Negative View of Cycle Helmets

Cabaal

Is this just limited to Ireland or what?
Their appears to be a negative view on people using and wearing cycle helmets in Ireland, yes they will save your life but nobody buys them or even mentions them.

Anyone give any kind of explanation for this?

Hagar

It's a macho thing I think, here in France I rarely see a cyclist without one regardless of age.

Cabaal

Given that people on motor bikes have to hear them surely it should be make compulsary to wear them when on a bike, no?

Johnny Jukebox

I think the issue is that they suffer from an image problem. Most of them are extremely unflattering and make you look like a mushroom. You can get nice stylish ones like the Giro E2 which will run you about 100 yoyo.

However, even if you look like Mr. Blobby there is no excuse for not wearing one. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that injuries arising from *not* wearing a helmet while cycling should not be eligible for compensation or consideration. It should be a legal requirement also.

Cabaal

Johnny Jukebox wrote:

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that injuries arising from *not* wearing a helmet while cycling should not be eligible for compensation or consideration. It should be a legal requirement also.

Not a bad idea alright, in fairness a lad on a motor bike involved in a crash without a helmet would have a hard time claming for compensation so it would make much the same sense to apply it to a person on a bike

Itsfixed

Johnny Jukebox wrote:

I think the issue is that they suffer from an image problem. Most of them are extremely unflattering and make you look like a mushroom. You can get nice stylish ones like the Giro E2 which will run you about 100 yoyo.

However, even if you look like Mr. Blobby there is no excuse for not wearing one. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that injuries arising from *not* wearing a helmet while cycling should not be eligible for compensation or consideration. It should be a legal requirement also.

Ah come on, that's ridiculous. Whether you wear a helmet should a matter of choice, pure and simple. Motorists have a duty of care towards cyclists but whether a cyclist wears a helmet would make no difference to injuries that person inflicts on other road users as a result of careless riding or whatever.

I wear a helmet more or less all the time but my girlfriend doesn't. She does insist on a reflective yellow vest though. Yet i wouldn't impose on her to wear a helmet if she doesn't want to because i'm trying to encourage her to cycle more.

Its hard enough encouraging more people to cycle without imposing compulsory helmet wearing. The benefits of cycling in general (fitness, environment, cheapness, beating the traffic etc) is hard enough to get across to most people without making it law to wear one and thus put even more people off.

I read from studies that most injuries sustained by cyclists are to the limbs and body, rather than the head.

Johnny Jukebox

Itsfixed wrote:

I wear a helmet more or less all the time but my girlfriend doesn't. She does insist on a reflective yellow vest though. Yet i wouldn't impose on her to wear a helmet if she doesn't want to because i'm trying to encourage her to cycle more.

Its hard enough encouraging more people to cycle without imposing compulsory helmet wearing. The benefits of cycling in general (fitness, environment, cheapness, beating the traffic etc) is hard enough to get across to most people without making it law to wear one and thus put even more people off.

I read from studies that most injuries sustained by cyclists are to the limbs and body, rather than the head.

Well, fair enough. I dont have much love for the nanny state and believe people should bear the full consequences of their own actions and decisions.
You really dont want to wear a helmet while cycling ? Thats OK - but be prepared to live with the consequences if you get unlucky.

Maybe take your girlfriend for a walk around the Rehab hospital out in Dun Laoirghaire if she needs convincing.

robfitz

I'm a cyclist who wears a cycle helmet, but I'm completely against the making of wearing of cycle helmets compulsory. The benefits of cycling far outway the benefits of wearing a cycle helmet.

This is my favourite quote regarding cycle helmets:

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1034.html#3
Helmets for motorists are much more effective than those for cyclists and more beneficial than seat belts, interior padding or air bags. Their potential for reducing injury is 17 times greater than that of cycle helmets.

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/
http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/helmets/helmets.html
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3910

sobriquet

I'm pretty inconsistent when it comes to wearing a helmet. I will admit to being self-conscious with it on, though this is on the back of drivers just laughing when you shout at them for cutting you off etc.

I've found from my own experience that I get taken advantage of more if I'm wearing the helmet and high vis gear whilst commuting than if I don't. It seems to indicate to drivers a greater passiveness or something like that. If I dress more to look like the adrenaline junkie stereotype I get a wider berth. Anyone any experience of the same? It's a hard thing to measure though, I could easily be mistaken.

