Calling helmet deniers: Geraint alive and well
Comments
-
Ah! So we are moving away from generalisations and purely discussing one single event?But in the OP'S example that was not the case and do you think his helmet provided protection in the OP's first post in this thread?
It that case, exlcude me. And yourself. It did not involve us, we were not there and the video is inconclusive.
It could be argued that he spun round and took the brunt of the impact with his left shoulder. His head followed through and the helmet hit the post. If he was not wearing a helmet the extra clearance may have resulted in no head collision.
But do please carry on.
I guessed that would be the type of answer you would give which is why i asked the question.
In truth peoples natural reactions will stop alot of head injuries from happening. The problem is in some circumstances natural reactions will not help you. I have seen friends crash into the ground and other stationary objects with their cycling helmets taking the brunt of the impact. In one case head first into the road causing their helmet to crack in half. They ended up with shoulder and neck strain but without the helmet it is likely the impact on them and their family would have been very serious. That is the real point, if you feel the risk and cost justify wearing a helmet. Coming from mountain biking and also doing alot of miles on the road it is not a risk i want to take.
How do you know that the natural reaction of a helmet wearer wasn't to land exactly how they did because they had a helmet on?
In this case the speed they went down at was very fast and they had no time to react at all. They just crumpled head first into the road, it was unnerving to see. Wearing a helmet for me does not influence how i ride it is just an insurance policy to protect my head if the worst happens. In two decades of mountain biking i have had various glancing blows including from branches which could have been worse but no full on head impacts so far. You only have to be unlucky once.
How do you KNOW?My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.0 -
How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
So certainly not anecdotal. Only happened on Sunday last so I remember the details well. Not sure I could say that had I not been wearing a helmet.
At the end of the day you wear one or you don't, your choice. The risk is yours although the resultant injury from not wearing is likely to impact on others such as family. I do however know exactly where I stand on the wearing, or not, of the helmet debate. Each to their own I guess.0 -
Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
So certainly not anecdotal. Only happened on Sunday last so I remember the details well. Not sure I could say that had I not been wearing a helmet.
At the end of the day you wear one or you don't, your choice. The risk is yours although the resultant injury from not wearing is likely to impact on others such as family. I do however know exactly where I stand on the wearing, or not, of the helmet debate. Each to their own I guess.
You don't. I did the same thing. Bad headache. I have no idea if I would have had more or less injuries wearing a helmet.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
I'm sorry but it is you speculating. I do know! I know that bashing my head with the impact that I did would have caused me to sustain far worse than a headache. It was a dislodged, upturned lump of pave that connected with my helmet via the side/corner of the block!
Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
So certainly not anecdotal. Only happened on Sunday last so I remember the details well. Not sure I could say that had I not been wearing a helmet.
At the end of the day you wear one or you don't, your choice. The risk is yours although the resultant injury from not wearing is likely to impact on others such as family. I do however know exactly where I stand on the wearing, or not, of the helmet debate. Each to their own I guess.
You don't. I did the same thing. Bad headache. I have no idea if I would have had more or less injuries wearing a helmet.0 -
I'm sorry but it is you speculating. I do know! I know that bashing my head with the impact that I did would have caused me to sustain far worse than a headache. It was a dislodged, upturned lump of pave that connected with my helmet via the side/corner of the block!
Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
So certainly not anecdotal. Only happened on Sunday last so I remember the details well. Not sure I could say that had I not been wearing a helmet.
At the end of the day you wear one or you don't, your choice. The risk is yours although the resultant injury from not wearing is likely to impact on others such as family. I do however know exactly where I stand on the wearing, or not, of the helmet debate. Each to their own I guess.
You don't. I did the same thing. Bad headache. I have no idea if I would have had more or less injuries wearing a helmet.
You believe. You don't know. I believe it prevented worse injuries (in my case) as well. I don't know that there would have been worse injuries or what the extent of those worse injuries would have been. Speculation is a theory unsupported by firm evidence.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
Whatever.
I'm sorry but it is you speculating. I do know! I know that bashing my head with the impact that I did would have caused me to sustain far worse than a headache. It was a dislodged, upturned lump of pave that connected with my helmet via the side/corner of the block!
Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
So certainly not anecdotal. Only happened on Sunday last so I remember the details well. Not sure I could say that had I not been wearing a helmet.
At the end of the day you wear one or you don't, your choice. The risk is yours although the resultant injury from not wearing is likely to impact on others such as family. I do however know exactly where I stand on the wearing, or not, of the helmet debate. Each to their own I guess.
You don't. I did the same thing. Bad headache. I have no idea if I would have had more or less injuries wearing a helmet.
