wallop.

Increased leverage / rotation has already been mention by other posters, and related to this is the yanking effect of helmet edge "catching" on the road. Possibly apocryphal, but I've heard it said that tin-hatted soldiers having to abandon ship sometimes got their necks brocken upon hitting the watèr - (jumping in from a height obviously)

Risk compensation, by the safe-feeling cyclist, AND especially by closer passing motorists also deserves more scrutiny

The other stuff you've mentioned also valid

 

[Licramite]

A valid point, I often crack my head on site because of the safety helmet, if I wasn't wearing it I would have missed the object, - on ther other hand if your not wearing your helmet and don't miss the object , it can be very painful.
and its true with helmet design with all those gaps and ridges for better ventilation are not going to help your head slide along the ground or impeed things sticking in your head.

I suppose you could mount ball bearings in rows on the outside so whatever angle it hit it would roll along the ground - helmet design unfortunately has more to do with fashion than function.

 

[Cycling athlete]

Hi

Read this post with interest. I have some on the job cycling helmet evidence.

Crashed at 45+ mph smashed head off kerb. Got up walked away, helmet was a write off. (Specialized Sworks)

Crashed at 30+ mph over bars head first into Tarmac, got up walked away. Helmet was a write off. (Salice)

Close friend crashed at 30+ mph over bars into Tarmac, no helmet did not get up and walk away:-( oh I should mention that was 4 yrs ago, and he is still in a wheelchair needing his wife to wipe his arse.

You can argue and debate all you want about the scientific evidence of this and that, it's just a bunch of hogwash. I have all the evidence I require for the benefit of cycling helmets.

 

[Dan B]

Are these real speeds or internet speeds?

 

[Rob3rt]

Hi

Read this post with interest. I have some on the job cycling helmet evidence.

Crashed at 45+ mph smashed head off kerb. Got up walked away, helmet was a write off. (Specialized Sworks)

Crashed at 30+ mph over bars head first into Tarmac, got up walked away. Helmet was a write off. (Salice)

Close friend crashed at 30+ mph over bars into Tarmac, no helmet did not get up and walk away:-( oh I should mention that was 4 yrs ago, and he is still in a wheelchair needing his wife to wipe his arse.

You can argue and debate all you want about the scientific evidence of this and that, it's just a bunch of hogwash. I have all the evidence I require for the benefit of cycling helmets.

All the evidence YOU require.

Many other people are not quite as easily swayed by anecdotal "evidence".

 

[Cycling athlete]

@DanB .. I live in the Peak District, so very real speeds mate.

@Rob3rt.. Sometimes empirical evidence is all you need if you have a modicum of sense. All the theoretical research in the world would never change my view on the absolute benefit of wearing head protection. But hey feel free, ride without one, free world.

 

[Profpointy]

@DanB .. I live in the Peak District, so very real speeds mate.

@Rob3rt.. Sometimes empirical evidence is all you need if you have a modicum of sense. All the theoretical research in the world would never change my view on the absolute benefit of wearing head protection. But hey feel free, ride without one, free world.

Ok, you've made up your mind, fair enough. But this is not "theoretical" research the guys are talking about but real numbers of injuries. You may not like it, or even believe it, but the rate of head injuries in countries which have introduced compulsion have not gone down, so it's not mere naval gazing.

To turn your example around, george burns, the comedian smoke all his life and lived to be a hundred. This does not mean the doctors are talking bollocks when they say fags cause cancer etc.

 

[Cycling athlete]

^^^^
I don't disagree. Individuals put lots of s*** in their bodies and live for a long time, but your comment is flawed. For every George burns there are thousands of dead 1s. Hardly good odds would you say.

As for helmets, I am not a helmet fascist, but when you have direct experience of 'live' situations then all the research can say what it wants. Much of the research is flawed on helmets anyway it bases much of its data on city/commutes etc, are they taking into account vehicle collisions etc that are causing injury and influcing the outcome of the accident/human error? Most accidents are human error after all.

Ultimately I ride to race and for maximum thrills, I ride as fast as I can for as long as I can whenever I can, I ride on roads that have minimal traffic at anytime of day, so I am able to take my bike handling abilities to threshold and past every time I ride. Which if you ride that way means you will crash! I have broken ribs, wrist, elbow, femur, collar bones and I have suffered one head injury during the late 80s when I raced MTB during the early years and I still have the hole in my forehead. I have hit my head many times since during crashes and never suffered a head injury due to helmets. So as I stated the, research for ME! Is bunkum, I have never held with convention. I work in a research based industry, however if the data doesn't workout in the field I couldn't careless what it states.

It's been proven that rugby union players that started wearing body armour had more injury as they used less technique and more generated force in the tackle, when they stopped wearing it the injury rates went down again, but some still wear it others don't. It's a choice. I served in the military for many years and I chose to wear every bit of body armour that I could get my hands on, even though many comrades did the same and are no longer here:-(( others chose to wear the minimal amount and are still here, so it's all about choice based on experience. So ultimately my choice irrelivent of the researched facts is that the cycling helmet has prevented serious head trauma. I would state that most cyclists never max out their abilities so will never experience a full on top speed crash, which is a very good thing. However I am unable to ride like that. For most people the biggest cause for concern is traffic and well, if you get blindsided by an arctic lorry it doesn't matter what you have on your head!

The greatest thing you can have as a cyclist is awareness, but sadly many cyclists lack in that area.

So just ride safe be aware and enjoy it.