FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Helmet or not?
Helmet or not?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
 | |||
"Seems a no brainer. "Oh very good, and it's not even 7am | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"My standard answer for many of the more recent Health & Safety suggestions is "I grew up through the 80's and I am fine" but... I think riding a bike without a helmet is stupid, you can reach some incredible speeds on a push bike, easily the same as a moped/small motorcycle and it's law that you wear one for those. Ultimately it's his choice though..." see above. Cycle helmets are vastly different to m/c helmets. Try cycling 5 miles in a motorcycle helmet then come back and tell us how it felt! | |||
"My standard answer for many of the more recent Health & Safety suggestions is "I grew up through the 80's and I am fine" but... I think riding a bike without a helmet is stupid, you can reach some incredible speeds on a push bike, easily the same as a moped/small motorcycle and it's law that you wear one for those. Ultimately it's his choice though... see above. Cycle helmets are vastly different to m/c helmets. Try cycling 5 miles in a motorcycle helmet then come back and tell us how it felt!" I know they're different, I'm not stupid! The fact is they're "something", they offer a level of protection above what you would normally have and that can only be a good thing even if they only save a couple of lives a year. | |||
| |||
"My standard answer for many of the more recent Health & Safety suggestions is "I grew up through the 80's and I am fine" but... I think riding a bike without a helmet is stupid, you can reach some incredible speeds on a push bike, easily the same as a moped/small motorcycle and it's law that you wear one for those. Ultimately it's his choice though... see above. Cycle helmets are vastly different to m/c helmets. Try cycling 5 miles in a motorcycle helmet then come back and tell us how it felt! I know they're different, I'm not stupid! The fact is they're "something", they offer a level of protection above what you would normally have and that can only be a good thing even if they only save a couple of lives a year." They do help - if you slide on a corner, hit your head on the kerb they can help - although some studies show they increase the risk of rotational injuries. They aren't much use for anything above that though - a pro cyclist died the other year in a race after going over his bars at 50+mph - he was wearing a helmet. Essentially they are good for protecting against cuts, grazes and small contusions - there is no evidence to show they have any outcome on injuries sustained in vehicle/cycle collisions. That's what Boardman is about - addressing the major causes of KSI's, not focussing on the minor stuff. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Currently sitting at home..off work with severe concussion from getting knocked off my bike at 25mmph. Ambulance, stitches, blacked out. Hospital said if I hadn't had my helmet on I wouldn't be here. Scared me to death and made me feel evangelical about helmets! " Exactly right, you are lucky because you are sensible, I never used to wear one until about 2 years ago and now it's second nature | |||
| |||
"Absolutely helmet it might not help much but if it helps at all that's a good thing and as for people thinking they are hard ect don't need one I'll point out Gary Mason the former heavyweight boxer who thought that and ended up dead after a cycling accident " Jamie Cracknell is a prime example of why you should wear one | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I recommend all cyclists wear full suits of armour. Police and paramedics would need to add can openers to their kits." One of those zorb ball things would be perfect too | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Push bike helmets are over priced (packing matiral) most cases no chin protection, no real testing Or rating. And they want around £30, you can get a gold acu tested motorcycle helmet for that. And the box it comes in has more protection than a cycle Helmet. Go figer. " I was surprised to find motorcycle helmets were only texted to the equivalent of a 19.05mph impact!! | |||
"Push bike helmets are over priced (packing matiral) most cases no chin protection, no real testing Or rating. And they want around £30, you can get a gold acu tested motorcycle helmet for that. And the box it comes in has more protection than a cycle Helmet. Go figer. " Rather you than me wearing that crash helmet. | |||
| |||
"Yes, helmets can provide some limited protection against minor head injuries. Yes, motorists need to be more aware of cyclists (I'm a biker, I know how bad it can be for me and I'm a damn sight bigger). But cyclists do need to be more careful and comply with the highway code. I have been in situations of having to take evasive actions when cyclists have cut across lanes, come out of junctions without looking, ignored red lights, ridden against the traffic directions etc. Not all by any means are like this, but there are a large number who are!" TfL/DfT data shows motorists to be at sole fault in cycle/vehicle collisions - the helmet 'debate' is a smokescreen. Address the greatest risk first. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Just seen a report on bbc breakfast about cycling and Chris Boardman didn't have a cycle helmet on, the presenter said he was asked why and his answer was he didn't need one, sorry but I always wear a helmet when on the bike, people say if you're hit by a car, the helmet ain't gunna help, but there has been a few times I've been forced off my bike and been glad I've had a helmet on, what are your thoughts, cycle with or without a helmet?" Stupid question! You wear protective equipment for a reason. Boardman deserves what's coming his way with an attitude like that, let alone the example he's setting. | |||