You believe. You don't know. I believe it prevented worse injuries (in my case) as well. I don't know that there would have been worse injuries or what the extent of those worse injuries would have been. Speculation is a theory unsupported by firm evidence.
You are beginning to sound like you may have bashed your head a time or two too many.
0 -
How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
This is a cycling forum where people share advice and experiences not a sealed research laboratory or legal court
All posts provide evidence and facts as people view and experience them. So like myself due to first hand personal experience some chose the extra protection of a helmet. Others decide not to and make reasons why wearing a helmet is not for them.
If this was in the mountain bike section of the forum there would be little if any variation in views.0 -
How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
This is a cycling forum where people share advice and experiences not a sealed research laboratory or legal court
All posts provide evidence and facts as people view and experience them. So like myself due to first hand personal experience some chose the extra protection of a helmet. Others decide not to and make reasons why wearing a helmet is not for them.
If this was in the mountain bike section of the forum there would be little if any variation in views.
If only people would say stuff like that, rather than they know My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
How do you not know
people take all kinds of risks in life, not wearing a helmet is not one for me, you only need to be unlucky once without a helmet and all the reasons posted on a forum not to wear a helmet become meaningless.
This isn't about reasons not to wear one. Or reasons to wear one. It's about deconstructing anecdotal observations as not representing evidence or fact.
This is a cycling forum where people share advice and experiences not a sealed research laboratory or legal court
All posts provide evidence and facts as people view and experience them. So like myself due to first hand personal experience some chose the extra protection of a helmet. Others decide not to and make reasons why wearing a helmet is not for them.
If this was in the mountain bike section of the forum there would be little if any variation in views.
If only people would say stuff like that, rather than they know pedant alert 0 -
If you don't wear a helmet, you're aloud to keep going through red lights.Cube Attain SL Disc
Giant CRS 2.00 -
Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.
So certainly not anecdotal.
how is that not anecdotal?www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
Very good point. Assuming the same thought process is applied to walking, stairs, DIY, crossing a road, getting out of bed, etc. I reckon the chances of banging your head walking down an icy garden path are higher than on the average ride to the shops, but I've never seen anyone wearing a crash helmet to walk down their garden path.Decide whether you might hit your head sharply on a hard surface at any given time during any specific activity.
Choose whether or not to wear a helmet at such times.
What do you mean 'Assuming the same thought process is applied to...........'
You don't need to 'assume' anything. Thats exactly what my text you quoted says :roll:
People generally choose to wear the helmet for cycling, but not for the other things.
It would be inconvenient and silly to wear a helmet for walking, but easy and sensible to use one for cycling IMO.
Why engineer a scenario that suits your argument and mention popping to the shops? Who on here only ever just pops to the shops on their bike?
Why do you assume people who are pro helmet would have a problem with not wearing a helmet when popping to the shops anyway.
Why are they 'popping' to the shops rather than going to the shops? lol
Most people popping to the shops on the bikes we are talking about would have to put cycling shoes on.
If you do that and have a helmet (possibly hanging from the handlebars) nearby then I don't see a problem with putting that on too.
I have a pub/shop bike and I would probably not wear a helmet when riding that as its falls the walking/gardening side of the line for me.0 -
[/quote]It would be inconvenient and silly to wear a helmet to walking, but easy and sensible to use one for cycling IMO.
Not the most compelling argument but at least you haven't presented it as fact.
FWIW, I often pop to the shops on my road bike wearing whatever shoes I happen to have on at the time.
Back to your point - Pedestrians suffered a recorded 53,207 head injuries over a 6 year period. From here - http://m.injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/9/3/266.full
Maybe not such a silly idea.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I concede that, by definition, my post is indeed anecdotal. I guess the point I was trying to make is that my experience was not second hand, hearsay.Not anecdotal in my case. Fell and bounced my head hard on the cobbled surface which resulted in a headache (apart from other bodily injuries not related to wearing a helmet or not). I KNOW for fact that had I not been wearing a helmet I would definitely, given the force of the impact, have sustained far and away worse than a headache and very possibly a serious head injury.
So certainly not anecdotal.
how is that not anecdotal?
My opinion with regard to the wearing of a helmet remains unchanged.0 -
Just wondering who the 'helmet deniers' are since the word denier is now used to describe someone who insists on believing something despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The most obvious examples being climate change deniers and holocaust deniers.
Could the OP please point me in the direction of the overwhelming evidence that cycle helmets lead to a significant reduction in head injuries to justify use of the term helmet deniers?
