Would you wear a helmet if.......

GeorgeShaw

Yes. Two friends of mine came off while chatting, just a bit of a wobble was all that was needed. One cracked her helmet ... :shock:

Smokin Joe

When I first began serious cycling back in the late sixties there were more clubs than there are now, membership was higher and club runs were better attended all day affairs doing higher mileages. General cycle use was also higher as car ownership was low. We crashed at least as much as riders do today, probably more as roads were poorer as were tyres and brakes, yet I cannot remember anyone suffering death or serious injury after their head struck the road or a kerb.

Funny how the widespread use of helmets has suddenly thrown forth thousands of people who have been saved from having their brains scrambled by a lump of polysteryne on their head.

NWLondoner

I never used to wear a helmet but i always do now.


I know that i am in a bad crash with a car/lorry/bus then cracking my skull is the least of my worries.

However i realise that i could just have a stupid fall and the damage that a kerb could do to my head that is not worth taking the risk

pjh

Yup - no question.

Fell off Saturday .... nothing to do with a car

redddraggon

oldwelshman wrote:

redddraggon wrote:

.....there were no cars on the road?

I probably wouldn't. I'm not saying that a helmet would help in a bad collision with a car, but I reckon that a low impact fall might be caused indirectly/directly by car (e.g. cutting you up and you evading). If I was bunch racing, or cycling when there was ice I would wear one as well.

This isn't meant to be helmet rant (like most end up), more a question of why you wear a helmet if you do?

I came off on ice recently and the side of my head landed bang on the kerb edge and bounced a couple of times. helmet dented and also pride only!!
What do you think the outcome would have been if I had no helmet and hit kerb on side of head after falling doing 23mph?

shifter58

Yes i would,i was riding a easy track in the dark last year and hit a branch full on on my helmet doing about 25mph, wsnt knocked out and my helmet was cracked,and you could hit the road head first no vehicles involved.

jamesblodgett

nasahapley wrote:

simonali wrote:

Porgy wrote:

In 30 years and plenty of falls and accidents, my head has never once hit anything.

Same here. The reason why I've never bought one in my life!

Me too! But now I've got to - entered a sportive that makes them compulsory. I don't think this is a very common requirement though?

Ofcourse, one of the symptoms of head trama is memory loss! I keep a box of helmets that have been smashed with my head inside, just in case, in a moment of insanity, I am temped not to wear one.

Here's a study of bike crash deaths: http://www.helmets.org/stats.htm note the difference in the percents of helmet wearers to non-helment wearers.

Philip Davis

Its exactly the opposite for me - I will not wear a helmet in traffic as there is plenty of peer reviewed evidence (and my own experience) to indicate that traffic behaves in a more dangerous way near helmeted riders (the famous Ian Walker study from Bath University). It also seems likely that rotational injuries are more likely if you are struck by a car.

I wear a helmet when the type of accident that helmets are designed for is a possibility - when i'm off-roading, or when i'm riding with a group, or intending to go fast on big downhills. I also sometimes wear it at night as I mount a light on it and have reflectors on it so its good for visibility.

hambones

Same as Philip on this one. Always wear a helmet for off-road (think branches!) - on road I'm an occasional wearer, usually organised events, some club runs in icy conditions etc. Certainly for urban traffic I don't tend to wear one or for solo riding.

scherrit

I suspect that "plenty" may be a slight overstatement, and seem to remember that the Walker study covered a low number of riders, that the difference were slight (in cm terms) and that the graphs were drawn for effect not understanding (no zero on the axes and the like).

On a lighter note, all new helmets ought to be fitted with eagles named Igor.....

jamesblodgett

Philip Davis wrote:

Its exactly the opposite for me - I will not wear a helmet in traffic as there is plenty of peer reviewed evidence (and my own experience) to indicate that traffic behaves in a more dangerous way near helmeted riders (the famous Ian Walker study from Bath University). It also seems likely that rotational injuries are more likely if you are struck by a car.

I wear a helmet when the type of accident that helmets are designed for is a possibility - when i'm off-roading, or when i'm riding with a group, or intending to go fast on big downhills. I also sometimes wear it at night as I mount a light on it and have reflectors on it so its good for visibility.

Walker's interpetations were delusional, at best! I wear a helmet for the same reason I wear a seatbelt. It dramatically increases my chances of surviving a crash.

Smokin Joe

jamesblodgett wrote:

Philip Davis wrote:

Its exactly the opposite for me - I will not wear a helmet in traffic as there is plenty of peer reviewed evidence (and my own experience) to indicate that traffic behaves in a more dangerous way near helmeted riders (the famous Ian Walker study from Bath University). It also seems likely that rotational injuries are more likely if you are struck by a car.

I wear a helmet when the type of accident that helmets are designed for is a possibility - when i'm off-roading, or when i'm riding with a group, or intending to go fast on big downhills. I also sometimes wear it at night as I mount a light on it and have reflectors on it so its good for visibility.

Walker's interpetations were delusional, at best! I wear a helmet for the same reason I wear a seatbelt. It dramatically increases my chances of surviving a crash.