The adrenaline junkie thing is a touch ironic though. I routinely see cyclists who look the part - helmet, high vis gear, lit up like a christmas tree, grinding on too high a gear - do dumb **** in traffic a circus monkey in a blindfold on a mini-bmx wouldn't do. Completely contrary to expectations.

tabatha

a lot of cyclists need to grow up in general. far to many dont know what a light is to begin with. helmets arent a fashion accessories, there is a reason for there use. its like having to wear a seat belt when you drive. i think its high time the law was changed and enforced for cyclists if they want to use the roads. more often then not i find them a hazard on the roads.

sobriquet

tabatha wrote:

more often then not i find them a hazard on the roads.

Bubye thread. Of course, we could ignore this (it's hard, I know) and not let the thread degenerate into "yes, but what about the motorists who..."

tabatha wrote:

a lot of $FOO need to grow up in general.

Where $FOO could be just about every group of humans ever.

daymobrew

robfitz wrote:

I'm a cyclist who wears a cycle helmet, but I'm completely against the making of wearing of cycle helmets compulsory.

In California a helmet is compulsory for those under 18. Hopefully wearing a helmet is such a habit that they'll continue wearing one after 18.

Maybe this is the route we should take. Like helmets in hurling - it's compulsory for kids.

rob1891

Cycling is not dangerous. You do not need to wear a helment!

Heinrich

rob1891 wrote:

Cycling is not dangerous. You do not need to wear a helment!

That is a foolish comment. Cycling is dangerous and a helmet can provide protection from serious head injuries. If a person does not wish to wear a helmet that is another matter entirely.

rob1891

Heinrich wrote:

That is a foolish comment. Cycling is dangerous and a helmet can provide protection from serious head injuries. If a person does not wish to wear a helmet that is another matter entirely.

It is a foolish comment? Then I am a fool, but it makes me wonder if there is any intelligence behind your own comments.

The number of injuries per million hours cycling is 50 according to a study in Austrailia (link to it is dead unfortunately). If squash (1300 per million) is a safe sport then cycling is so safe it's boring.

scargill

interesting reading....

http://www.magma.ca/~ocbc/StatsCan.html

roadmanmad

Helmets may not be compulsory.I have seen too many close calls.

When I am commuting, or touring I always wear one. Anyone who chooses not to, you will have to live with the consequences.

In my Opinion Road Cycling cycling is a dangerous past time. Just remember, many sporting cyclists suffer less injuries from more frequent falls because they have experienced it before. The majority of us freeze our bodies in a crash and thus the crash has a bigger impact on us.

There are too many drivers on the road, who are thinking of everything else except the driving.

If you have to buy a fancy helmet, do so. The safety level may not improve but Fashion is everything.

rob1891

Why would anyone with an interest in the sport perpetuate the myth that cycling is not safe? 1 in 71 cyclists involved in a collision with a car died in the States in 97, however 1 in 15 pedestrians met their maker ... and cycling is the dangerous past time? Life is dangerous, you don't need a helmet to survive it though.

Discouraging people from a safe & healthy activity like cycling, by going on about how goddamn dangerous you think it is, is what's not safe. Their heads may stay in one piece but their hearts will go caput, and we'll be paying for the bypass.

Capt'n Midnight

Cabaal wrote:

Given that people on motor bikes have to hear them surely it should be make compulsary to wear them when on a bike, no?

Motorbike helmets would save 1 in 17 of car users killed in crashes so they should wear them too, shouldn't they ?

Given the heat generated when cycling and the isolation of a motorbike helmet it's unlikely many cyclists would wear one, even though if you get hit by a motorist at over 40mph they might save you. The lightweight expanded polystyrene foam helmets mostly used for cycling won't really help you when you get hit by a speeding motorist. They are fine for when you fall off a bike or slow collisions, but in Dublin most cyclists have been killed by Large vehicles, trucks or buses.

Very few cyclists have been killed by anything other than a collision with a motorist (and a legal system top heavy with motorists usually finds the motorist guilty). Enforcing our current speeding and other motoring laws would probably help more than if every cyclist had to wear a helmet.

dalk

As has been mentioned already, its a pity that so many perpetuate the myth that cycling in Dublin is dangerous... Its one of the first things that people often say to me - "i wouldnt cycle around Dublin its too dangerous" - "isnt it dangerous to cycle around Dublin?" etc. The fact of the matter is that, in the scale of things, it is not. (I am not saying, by the way, that this means that you shouldn't wear a helmet).