 | |||
| |||
"I wear a helmet most of the time. That said I agree 100% with Chris Boardman. the helmet debate is a red herring and distracts from the true issue regarding road safety." Agree 100%. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Yes, helmets can provide some limited protection against minor head injuries. Yes, motorists need to be more aware of cyclists (I'm a biker, I know how bad it can be for me and I'm a damn sight bigger). But cyclists do need to be more careful and comply with the highway code. I have been in situations of having to take evasive actions when cyclists have cut across lanes, come out of junctions without looking, ignored red lights, ridden against the traffic directions etc. Not all by any means are like this, but there are a large number who are! TfL/DfT data shows motorists to be at sole fault in cycle/vehicle collisions - the helmet 'debate' is a smokescreen. Address the greatest risk first." Not strictly true. There are a large number of accidents where the cyclists are at fault, but they are largely not reported to the police. In cases of cycle vs car/bus/truck/motorcycle, it is assumed to be the cyclist who is the innocent victim because they normally come off worst. | |||
"Yes, helmets can provide some limited protection against minor head injuries. Yes, motorists need to be more aware of cyclists (I'm a biker, I know how bad it can be for me and I'm a damn sight bigger). But cyclists do need to be more careful and comply with the highway code. I have been in situations of having to take evasive actions when cyclists have cut across lanes, come out of junctions without looking, ignored red lights, ridden against the traffic directions etc. Not all by any means are like this, but there are a large number who are! TfL/DfT data shows motorists to be at sole fault in cycle/vehicle collisions - the helmet 'debate' is a smokescreen. Address the greatest risk first. Not strictly true. There are a large number of accidents where the cyclists are at fault, but they are largely not reported to the police. In cases of cycle vs car/bus/truck/motorcycle, it is assumed to be the cyclist who is the innocent victim because they normally come off worst. " TfL/DfT data shows drivers at sole fault 68-72%, shared fault 20%, cyclists at sole fault 8-12%. This is freely available data, without peer reviewed evidence its merely anecdote. There is no 'assumption', it is the result of collating data from police reports. Anecdote is simply victim blaming & flying in the face of hard evidence. | |||
 | |||
"simply put -its personal choice. Cycle helmets are rated to a maximum impact from vertical of 12mph. This is the testing equivalent of a sideways topple from your bike, helmets are not designed to save your head from injury in the event of a 30mph sideways impact from a vehicle. Cycle helmets are made from the same material that your TV came packed in, its not a wonder material. Th insistence on cycle helmets is a diversion, its thrown up whenever road safety and cycling is mentioned. Study after study shows the overwhelming majority (70%) of cycle/vehicle collisions are the sole fault of the driver of the vehicle - lets address the major cause of cycling KSI's before we tinker around the edges. I DO wear helmets, but I'm under no illusions as to how much protection they can give me in the event a driver fails to look, or decides my safety is less important than his desire to get in front of me. My commuting helmet is mainly there as somewhere to mount extra lights, my road helmet is hi-viz yellow, yet the most common refrain heard is "oh, I didn't see you". In every country where helmets have been made compulsory the rates of cycling have roughly halved, with the knock-on effects of increasing societal obesity and associated illnesses, adding to the public health bill. Look up the effects of compulsory helmets in Australia & New Zealand if you want the figures. Wear a helmet. it 'can' help against minor bumps and scrapes, but better road positioning, better awareness from all road users & better infrastructure are of far more effectiveness than a polystyrene hat." | |||
| |||
| |||
"All those statistics just mean that there aren't that many cyclists on the road. And no wonder. Its too hilly, and cars are better." The key point is that if you want to reduce head injury fatalities in road collisions then make drivers wear helmets. Apparently 51% of all UK head injury fatalities occur inside motor vehicles - but yeah, lets focus on making cyclists,wear polystyrene hats for 'safety reasons'. | |||
| |||
"All those statistics just mean that there aren't that many cyclists on the road. And no wonder. Its too hilly, and cars are better." Cars aren;t better, they are just different. And yes sometimes cars are more practical but the same is true of bikes too. It;s rarely too hilly - tht's just an excuse and no hinderence to cycling. Snd have you not noticed there are more and more cyclists on the roads, riding for leisure and commuting | |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull?" Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security | |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security" No - that I can go faster in a car and that statistically there are more car users than cyclists. | |||