Dramatically?

In the 100 plus years before helmets that professionals were throwing themselves off bicycles at high speed many time a season the number who died of head related injuries wouldn't even make a statistic.

Whatever the effectiveness of helmets, their safety advantage is only marginal at best.

Philip Davis

sherrit, yes, i shouldn't have used the word 'plenty' in relation to cycling studies. But the concept of risk compensation is well established with regards to drivers. I don't think anyone familiar with the literature was surprised at Ian Walkers findings. There is an Australian study that found that drivers are more likely to overtake cyclists wearing helmets on narrow roads, although I can't find a link to it right now.


I'm not sure I understand your point about the study using a low number of riders though - It only used one I think, but thats irrelevant statistically as what he was measuring was the car drivers behaviour, not the cyclists. His sample was more than statistically significant (for drivers in Bath, anyway). I'm not sure I'd agree that the distances are slight, I think the gaps he found were highly significant, more than enough to account for an increased risk to helmet wearing cyclists. If memory serves me right the graph you refer to was on a briefing sheet he produced, not the original study.

It would be interesting to know if risk compensation can be demonstrated for cyclists - I'm almost certain it would, but I don't know how you'd set up a study for it.

Roger Davies

redddraggon wrote:

.....there were no cars on the road?

I probably wouldn't. I'm not saying that a helmet would help in a bad collision with a car, but I reckon that a low impact fall might be caused indirectly/directly by car (e.g. cutting you up and you evading). If I was bunch racing, or cycling when there was ice I would wear one as well.

This isn't meant to be helmet rant (like most end up), more a question of why you wear a helmet if you do?

I dont because the sun burns my bald head through the slots.

ellieb

I believe Walker found that, on average, cars leave a 4.4 ft gap when overtaking (Buses left 9 inches less). Wearing a helmet reduced that by 3.75 inches. I'm working from memory here so these figures may not be spot on. I'm not sure myself that the 3.75 inches represents much more of a danger, although I am capable of being persuaded.

jpembroke

How about if you wore a really huge helmet, say 4.4ft wide?

I remember a Guardian journalist saying her best protection on a bike was to wear a pair of fishnets. Drivers gave her a very wide berth and probably drove in to one another instead.

Not sure they'd suit me though.

richardast

Walker's study would only really have proved anything if the exact same drivers had been overtaking him in his varying cycle garb on the very same bits of road at the very same time of day with the very same traffic and weather conditions, etc.
As these controls don't appear to have been in place (how could they?), to me it's just anecdotal.

I believe that in the same study he found that riding primary, favoured by more experienced cyclecraft savvy cyclists (apparently), is actually more dangerous than riding in the gutter.

He may not wear a helmet , but I notice that his tweed jacket does have leather patches on the elbows. It that risk compensation or risk management?
Or is it the uniform for a social scientist creating theories at a univerity?

alfablue

richardast wrote:

He may not wear a helmet , but I notice that his tweed jacket does have leather patches on the elbows. It that risk compensation or risk management?
Or is it the uniform for a social scientist creating theories at a univerity?

I like it!!!

Clever Pun

on the road wrote:

Once I fell over on the bike, I wasn't wearing a helmet, but because my head was lighter from not wearing a helmet it was easy for me to keep my head from hitting the ground, it's just instinct.

I suppose if you've always worn a helmet and you go out without a helmet and then crash, because you're so use to wearing a helmet when you crash without one you automatically let your head hit the ground because you've not learned how to keep your head from hitting the ground.

I don't think wieght has anything to do with it unless your helmet is metal?

I've decided not to wear one in the summer, but in the winter I wear one as it's got colours on that can help people see me.

As said I've never had any issues falling off and hitting my head even with a helmet.

I answer to the threads question... no I probably woudn't

alfablue

Yes, I would wear a helmet at all times, the research may tell otherwise (it may suggest they increase risk, but I am sceptical), but I am a particularly clumsy rider and I am quite capable of falling off and head butting the ground without another soul, or vehicle in sight. I have destroyed two helmets doing this (both times on paths, not the road), and on one occasion I hit (and bounced) on the ground hard enough to break my pelvis and shoulder which meant 8 weeks in hospital, but my head was unharmed. Broken helmet, but not even a headache. I am sure I will do it again sometime, and I don't fancy the idea of sitting in my hospital bed with a fractured (or delaminated!) skull, thinking, "statistically, that shouldn't have happened" :shock:

Clever Pun

alfablue wrote:

Yes, I would wear a helmet at all times, the research may tell otherwise (it may suggest they increase risk, but I am sceptical), but I am a particularly clumsy rider and I am quite capable of falling off and head butting the ground without another soul, or vehicle in sight. I have destroyed two helmets doing this (both times on paths, not the road), and on one occasion I hit (and bounced) on the ground hard enough to break bones on my left hip and shoulder which meant 8 weeks in hospital, but my head was unharmed. Broken helmet, but not even a headache. I am sure I will do it again sometime, and I don't fancy the idea of sitting in my hospital bed with a fractured (or delaminated!) skull, thinking, "statistically, that shouldn't have happened" :shock:

holy cr@p... maybe you should ride in bubblewrap as well

alfablue

Clever Pun wrote:

alfablue wrote:

