Helmets? What do you think?

blister pus

Tom Butcher wrote:

blister pus wrote:

Reality check time. You minimise risk where you can and you certainly do go out of your way to minimise risk with developing craniums so putting a poxy ******* 20 quid helmet on a small head and making it stay there generally stops a pointy stone or rock going into the temple when they get thrown off. .....and coming off has got nothing to do with speed either, it's purely down to how you come off, how you are jolted, what tension you have in your body, the landing and what you land on.

I'd love to see your face when your wife / partner is busting your balls because your kid has large bruises and a preventable concussion or worse.

As I said what's the difference between kids climbing trees, playing sport, etc and cycling - would your kids wear a helmet for all of these activities. Nobody goes through life trying to minimise every little risk - just some of you choose to buy into the pro helmet lobby scare stories like a flock of sheep.

My missus wont "bust my balls" either - if that's your relationship with your partner then fair enough - we would both try and balance unacceptable risk and kids having some freedom to make decisions and enjoy themselves. Where do you stop - full face helmets, body armour, stop them cycling at all ? You talk about minimising risk but in fact you aren't are you - you are advocating a very small reduction in what is already a minimal risk.

Oh yes, and we've also got a trampoline in the garden and I let them play on it 2 or 3 at a time - without helmets - is that wrong too ?

Nicely evaded.

And you'll find most here have actually come off and received injury.

Tom Butcher

I've evaded nothing - if you'll tell me what question I've evaded I'll answer it - or are you going to evade that too.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why cycling should be singled out as a uniquely dangerous activity whilst kids on trampolines, playing sport, climbing trees etc etc are not expected to wear helmets.

The only people evading answering the question are you lot.

Dgh

Tom Butcher - promoting helmet use is not avoiding risk, it's managing it. Avoiding risk would be not riding a bike at all. We who ride bikes know there are risks involved, some of us choose to try to manage the risks, by riding sensibly and bt wearing helmets.

It's the difference between trying to climb K2 with property preparation and gear, and thinking you can do it with a rucksack and raincoat.

I think it as learned hand who had an equation for assessing risk - chance of thing happening x consequences if it does. OK, the chances of sustainign a significant head injury are small, but the consequences are terrible. Wearing a helmet sacrifices nothing (save a few quid), but could save alot. Considered like that, you'd have to be an idiot not to.

blister pus

Tom Butcher wrote:

I've evaded nothing - if you'll tell me what question I've evaded I'll answer it - or are you going to evade that too.

I can't work out whether you're being deliberately thick or a wind up.

Tom Butcher wrote:

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why cycling should be singled out as a uniquely dangerous activity whilst kids on trampolines, playing sport, climbing trees etc etc are not expected to wear helmets.

That's your question no-one elses.

You minimise risk where you can and you certainly do go out of your way to minimise risk with developing craniums

helmet on a small head and making it stay there generally stops a pointy stone or rock going into the temple when they get thrown off.

.....and coming off has got nothing to do with speed either, it's purely down to how you come off, how you are jolted, what tension you have in your body, the landing and what you land on.

Tom Butcher wrote:

The only people evading answering the question are you lot.

You are indeed a wind up.

Tom Butcher

And when playing sport, climbing trees, using a trampoline ?

The flaw in your argument is that if helmets are not uncomfortable and cheap then why don't you wear one all the time - because whilst the risk of head injury is small it is, I think you'll agree, ever present ? It can only be for vanity - or because you see cycling as being more dangerous than it really is.

Tom Butcher

Blister pus - you accuse me of evading the question - yet when I ask you a question you wont answer but instead resort to insults.

blister pus

No insults there. Just straight observation.

If you don't understand concepts like "minimising risk where possible" and understand the difference between trampolines that have padding and are usually designed to a safety standard and hard rock - pointy stone then that's down to you.

Or equally if you choose not to read, or like to put your fingers in your ears and sing loudly, then that's also down to you.

thekickingmule

blister pus wrote:

No insults there. Just straight observation.

If you don't understand concepts like "minimising risk where possible" and understand the difference between trampolines that have padding and are usually designed to a safety standard and hard rock - pointy stone then that's down to you.