I've just seen Geraint Thomas' awful crash on ITV4 catchup, where they also showed his helmet close up. It didn't appear to have sustained any damage apart from a few scratches and it does seem that his shoulder took most of the impact from what I saw. So the helmet may have made a difference or it may not. The important thing is that he wasn't seriously injured and is still in the tour.0 -
FWIW, I often pop to the shops on my road bike wearing whatever shoes I happen to have on at the time.
You should be careful doing that, you might have an accident ;-)0 -
Another similarity is that we know what the Holocaust was, and what is being denied. But 'Climate Change' and 'Helmet' are fuzzy things to 'deny'.
There is no overwhelming evidence that CO2 emissions will cause catastrophic climate change, but humans cause climate change. There's no overwhelming evidence that cycle helmets in their current form significantly reduce the severity of head injuries generally, but sometimes they will.
So, useful analogy...
Paul0 -
Someone needs to do a statistical analysis course. The average citizen is much more likely to die from cancer than a bicycle accident, but that's mostly because the average citizen doesn't ride a bike. You can't apply those stats to yourself as I assume from your participation in this forum you ride a bike quite a lot. In fact you may spend 100 times more time on a bike than the average person so you are 100 times more likely to die in a bike crash than the average.
I missed this in the flurry of posts.
Someone needs to heed their own advice.
Answer 2 questions.
1. What percentage of cyclists die from cancer?
2. What percentage of cyclists die from cycling related head injuries whilst not wearing a helmet?
Once you have the answers, consider whether it is worth continuing.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Why don't you get someone to hit you over the head with a hammer. Once whilst wearing a helmet, and once whilst not wearing a helmet. If that proves inconclusive, perhaps you could wear the helmet instead. If neither of you own a helmet, try slamming a door on your helmet :idea:Someone needs to do a statistical analysis course. The average citizen is much more likely to die from cancer than a bicycle accident, but that's mostly because the average citizen doesn't ride a bike. You can't apply those stats to yourself as I assume from your participation in this forum you ride a bike quite a lot. In fact you may spend 100 times more time on a bike than the average person so you are 100 times more likely to die in a bike crash than the average.
I missed this in the flurry of posts.
Someone needs to heed their own advice.
Answer 2 questions.
1. What percentage of cyclists die from cancer?
2. What percentage of cyclists die from cycling related head injuries whilst not wearing a helmet?
Once you have the answers, consider whether it is worth continuing.0 -
Before carrying out such a test, I would partake in a risk assessment.
Why don't you get someone to hit you over the head with a hammer. Once whilst wearing a helmet, and once whilst not wearing a helmet. If that proves inconclusive, perhaps you could wear the helmet instead. If neither of you own a helmet, try slamming a door on your helmet :idea:Someone needs to do a statistical analysis course. The average citizen is much more likely to die from cancer than a bicycle accident, but that's mostly because the average citizen doesn't ride a bike. You can't apply those stats to yourself as I assume from your participation in this forum you ride a bike quite a lot. In fact you may spend 100 times more time on a bike than the average person so you are 100 times more likely to die in a bike crash than the average.
I missed this in the flurry of posts.
Someone needs to heed their own advice.
Answer 2 questions.
1. What percentage of cyclists die from cancer?
2. What percentage of cyclists die from cycling related head injuries whilst not wearing a helmet?
Once you have the answers, consider whether it is worth continuing.
I would conclude that it would not be advisable to carry out the test.
I do a similar risk assessment before deciding to wear a helmet. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't.
At no point have I said helmets do not have their place.
It is those suggesting that a helmet should always be used that are in the wrong.
And that test above has zero relativity to the post it quotes.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
It is those suggesting that a helmet should always be used that are in the wrong.
Can you name these people please.
Not that the most thorough risk assessment will tell you exactly which rides will be 'the one' when you need the helmet, so there is nothing wrong with wearing one all of the time (if you wear one most of the time) is there?
I think the main reason I would wear one even in situations that I do not feel its required is that I would feel I was tempting fate if I did not.0 -
Here is one who was quite insistent.Can you name these people please.Another good read for you "the earth is definitely flat" folks, a large collection of reports by professionals who are not bike forum armchair experts:
http://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/advice-services/road-safety/cyclists/cycle-helmets.pdf
A few quotes if you can't be bothered to click the link.
"The study concluded that cycle helmets reduce the risk of head injury by 85% and of brain injury
by 88%."
"The report concludes that head protection could reduce the incidence and severity of head injuries among pedal cyclists"
"The report concluded that helmets would prevent 90% of the deaths due to head injury"
"the medical evidence for cyclists to wear helmets is strong"
"None of those wearing a helmet sustained a head injury while 7 of the 13 not wearing a helmet did receive a head injury."