| |||
 | |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security No - that I can go faster in a car and that statistically there are more car users than cyclists." Correction, the car is 'capable' of going faster, however it takes me 35 minutes to cycle to work and 60 minutes to drive - think I'll stick to cycling to work thanks. | |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security No - that I can go faster in a car and that statistically there are more car users than cyclists. Correction, the car is 'capable' of going faster, however it takes me 35 minutes to cycle to work and 60 minutes to drive - think I'll stick to cycling to work thanks." Go for it, feel superior, but in a crash situation, basically a cyclist is even more vulnerable than a motorcyclist. | |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security No - that I can go faster in a car and that statistically there are more car users than cyclists. Correction, the car is 'capable' of going faster, however it takes me 35 minutes to cycle to work and 60 minutes to drive - think I'll stick to cycling to work thanks. Go for it, feel superior, but in a crash situation, basically a cyclist is even more vulnerable than a motorcyclist." Which again flies in the face of statistical evidence | |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security No - that I can go faster in a car and that statistically there are more car users than cyclists. Correction, the car is 'capable' of going faster, however it takes me 35 minutes to cycle to work and 60 minutes to drive - think I'll stick to cycling to work thanks. Go for it, feel superior, but in a crash situation, basically a cyclist is even more vulnerable than a motorcyclist. Which again flies in the face of statistical evidence" which is bunkum | |||
| |||
| |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security No - that I can go faster in a car and that statistically there are more car users than cyclists. Correction, the car is 'capable' of going faster, however it takes me 35 minutes to cycle to work and 60 minutes to drive - think I'll stick to cycling to work thanks. Go for it, feel superior, but in a crash situation, basically a cyclist is even more vulnerable than a motorcyclist." Nothing superior about it, just the way it is. Yup as a cyclist I am way more culnerable than a motorcyclist (which also applies to me anyway) however you cannot drive a car on a canal towpath so my only risk is from bridges and myself - safe enough for me. Something else to consider, and the primary reason for the time difference, there are far more cars on the road than there are bicycles on the towpath or cyclepaths. So there is far greater chances of a car being involved in an accident with another car, especially with so many people getting frustrated with stop start rush hour traffic. | |||
"In all honesty I average 15 mph along the canal path (please note that is average, as I spend a lot of time slowing down for other path users). At that speed to truely protect my limited brain, I really should be wearing a motorcycle skid lid, except that would make breathing a tad interesting and my head would be a tiddly bit tooooo warm. That said a bicycle lid is still better than nothing especially with all the low bridges along the canal." If you wore a motorcycle helmet you may just drown a little more quickly? ps note to vehicle drivers, other than the deliberately obtuse drillz, but cyclists going up hills cant help but wobble. More so near the top. So be more aware, more careful. | |||
"If helmets are so useless, why do we see them worn in every professional cycling race on the planet?" Good point. Except for one thing, Queen's "Bicycle Race" promo video. | |||
"What evidence is there that cycle helmets reduce serious injury? There have been many predictions that cycle helmets are effective in reducing serious injuries. Most of these predictions come from case-control studies, which are based on small research populations and have been criticised for methodological limitations. On the other hand, large population data, from sources such as traffic casualty statistics and hospital treatment records, do not support these predictions. These sources show no improvement in serious injury trends as helmet use has become more common. Indeed, sometimes they suggest that the number or severity of injuries has increased. In Great Britain, there was no detectable improvement in fatalities, serious injuries or the average severity of injuries to cyclists over the period 1985 to 2001, during which helmet use rose from close to zero to approx 22%. Injury severity increased as helmet use became more common (BHRF, 1071). A study of road traffic casualties has found no association between differing patterns of helmet wearing rates and casualty rates for adults and children. Similarly, boys and girls have identical percent head injury rates but markedly different levels of helmet use (Hewson, 2005; Hewson, 2005b). In Greater London, cyclist injuries became more serious as helmet use increased in the mid 1990s (BHRF, 1072). In 2001, although about half of