Now don't get me wrong, I agree with what you are saying, however, Tom has a point, what is he evading?
Plus, you mention tramplines have padding, yet when you fall off the trampoline, you're head lands on something usually not padded. He has a point with trees too, if you climb to the top of a tree and fall, your head will probably hit every branch on the way down which will do more damage than falling off a rock. Maybe, it's impossible to say.

You always hear about the people who get knocked/fall off their bike with no helmet and 'that probably killed/vegetised them' likewise you hear about the people that wore a helmet and got knocked/fell off their bike and it saved their life' You never hear about the people that survived with no helmet and died with a helmet, as I imagine the number of these incidents are just as high, if not more in number.[/devils advocate]

Daz555

It winds me up when I hear mountain bikers, happy to career down narrow paths at 30mph and launch themselves metres into the air or off rocky steps, complain about people who have the audacity to nip down the shops without a helmet on! It's a completely messed up view on real-life risks.

Cyclists need to take a lesson from the skiers and snowboarders. Plenty wear helmets and plenty don't. But you know what? The pro-helmeters don't bang on about it all the bloody time.

+1 for the snowriders, -1 for the cycling health and safety mafia.

nfrang

blister pus wrote:

You are indeed a wind up.

This aint the first thread on this and certainly wont be the last. I would say given their limited input the OP is doing the winding up.

Somebody fire up a thread on "FS or HT...which is better" and you'll get similar results...

Dull

blister pus

thekickingmule wrote:

blister pus wrote:

No insults there. Just straight observation.

If you don't understand concepts like "minimising risk where possible" and understand the difference between trampolines that have padding and are usually designed to a safety standard and hard rock - pointy stone then that's down to you.

Now don't get me wrong, I agree with what you are saying, however, Tom has a point, what is he evading?
Plus, you mention tramplines have padding, yet when you fall off the trampoline, you're head lands on something usually not padded. He has a point with trees too, if you climb to the top of a tree and fall, your head will probably hit every branch on the way down which will do more damage than falling off a rock. Maybe, it's impossible to say.

You always hear about the people who get knocked/fall off their bike with no helmet and 'that probably killed/vegetised them' likewise you hear about the people that wore a helmet and got knocked/fell off their bike and it saved their life' You never hear about the people that survived with no helmet and died with a helmet, as I imagine the number of these incidents are just as high, if not more in number.[/devils advocate]

I'm looking at 2 trampolines in 2 different gardens now and both have side netting, both have approx 1' padded foam width around the outside so you "minimise risk" if the child over-shoots the bounce area and catches the head on the side - rather like a helmet would - funny that.

Tom has no point whatsoever because he can't grasp simple concepts as stated above. It's called lousy judgement - or a wind up.

blister pus

nfrang wrote:

blister pus wrote:

You are indeed a wind up.

This aint the first thread on this and certainly wont be the last. I would say given their limited input the OP is doing the winding up.

Somebody fire up a thread on "FS or HT...which is better" and you'll get similar results...

Dull

Absolutely 100% correct.

Tom Butcher

blister pus wrote:

thekickingmule wrote:

blister pus wrote:

No insults there. Just straight observation.

Tom has no point whatsoever because he can't grasp simple concepts as stated above. It's called lousy judgement - or a wind up.

Hmm yeah - a whole inch of padded foam ! Surely a helmet plus that foam would be better - and as helmets are cheap and comfortable there is no reason for you not to insist on kids wearing one while trampolining - hell yeah they'll get hot and complain about them you stick to your guns.

And of course for the little ones learning to walk can be dangerous - so presumably you insist on one of these ?
http://www.thudguard.com/

blister pus

Did I put an inch ???

Obviously there is one foot around each.


Now go away.

Daz555

Tom Butcher wrote:

And of course for the little ones learning to walk can be dangerous - so presumably you insist on one of these ?
http://www.thudguard.com/

Bloody hell. The mind boggles. :?

Nik_B

blister pus wrote:

Always wear a helmet everywhere - the only exception is climbing or descending where there's guaranteed soft landing all around me (moorland that I know).

