Helmets in the Tour De France???

13»

Comments

  • aurelio_-_banned
    aurelio_-_banned Posts: 1,317
    DaveyL wrote:
    aurelio wrote:
    Not only will a helmet be as much use as a chocolate fireguard in a high impact situation, largely because the foam will just crush down completely (or more likely the helmet will simply break up) it need not reduce the impact significantly in an impact situation lower than that which the helmet is designed/tested for. This is because a foam density that is stiff enough to crush down - but not bottom out - at 12.5 Mph will not crush down at all in a lesser impact.

    I guess it worked OK for Brajkovic in his high impact (60 kph) crash. Difficult to make a scientific comparison though - I'm guessing it might be hard to find someone willing to do the control experiment. Perhaps you'd like to volunteer?
    His crash might have been at 60 kph, but this in no way means that this resulted in a 'high impact' when he struck his head. He may well have simply gone sliding down the road.

    Further, the sort of 'experiment' you propose is hardly needed, given what we already know about the kinetic forces generated in a crash situation, the mechanisms of brain injury and the very limited ability of an inch of polystyrene to absorb energy...

    To turn your proposal on it's head, isn't a 30 Mph crash supposed to be the equivalent of falling from a 3rd floor window? Perhaps someone who 'believes' in the miraculous powers of polystyrene hats would like to demonstrate by jumping off a couple of buildings in order to demonstrate how helmets 'save lives'. Like to volunteer? Of course, the faithful are likely to argue that their polystyrene prophylactic won't prevent the broken limbs, ruptured internal organs and so on that are likely to result, to which I say 'Why do you think the situation would be any different in a road crash'?!

    I would even be happy to let the 'true believers' dive head first if they so wished! :wink:

    Helmets are a dangerous diversion away from the real issues that need to be addressed if we are to genuinely improve the safety of cyclists.
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    http://twitter.com/janibrajkovic/status/1316521661

    "Now I know how it feels to land on your head @ 60kph. I saw lots of stars"

    http://twitter.com/janibrajkovic/status/1320327227

    "Btw never ever gonna ride without helmet again."

    I understand you may well have political reasons for wishing to make helmets less of an issue when campaigning for cyclists' safety, but I'm not sure that should be conflated with whether or not you might want to wear one to lessen the potential injuries in the slim chance you do fall off.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • timoid.
    timoid. Posts: 3,133
    DaveyL, you are mixing up cause and effect here. Even Bell isn't going to claim that a lid will save your noggin at 60kph

    He was lucky. He would have been alright, if a little more bloody, if he hadn't had a lid on.
    It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Timoid. wrote:
    DaveyL, you are mixing up cause and effect here. Even Bell isn't going to claim that a lid will save your noggin at 60kph

    He was lucky. He would have been alright, if a little more bloody, if he hadn't had a lid on.

    Just quoting what he says :D

    But "He would have been alright, if a little more bloody, if he hadn't had a lid on." - that's good enough for me, I'll take attenuation of injury in some cases over no attenuation, any day. That's my personal choice. I think there will come some point in the injury continuum where the helmet will reduce your injury from something pretty serious, that you really wouldn't want, to something less so.
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • wildmoustache
    wildmoustache Posts: 4,010
    aurelio wrote:
    DaveyL wrote:
    aurelio wrote:
    Not only will a helmet be as much use as a chocolate fireguard in a high impact situation, largely because the foam will just crush down completely (or more likely the helmet will simply break up) it need not reduce the impact significantly in an impact situation lower than that which the helmet is designed/tested for. This is because a foam density that is stiff enough to crush down - but not bottom out - at 12.5 Mph will not crush down at all in a lesser impact.



    Helmets are a dangerous diversion away from the real issues that need to be addressed if we are to genuinely improve the safety of cyclists.

    ever considered you might be over-thinking this one? most of us are well aware that road safety related to the movement of traffic is far more important to safety than just wearing a helmet
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Just to point out - i didn't write that. It's replaced the McIlvain-Lemond phone call link as aurelio's new sig line. Seemingly.
    Le Blaireau (1)

Categories