cyclists wore helmets, the severity of injuries was significantly higher than in 1981 and fatalities were highest since 1989. In Edinburgh, also with approx 50% helmet wearing, casualties have become more serious as helmet use has increased (BHRF, 1247). In the Lothian region (close to Edinburgh), wearing a helmet has made no significant difference to outcome in the case of the more serious head injuries measured by need of follow-up or hospital admission (Scottish Exec, 2005). In the USA, cyclists suffered more head injuries in 2001 than in 1991 although helmet use had increased from 18% to 50%. There is no clear information that cycle use increased during this period and some evidence that it may have fallen. (BHRF, 1041) In Australia, helmet laws caused head injuries to fall by 11% to 21%. But cycle use fell by 30% to 60%, suggesting that those who continued to cycle were more at risk (BHRF, 1096). In New Zealand, large increases in helmet use have not brought any reduction in the proportion of serious head injuries. Some reduction in mild concussions and lacerations has been balanced by an increase in neck injuries (##10017). An analysis of enforced helmet laws in Australia, New Zealand and Canada has found no clear evidence of benefit and increased risks for cyclists post-legislation (Robinson, 2006). Analysis by Erke and Elvik, 2007 showed an increased accident risk per cycling-km for cyclists wearing a helmet. In Australia and New Zealand the increase was estimated to be around 14%. In Germany, research found no significant difference in the level of head-trauma in cycling crashes between cyclists who wore a helmet and those who did not (Möllman, Rieger and Wassmann, 2004). More generally, concerns have been expressed that helmets may increase the risk of the most serious types of head injury typical of road crashes and which involve rotational forces (BHRF, 1039). " I read this too and it's the reason why I don't insist my teenage son wears a helmet when he's on his BMX. This is despite him having severe concussion following a fall onto his face / side of his head. This required a stay in hospital. A year to the day later he did exactly the same but wasn't so badly injured. I'm not neglecting him; when I read this report I couldn't decide whether forcing him to wear one would help. He's autistic and can't bear any sort of hat so a helmet is a very tall order. Even if I bought the trendiest most expensive helmet for him he'd do what he's done with all the others: "lose" it on day one. In actual fact, In his first head injury a helmet wouldn't have helped because it wouldn't have protected the part of his head which was injured. | |||
| |||
" Last time i fell off, my fault entirely, i landed on my helmet. Couldn't wank for a week. " lol | |||
"Push bike helmets are over priced (packing matiral) most cases no chin protection, no real testing Or rating. And they want around £30, you can get a gold acu tested motorcycle helmet for that. And the box it comes in has more protection than a cycle Helmet. Go figer. Rather you than me wearing that crash helmet." I pesonaly don't buy cheap helmets, and I have had personal experience of effectiveness. They work. Not so sure about cycle helmets with about 35 % coverage with all the holes in them. | |||
"If helmets are so useless, why do we see them worn in every professional cycling race on the planet?" Because they aren't 'useless' - rather that their effectiveness is much overstated by pro-helmet campaigners, many of whom have a vested interest in moving the discussion into the area of PPE and avoiding the real risk on the roads. This discussion is a case in point - no one wants to address the real problem, the attitudes of the majority of road users, the dangerously designed infrastructure and the complete lack of training/understanding of what is actually correct cycling in the non-cycling masses. | |||
| |||
"If helmets are so useless, why do we see them worn in every professional cycling race on the planet? Because they aren't 'useless' - rather that their effectiveness is much overstated by pro-helmet campaigners, many of whom have a vested interest in moving the discussion into the area of PPE and avoiding the real risk on the roads. This discussion is a case in point - no one wants to address the real problem, the attitudes of the majority of road users, the dangerously designed infrastructure and the complete lack of training/understanding of what is actually correct cycling in the non-cycling masses." Also - can you spot the vital difference between a pro road race and cycling on public roads? VEHICLES - vehicles driven by people too busy doing other things (phones/kids/doing makeup/eating etc) to be fully aware of the road around them. Will a helmet help if you go over the bars racing downhill at 50+mph? No. Will a helmet help if you collide with fellow racers at 20mph? Probably. Will a helmet help if Joe bloggs is too impatient to wait & left hooks you, driving his car over your prone body? Definitely not. THAT is the difference, & THAT is why the helmet debate is a deliberate distraction from addressing the real dangers to cyclists on our roads. | |||