So it's ok for you to make a sensible judgement on whether or not to ride without a helmet but not for anyone else? Listen to yourself you sound like one of those killjoys who ban sports at schools.

Wearing a helmet on a leisurely ride down a towpath is a bit over kill isn't it especially as someone pointed out the guy doing 20 ft drop offs at 20 mph with a helmet is in far more danger.

It isn't law to wear a helmet yet, people must make their own choice, but what giles me more than whether someone wears a helmet or not is how certain people feel totally justified to have a go at someone who they don't agree with.

blister pus

Nik_B wrote:

blister pus wrote:

Always wear a helmet everywhere - the only exception is climbing or descending where there's guaranteed soft landing all around me (moorland that I know).

So it's ok for you to make a sensible judgement on whether or not to ride without a helmet but not for anyone else? Listen to yourself you sound like one of those killjoys who ban sports at schools.

Wearing a helmet on a leisurely ride down a towpath is a bit over kill isn't it especially as someone pointed out the guy doing 20 ft drop offs at 20 mph with a helmet is in far more danger.

It isn't law to wear a helmet yet, people must make their own choice, but what giles me more than whether someone wears a helmet or not is how certain people feel totally justified to have a go at someone who they don't agree with.

Even allowing for taking the piss and playing devil's advocate. You are stretching it beyond a quantum leap of fantasy bollocks by any standard

RichMTB

Who knows what the nickname is for cyclists who don't wear helmets?

MrChuck

I think Tom Butcher does have a point, although I'm not sure he's putting it the best way!

I always wear a lid and I do think it's a bit daft not to wear one offroad, but I don't think people are idiots with a death wish if they don't wear one at all times.

I take people's point about minimizing and managing risk where you can do it cheaply and easily, but to apply this argument exclusively to cycle helmets is to suggest that cycling is statistically more dangerous than it is.

So either perceived risk is winning out over actual risk, or the argument should be extended to its logical conclusion and people should wear full-face helmets when/where they're actually most likely to pick up head injuries, for example when they're in a car*.

Now I'd say that most people would think the Thudgard thing Tom linked to is ridiculous (me inlcuded) but if it is then so is the idea that you should never get on a bike without a helmet.





* Dunno if this is actually true but you get the point!

mac_man

This is one of those areas where 'personal choice' comes into the equation.
Some people see little or no risk in certain activities where other people see plenty of risk.

I spent my childhood climbing up and falling out of trees. And yes I did hurt myself. A branch I was hanging on snapped and I cracked my head open on hitting the ground, blood pouring everywhere. I was about 5 or 6 at the time. If I'd been higher up, or the ground had been harder then I might not be here writing this.

I might consider somebody to be an idiot for not wearing a helmet, but it's not my position to sit in judgement on them or persuade them to wear one, other than to point out to someone who has no awareness of the risk, what could happen.

The reason we are forced to wear seatbelts is not through some great love that our government has for us... it's probably more to do with finance. It's cheaper if people wear a seatbelt, rather than being cared for by the state due to their injuries. Why do you think they haven't banned smoking altogether? Cos the Govt. makes more than it spends from ciggies.

andyonwight

As someone who has always worn a helmet on the bike, unless checking thinks round the garage, and glad I do after being forced off the road going towards a trail.

Its a personal preferance for those that do not but I have turned quite a few to wearing the helmets after showing the pictures of my face after the accident and that was with a helmet. I have also seen a neuro ward where over half were involved in accidents on bikes and had not worn a helmet.

canada16

I just got hit by a car, and trust me, my head smacked the pavement.

I always used to be uck but you needs to see the scrape on my helmet that would have been my scalp.

I will always wear a helmet no matter what.

supersonic

Ah, another helmet thread ;-)

It is, as many people have said, assessing the risk to yourself (or kids if you are responsible for them) and making a judgement.