Yes, I would wear a helmet at all times, the research may tell otherwise (it may suggest they increase risk, but I am sceptical), but I am a particularly clumsy rider and I am quite capable of falling off and head butting the ground without another soul, or vehicle in sight. I have destroyed two helmets doing this (both times on paths, not the road), and on one occasion I hit (and bounced) on the ground hard enough to break bones on my left hip and shoulder which meant 8 weeks in hospital, but my head was unharmed. Broken helmet, but not even a headache. I am sure I will do it again sometime, and I don't fancy the idea of sitting in my hospital bed with a fractured (or delaminated!) skull, thinking, "statistically, that shouldn't have happened" :shock:

holy cr@p... maybe you should ride in bubblewrap as well

When Gore Tex make breathable bubble wrap I'll be there first in the queue!

In mitigation, that accident happened whilst scratching my nose with one hand, and simultaneously hitting a tree root, which whipped the bars out of my hand, wheel went sideways, I went over the top. I was doing about 18mph.

Okay, not much of an excuse, I am basically crap!

oldwelshman

on the road wrote:

Once I fell over on the bike, I wasn't wearing a helmet, but because my head was lighter from not wearing a helmet it was easy for me to keep my head from hitting the ground, it's just instinct.

I suppose if you've always worn a helmet and you go out without a helmet and then crash, because you're so use to wearing a helmet when you crash without one you automatically let your head hit the ground because you've not learned how to keep your head from hitting the ground.

This post is a wind up right?
You really think that not wearing a helmet made your head light enough to avoid collision?
You obviously was either not going very fast or had a very lucky fall, if you fall and come off sideways at speed, your head is going to hit the floor at some point, unless it is empty and even ligher perhaps 8)

There is a simple test you can try.
Put a helmet on, then head but the kerb, then take it off and repeat test and then tell me the helmet does not prevent injury.
I wear one but that my choice, trying to justify not wearing one becuase it makes your head lighter is a bit silly really.

richardast

Your honesty is laudible.

Im also a helmet wearer and glad of it. My crapness sees me off the bike for a spell due to a spill on oil/diesel a couple of weeks ago.
Fortunately, it turns out that my wrist is only severly sprained, not fractured, so it'll only be 4 weeks off the bike rather than 6 or 7.
My helmet's got a dent in it that may have otherwise been in my head, so I'll be reading April's C+ with interest. I believe it's got a helmet buying article in it and I'm obviously needing a replacement.

Hardsnail

I'm a newb to the forum so may be way out of line but surely, surely common sense tells you that wearing something protective on your head is likely decrease the chances of injury should said protected area come into contact with another, more robust substance than the human skull?

alfablue

Yes, that is the common sense approach, the arguments against this are:

No evidence of reductions in head injuries where compulsion has been introduced
Some concern that helmets can increase risk of rotational injuries
Some evidence that drivers give less room to helmeted cyclists
The risk compensation argument, you will ride less safely because you feel protected by the helmet
That (and this is the most stupid one IMHO) as helmets are designed for a 12mph impact, they are as useful as a chocolate teapot at 12.1mph, so with a helmet and crashing over 12mph you are dead anyway, and under 12mph without, you would be fine so they are not worth wearing (I exaggerate, but some use this logic)

I am sceptical of all the above, and to be honest I think the evidence pointing either way is insufficiently developed and / or is flawed. I think each individual should decide for themselves on their own understanding of the evidence, and / or any other rational or irrational considerations that are pertinent to them.

Personally I am going to wear one, always

Hardsnail

Very good points - a most informative discussion. I think I'm going to like these forums!

alfablue

Oh, I forgot to add another argument:

The supposed decline in cycling IF (I know this isn't the subject under debate) compulsion was introduced would have a greater detriment to the nations health compared to the head injuries and deaths that the measure would save.

andy_wrx

jpembroke wrote:

I remember a Guardian journalist saying her best protection on a bike was to wear a pair of fishnets. Drivers gave her a very wide berth and probably drove in to one another instead.

Not sure they'd suit me though.

Perhaps you could post a photo of yourself in fishnets and we could vote on it

- you might repel some so much they give you a really wide berth
- you might attract others (is that really what you'd want :shock: )
- some might just come closer for another look !

A guy in the running club runs in a dayglo&reflective cycling jacket (the clubruns specify you have to wear a reflective in the Winter after a member was killed running on an unlit country lane a couple of year ago)
Printed on the back is 'back off f*ckface'
- charming !
- but I think if I were a driver following him, I'd perhaps be so intrigued by it that I'd be likely to drive too close trying to make-out what it said...

jpembroke

I was thinking of having a cycling jersey printed up with a picture of my 6 year old daughter on the back and the words 'My Daddy on board'. That might work.

Either that or the fishnets.