"If helmets are so useless, why do we see them worn in every professional cycling race on the planet? Because they aren't 'useless' - rather that their effectiveness is much overstated by pro-helmet campaigners, many of whom have a vested interest in moving the discussion into the area of PPE and avoiding the real risk on the roads. This discussion is a case in point - no one wants to address the real problem, the attitudes of the majority of road users, the dangerously designed infrastructure and the complete lack of training/understanding of what is actually correct cycling in the non-cycling masses. Also - can you spot the vital difference between a pro road race and cycling on public roads? VEHICLES - vehicles driven by people too busy doing other things (phones/kids/doing makeup/eating etc) to be fully aware of the road around them. Will a helmet help if you go over the bars racing downhill at 50+mph? No. Will a helmet help if you collide with fellow racers at 20mph? Probably. Will a helmet help if Joe bloggs is too impatient to wait & left hooks you, driving his car over your prone body? Definitely not. THAT is the difference, & THAT is why the helmet debate is a deliberate distraction from addressing the real dangers to cyclists on our roads." Wow you really care about cyclists xx | |||
| |||
 | |||
"Ok, I get the argument about the helmet debate distracting from the greater issues, and I'm pretty sure that most people understand that helmets offer limited protection. To return to the ops point. In my opinion, by not wearing a helmet and higher vis clothing on a major tv broadcast, Boardman now looks very foolish. Regardless of the bigger issues, he should have had the nous to play the game and keep the media on-side. Now he's going to struggle to be taken seriously on the big cycling safety issues, which is a real shame." Boardman is yaken seriously and is a well respected voice. Why should he be a hypocrite? How would have any credibility as a campaigbet by not practicing what he preaches? | |||
| |||
"Ok, I get the argument about the helmet debate distracting from the greater issues, and I'm pretty sure that most people understand that helmets offer limited protection. To return to the ops point. In my opinion, by not wearing a helmet and higher vis clothing on a major tv broadcast, Boardman now looks very foolish. Regardless of the bigger issues, he should have had the nous to play the game and keep the media on-side. Now he's going to struggle to be taken seriously on the big cycling safety issues, which is a real shame. Boardman is yaken seriously and is a well respected voice. Why should he be a hypocrite? How would have any credibility as a campaigbet by not practicing what he preaches? " It remains to be seen whether he'll ride out the storm and retain his respected voice. I hope he does. As for credibility, he just damaged that by setting himself up as an easy target for the media. A schoolboy error. Hypocrite? I don't understand your point here? How would he have been a hypocrite by wearing a helmet? There's half a dozen Boardman branded helmets at Halfords he could have chosen from | |||
| |||
"You do realise that will never happen. So, it a car, you have a crash, you're in a steel cage. You're on a bike - what would help you if you fell off - your skull? Yet you are far more likely to die in a car crash of head injuries than on a bike - what does that tell you? That your steel cage gives you a very false sense of security" This has bee proven I several programmes on TV, the more safety gadgets a car has the cocooned the driver will become. I have a mate who is a fireman most of the car crashes he attends the driver has hit the windscreen, luckily most of the drivers get away with a very bad headache and a few cuts. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Cyclists on the footpath.. Menace to society, if you can injure your brain at 15mph on a pushbike what about a pedestrian getting hit my the bike and a moron breaking the law. I say big fines and confiscation for those fools who put lives in danger." I agree. But of course the same rules should apply to motorists. So speeding, no MOT, using a mobile and countless other indescretions all put lives at danger so let's do away with 3 points and confiscate cars in those scenarios. Or is that not the same? | |||
"Cyclists on the footpath.. Menace to society, if you can injure your brain at 15mph on a pushbike what about a pedestrian getting hit my the bike and a moron breaking the law. I say big fines and confiscation for those fools who put lives in danger. I agree. But of course the same rules should apply to motorists. So speeding, no MOT, using a mobile and countless other indescretions all put lives at danger so let's do away with 3 points and confiscate cars in those scenarios. Or is that not the same?" Crush the cars, make the driver pay for the privilege. That punishment can be doled out to car driver who stop in the cyclist box at traffic lights. | |||
"Cyclists on the footpath.. Menace to society, if you can injure your brain at 15mph on a pushbike what about a pedestrian getting hit my the bike and a moron breaking the law. I say big fines and confiscation for those fools who put lives in danger." Would you rather see a kid cycling on a footpath or on a really busy road through town? | |||
"The Netherlands is fucking flat. Scotland has mountains. Im driving. Wear a crash helmet and make sure you can cycle without wobbling." Make sure when passing a cyclist you leave a 3 foot gap, as per highway code states. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I recommend all cyclists wear full suits of armour. Police and paramedics would need to add can openers to their kits." | |||