Northwind

Tom Butcher wrote:

And when playing sport, climbing trees, using a trampoline ?

less likely to suffer a brain injury, so, less need to wear a helmet. It's just logic, nothing scary 2 reasons- one is lower incidence of threatening injury (ie playing sports, where in most sports you're extremely unlikely to suffer a damaging head knock), the other is lower incidence of the risk itself (because a kid can ride a bike for half a day but they won't spend that much time climbing trees)

Vegman

Anyone inspected the inside of a helmet after falling off or being knocked off at speed/hight, and landing on their bonce? if you have,(and seen all those little 'popped ' bits of polystyrene} then like me you wont get on even go down the shops without putting a lid on, and that should go for your kids too, its not just about personal choice, you can't choose the pillock who 'just didn't see you'. Even if you were wearing hi viz. Your choice, your young child is not aware enough to make that choice.

Anonymous

blister pus wrote:

I'm looking at 2 trampolines in 2 different gardens now

So YOU're the strange bloke that's going around watching local kids in their gardens?

I'd rather proitect kids from YOU than from bike crashes


(only kidding, of course)

blister pus

I swear to god this was the year of the argos trampoline round here. You could see 7 or 8 trampolines at one point this "Summer" either in front or back gardens it was hard to ignore them at one point with the little gits screaming and killing each other on them. Of course there's a few who like to out-do everyone else and put up full marque circus style trampolines that you can see from Mars ...needless to say they're the ones still up.

Anonymous

haha!
Been a fair few round here as well, I think Aldis were doing them cheap or something.
They do look like fun.

snotty badger

Always offroad but never to the local shops. And that rare time to work I'll wear it due to the busy road.

I don't get why people don't wear them offroad? Seen a guy today, nice looking bike covered in Hope gear and no lid! :shock: :?

Snelly

I agree with Tom Butcher and I have the same attitude with my children too. I think Tom is abolutely correct in his assessment of risk and I applaud his judgement and common sense approach to this issue.

I don't expect you all to agree with my position but couldn't care less if you don't. We're all different.

I am 38 and didn't grow up with helmets, health and safety, nanny state controls and an entire industry built around telling the country what could and could not be done and what precautions need to be taken. I prefer to use my own judgement and common sense as I respect my take on these things far more than either anyone from the H&S executive or anyone from a younger generation that has grown up n a culture where all risks seem to have a burning need to be mitigated.

I got sent the content below from a mate about a month ago and some of the posts on this thread brought it to mind. It is quite long so sorry if I am hijacking the thread but I thought it salient!

I was born in the early 70's and we survived being born to mothers who drank while they carried us and lived in houses made of asbestos. They took aspirin, ate blue cheese, raw egg products, loads of bacon and processed meat, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes or cervical cancer.

Then after that trauma, our baby cots were covered with bright coloured lead-based paints. We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets or shoes, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.

As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags. We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle...

We ate cakes, white bread and real butter and drank soft drinks with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because......WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!

We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on. No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.

We would spend hours building our go-carts out of old prams and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. We built tree houses and dens and played in river beds with matchbox cars. We did not have Playstations, Nintendo Wii , X-boxes, no video games at all, no 999 channels on SKY, no video/dvd films, no mobile phones, no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms..........WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!

We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no Lawsuits from these accidents.

Only girls had pierced ears!

We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.

You could only buy Easter Eggs and Hot Cross Buns at Easter time...

We were given air guns and catapults for our 10th birthdays,

We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them!

RUGBY and CRICKET had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!! Getting into the team was based on MERIT.

Our teachers used to hit us with canes and gym shoes and bully's always ruled the playground at school.

The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!

Our parents didn't invent stupid names for their kids like 'Kiora' and 'Blade' and 'Ridge' and 'Vanilla'

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL !


Incredibly, I survived. Just like everyone else I grew up with. So please don't expect me to think that "it's about mitigation of risk" or "it only takes one accident to turn you into a vegetable" (sic). I know all that and I accept it as I am happy with the odds.

Life is a risky business.

And lastly, If I am biking off road or snowboarding at even greater speed then yes, I always wear a helmet and so will my kids. However, they will also grow up with an understanding of when these things are needed and in addition, that anyone connected with H&S is probably not worth listening to. They will have independent minds, just like me.