Somethimes , I wonder whether a lot of non-cyclists use it as an excuse not to cycle (it certainly sounds better than "i am too lazy to cycle"), and cyclists say it to get kudos from sounding like they dice with death everyday.

rubadub

I dont wear a helmet. I get questioned by some people if I do and I say no, then they usually ask "why not" and I say "probably for the same reasons you don't wear one while driving or walking on the footpath".
That link above was showing that it would be more effective for drivers to wear them, and that pedestrians and young drivers are most at risk from head injuries. So do the people who think it should be compulsory think it should be compulsory for pedestrians and motorists too?

Another post mentioned the danger to limbs, I have considered getting knee and elbow pads before. I have had many falls in my time and never even came close to hitting my head. Do people think these knee/elbow pads should be compulsory too?

cyclopath2001

Cabaal wrote:

Is this just limited to Ireland or what?
Their appears to be a negative view on people using and wearing cycle helmets in Ireland, yes they will save your life but nobody buys them or even mentions them. Anyone give any kind of explanation for this?

There are many explanations, you might also want to consider that for the authorities, making helmet wearing would be a convenient cop-out and much less trouble than making the road environment safe.

Helmets do not prevent accidents & if you read the labels inside of them you'll find that the manufacturers are far from confident of their abiltiy to prevent injury if a cyclist is struck by a car. Basicly, if you fall off your bike while travelling at low speed, it might prevent injury. The benefits are over-rated.

There are no statistics to prove that mandatory helmet-wearing laws (MHL) would improve cyclist safety & there have been reports from Australia of death and injury rates increasing following the intoduction of MHL.

Anyone who wears one (me included) does so from a combination of superstition and family pressure.

Johnny Jukebox

I'm somewhat bemused by the attitudes shown in this thread by presumably active cyclists towards their own safety. Some of the excuses and non sequiturs show real creativity.

Look at it from this perspective - if you cycle, you might fall off your bike. If you fall off your bike you might hit your head on the way down. If you're wearing a helmet you will be less injured than as if you're not wearing a helmet as the helmet will absorb some of the impact and offer some protection.

cyclopath2001

Johnny Jukebox wrote:

I'm somewhat bemused by the attitudes shown in this thread by presumably active cyclists towards their own safety. Some of the excuses and non sequiturs show real creativity.

Look at it from this perspective - if you cycle, you might fall off your bike. If you fall off your bike you might hit your head on the way down. If you're wearing a helmet you will be less injured than as if you're not wearing a helmet as the helmet will absorb some of the impact and offer some protection.

if you walk, you might fall or walk into a lamp-post or be hit by a drunk or a motorist. If you're wearing a helmet you will be less injured than as if you're not wearing a helmet as the helmet will absorb some of the impact and offer some protection.

So why not wear a helmet all of the time?

What's the difference?

People are injured in household accidents, why not wear helmets when using stairs?

The problem with helmets is that they're seen as a silver-bullet solution to road safety, when at best, they very marginally improve the chances of surviving a collision with a truck.

For the authorities, they represent a 'quick-win' when they want to be seen to be doing something about road safety. Much easier than persuading people to drive & cycle safely.

silverside

cyclopath, get real

i'll spell it out.

when you cycle you are mixing with big lumps of metal moving at 50 kmph and above. when accidents happen, as they do, you are very likely to fall or be thrown off your bike. if you fall on your head, wearing a helmet may well prevent you getting turned into a vegetable.

i wouldnt cycle without a helmet and i wouldnt let any of my friends do so either.

rubadub thank god i've not hit my head yet in any of my falls, but friends have, the helmet saved them serious injury.

tabatha

silverside wrote:

cyclopath, get real

i'll spell it out.

when you cycle you are mixing with big lumps of metal moving at 50 kmph and above. when accidents happen, as they do, you are very likely to fall or be thrown off your bike. if you fall on your head, wearing a helmet may well prevent you getting turned into a vegetable.

i wouldnt cycle without a helmet and i wouldnt let any of my friends do so either.

rubadub thank god i've not hit my head yet in any of my falls, but friends have, the helmet saved them serious injury.

someone speaking some sense at last!

cyclopath2001

tabatha wrote:

someone speaking some sense at last!