"The report concludes that if cyclists wore helmets the number of head injuries would be reduced"
"The report estimated that at least £80m per year could be saved in hospital costs if all cyclists wore helmets"
But, hey, what do experts with real-world A&E experience and objective reporting know? Not nearly so much as bike forum armchair experts?
The worst ones are those out on the road. Not only do they make the point, they are rude into the bargain.
I notice everyone is conveniently ignoring this little bit of post-Back to your point - Pedestrians suffered a recorded 53,207 head injuries over a 6 year period. From here - http://m.injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/9/3/266.full
Maybe not such a silly idea.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The problem with this subject is that can be a bit like like trying to have a calm, grown-up discussion with a bunch of 5 year olds.
At no point have I said or even implied that anyone must or should wear a helmet. In previous threads I've even said that I have ridden without one for several years, back in the day. I have no problem with bare-headed cyclists, it's up to each rider to do what he or she wants to do. Like someone said, it's all about risk assessment and personal choice.
All I was doing in this thread was pointing to the fact that the crash that Geraint had, where he whacked the side of his head off a telegraph pole at speed, was a beautiful and unequivocal demonstration that a helmet will, in some cases, save you from injury or death.
Me personally, I wear a helmet to keep my family happy and because it might, one day, albeit an infinitesimally small likelihood, save me from injury or death.
My thread title "helmet deniers" was referring to those that deny that a helmet is of any use in protecting you from injury or death, which the Geraint accident beautifully illustrates is complete nonsense. This was also the point I was trying to illustrate in a previous thread, re-quoted above.
It wasn't referring to those that deny that helmet-wearing should be compulsory, because I actually believe that it should not be compulsory and I have never suggested so in any post.
Before people go off on knee-jerk rants they should maybe read posts properly. I've made the key points bold to make it easy for even the most intellectually challenged reader.0 -
Top trolling 7/100
-
Why don't you get someone to hit you over the head with a hammer. Once whilst wearing a helmet, and once whilst not wearing a helmet. If that proves inconclusive, perhaps you could wear the helmet instead. If neither of you own a helmet, try slamming a door on your helmet :idea:
Let's make this a bit more like for like.
If someone knew they were definitely going to hit their head I'm fairly confident they would were a helmet.
So let's change it,a hammer isn't really similar to falling off a bike so if there was a 1 in a million chance you would get hit on the head by a plank of wood whilst you were doing something (watching tv, at work or something) and you were able to avoid it as best you could,would you were a helmet?
That's the choice,you decide if the likelihood of something happening warrants you to change your behaviour, simple.
Either way, one thing that is certain is that whether someone else wears a helmet has no impact on my safety so I don't care what they do. These threads are tedious and pointless.
Damn it, I was trying not to post on here!!!www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes0 -
If you were going to be hit over the head with a hammer, would you choose a cycle helmet for protection?Why don't you get someone to hit you over the head with a hammer. Once whilst wearing a helmet, and once whilst not wearing a helmet. If that proves inconclusive, perhaps you could wear the helmet instead. If neither of you own a helmet, try slamming a door on your helmet :idea:
It should be possible for the UCI to produce incontrovertible evidence of the efficacy of cycle helmets just from their records of racing accidents and consequent injuries.
Given they haven't, one wonders. I still wear one when riding 'properly', but is that because it's easier to go with the flow?
Paul0 -
So let's change it,a hammer isn't really similar to falling off a bike so if there was a 1 in a million chance you would get hit on the head by a plank of wood whilst you were doing something (watching tv, at work or something) and you were able to avoid it as best you could,would you were a helmet?
The two things are completely different for two main reasons.
One is that it is far easier, more practical, and more socially acceptable to wear a helmet whilst cycling than it is to pop one on to go to the shops or sit at your desk, or give a presentation etc. etc.
The second is that choosing to do a sport is very different to just existing in day to day life.
Its the same as saying you would not wear a life jacket on a speed boat because you would not wear one walking along a canal path.
The one in a million\14 million thing is rubbish too. If something is going to happen to you, its going to happen.
Why would you care how many other people it happens to?0 -
Thats not really the pointIf you were going to be hit over the head with a hammer, would you choose a cycle helmet for protection?
Why would that be in any way possible? I would have thought that the only way to prove the efficiency of helmets would be to have a time machine so that you could have the same crash twice.It should be possible for the UCI to produce incontrovertible evidence of the efficacy of cycle helmets just from their records of racing accidents and consequent injuries.
Given they haven't, one wonders.
Do you not know why you wear a helmet?I still wear one when riding 'properly', but is that because it's easier to go with the flow?
Paul
It is certainly helped by the fact most people do, but I wear one because I want to.0
This discussion has been closed.