Ah, a helmet facist! Could you say exactly which points you consider to be nonsense and why?

silverside wrote:

cyclopath, get real
when you cycle you are mixing with big lumps of metal moving at 50 kmph and above. when accidents happen, as they do, you are very likely to fall or be thrown off your bike. if you fall on your head, wearing a helmet may well prevent you getting turned into a vegetable.

I am being realistic, you are the one being unrealistic about the benefits of helmet wearing. At 50kph, in a collision with a motor vehicle, a helmet provides little protection against injury. Take off your helmet and read the label on the inside. Read the leaflet that came with it. (Note: please do this at home.)

If you are prone to falling off your bike, wear a helmet. If it makes you feel safer, wear one. But remember it offers NO protection against being run over by a truck or when flung against a wall at 50kph.

I have a negative view of facile 'solutions' to cycle safety which begin and end with 'wear an helmet'.

Those of you who bothered to read my posts, instead of jumping in with anecdotal arguments such as 'helmets saved my friends' will know that the point that I was making is that there is a risk that instead of doing something about dangerous driving that causes death and injury, the government will see enforcement of helmet-wearing as a 'short-cut' to cyclist safety.

There is much more to cyclist safety than wearing helmets.

Squirrel

My brother has managed to smash his helmet as a 10 year old racing around the block. He's now 20, he'd be a dead 10 year old if he didn't wear one according to the doctors, that was the extent of his injuries even with it on.

And the argument about walking is fairly bull**** to be honest. When out on a run I'd barely exceed 10mph, on a bike I'd rarely go less than that. On a bike you are precariously placed, don't have balance from a strong foothold. Comparing chalk and cheese. If cycling's so safe why not make it safer, or don't and just be a statistic

cyclopath2001

Squirrel wrote:

My brother has managed to smash his helmet as a 10 year old racing around the block.

A happy anecdote, at what speed was he cycling when he fell?

And the argument about walking is fairly bull**** to be honest.

There're no need for vulgarity. Let's keep the language of this discussion civil. I expect higher standards from 'moderators'. Indeed, I expect 'moderators' to take a neutral position rather than abusing contributors.

Because, in your opinion, walking is safer, are you arguing therefore that people should be allowed decide whether or not to wear a helmet based on their opinion of the likely risk of a fall?

If cycling's so safe why not make it safer, or don't and just be a statistic

Indeed, if walking is so safe, why not make it safer? Speaking of statistics, do you have any that support an argument that helmets make cycling safer? Please provide links.

To help make cycling safer, if you had to choose between making helmets compulsory, enforcing the speed limits & safe overtaking laws, or making cycle lanes operational on a full-time basis,which would you choose?

Have read read the label on your helmet?

Mucco

The debate on helmets is rather tired on many cycling fora. Personally, I somtimes wear one, depending on the type of cycle I'm doing.

However, there is no case for compulsory helmets, based on the following.
The British Medical Association says that 'even in the current hostile traffic environment, the benefits gained from regular cycling are likely to outweigh the loss of life through accidents for regular cyclists. '.
When compulsory helmet use was introduced in Australia, the number of cyclists dropped. Therefore compulsory helmet legislation reduces the health of the nation.

M


http://www.cycle-helmets.com/bicycle_numbers.html

Civilian_Target

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

They are fine for when you fall off a bike or slow collisions, but in Dublin most cyclists have been killed by Large vehicles, trucks or buses.

Dunno - I cracked my helmet off the ground when I came flying off on a roundabout in Blanchardstown last year. If I hadn't cracked my helmet I'd have cracked my head, which would have been substantially more painful/fatal and expensive!

So I'm a firm believer in helmets - once you've written one off its easy to believe! I'm told I look "cute" (and not in the good way) with them on but frankly I don't care, I like to cycle and lets face it, if you're getting on your bike to impress the ladies you probably have already bashed your head against the ground a little too hard already.

Helmets and hi-vis for the win! With some careful road placement its not hard to make cars avoid you.

Cyclopath wrote:

I have a negative view of facile 'solutions' to cycle safety which begin and end with 'wear an helmet'.

Agreed - helmet and hivis are my contribution to cycling safety. Now we need clean, sensible, permanent cycle lanes as the governments contribution, and a bit of sanity and attention to cyclists as the driver's contribution!