Helmets - the definitive thread.. ** Mod Note - Please read Opening Post **

Iwannahurl

magicbastarder wrote: »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/03/motorcyclist-dies-helmet-protest_n_889427.html

not intended as any sort of commentary or otherwise.

Not at all relevant to cycle helmets, I would say.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

I will throw my own 2cents on the helmet debate from recent experience.

I was involved in a hit and run 3 weeks ago and was left unconscious in the middle of the road. Got away without anything broken and concussion. Looking at the helmet and how it cracked on the inside i think its fair to say that without the helmet more serious injuries (or worse) could have occured.
Have always worn a helmet, always will and so will my kids. If that means they dont cycle cause they want to look cool without one on then so be it.....saying that after seeing Dads balloon like head and cracked helmet they have worn their helmets when going out.

galwaycyclist

Martin Tall Louse wrote: »

I will throw my own 2cents on the helmet debate from recent experience.

I was involved in a hit and run 3 weeks ago and was left unconscious in the middle of the road. Got away without anything broken and concussion. Looking at the helmet and how it cracked on the inside i think its fair to say that without the helmet more serious injuries (or worse) could have occured.
Have always worn a helmet, always will and so will my kids. If that means they dont cycle cause they want to look cool without one on then so be it.....saying that after seeing Dads balloon like head and cracked helmet they have worn their helmets when going out.

Which is why helmets and helmet promotion are in my view a bad thing, the more people who cycle the safer it becomes to be a cyclist.

Stop people from cycling for wearing the "wrong" clothes and you make the roads more dangerous for cycling.

Seaswimmer

Martin Tall Louse wrote: »

I will throw my own 2cents on the helmet debate from recent experience.

I was involved in a hit and run 3 weeks ago and was left unconscious in the middle of the road. Got away without anything broken and concussion. Looking at the helmet and how it cracked on the inside i think its fair to say that without the helmet more serious injuries (or worse) could have occured.
Have always worn a helmet, always will and so will my kids. If that means they dont cycle cause they want to look cool without one on then so be it.....saying that after seeing Dads balloon like head and cracked helmet they have worn their helmets when going out.

I coached juvenile GAA teams for a few years. Lots of the kids cycled to training. Parents were always at me to try and make sure the kids wore their helmets going home.

They sent them out on bikes with no brakes, under inflated tyres, dark clothes, no lights and little or no cycling instruction.

but hey they had their helmet so all was ok.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

Seaswimmer wrote: »

I coached juvenile GAA teams for a few years. Lots of the kids cycled to training. Parents were always at me to try and make sure the kids wore their helmets going home.

They sent them out on bikes with no brakes, under inflated tyres, dark clothes, no lights and little or no cycling instruction.

but hey they had their helmet so all was ok.

Goes without saying.

tomasrojo

Sort of review of Hövding:
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/15/hovding-inflatable-bicycle-helmet

Best comment:

It worked for me when I was hit by a bus outside our local zoo .
I went 20ft in the air and landed on my cushioned head.
I thought well that was a lucky escape.
But unfortunately I then bounced another 20 ft over a wall and into the lion enclosure.

jon1981

Fascinating that the a helmet debate can spawn so much! Is it not simple as as this: foam padding between my head and concrete/car/whatever is a good thing? obviously when cycling at any speed on the road with traffic and unpredictable road users!

Ok you can be as careful as you like, lit up like a christmas tree, brakes that will stop you on a penny, tyres that are glued to the road in any condition... but what about the careless twat that hits you at low/high speed and your unfortunate enough to land head first?

ah sure he was only going at 10 kph when he was knocked off the bike, how did he end up in a coma?

tomasrojo

jon1981 wrote: »

Fascinating that the a helmet debate can spawn so much! Is it not simple as as this: foam padding between my head and concrete/car/whatever is a good thing? obviously when cycling at any speed on the road with traffic and unpredictable road users!

Ok you can be as careful as you like, lit up like a christmas tree, brakes that will stop you on a penny, tyres that are glued to the road in any condition... but what about the careless twat that hits you at low/high speed and your unfortunate enough to land head first?

ah sure he was only going at 10 kph when he was knocked off the bike, how did he end up in a coma?

It's difficult to summarise 1268 posts in a single post. But you nailed it. Well done.

jon1981

tomasrojo wrote: »

It's difficult to summarise 1268 posts in a single post. But you nailed it. Well done.

Thank you

I've a great filter for nonsense.

jon1981

jon1981 wrote: »

Is it not simple as as this: foam padding between my head and concrete/car/whatever is a good thing?

Now apply the same logic to pedestrians and motorists.

You see?

Never 'simple' really!

helimachoptor

what annoys me..

Parents out with their kids... Kids have helmet, parents dont.

So parent doesnt want to see the kid smash their heads off the ground, but its ok for the kid to see the parent do it

jon1981

Deleted User wrote: »

Now apply the same logic to pedestrians and motorists.

You see?

Never 'simple' really!

We are talking about cyclists.

Cars have an array of safety equipment to protect the driver and passengers. Other than a helmet and road awareness/experience, what has a cyclist got?

Seweryn

jon1981 wrote: »

Cars have an array of safety equipment to protect the driver and passengers.

Like what - helmets, fireproof overall, roll cage? Can't see this on my car.

jon1981

Seweryn wrote: »

Like what - helmets, fireproof overall, roll cage? Can't see this on my car.

Exactly the nonsense I was referring to. Sure just ignore the safety equipment you do have, great argument :rolleyes:

jon1981

jon1981 wrote: »

We are talking about cyclists.

Cars have an array of safety equipment to protect the driver and passengers. Other than a helmet and road awareness/experience, what has a cyclist got?

Let's not have this argument all over again.

The point remains relevant - the "surely a helmet is safer than not wearing a helmet" argument applies to everything. As does the "if it saves one life" and all the others.

CramCycle

jon1981 wrote: »

Fascinating that the a helmet debate can spawn so much! Is it not simple as as this: foam padding between my head and concrete/car/whatever is a good thing? obviously when cycling at any speed on the road with traffic and unpredictable road users!

Its not only that but the fact that other road users may (and are often shown too) change their behaviour around cyclists depending on their attire.

I'd sooner have a car being more cautious around me than having a piece of safety equipment that made them feel safer to be beside me.

I got given out to for not wearing a helmet the other day, the lady proceeded to tell me how a helmet had saver her husbands life on several occasions during crashes and falling off.

You know what I think, your husband needs to learn how to ride his bike before he goes outside again.

Ok you can be as careful as you like, lit up like a christmas tree, brakes that will stop you on a penny, tyres that are glued to the road in any condition... but what about the careless twat that hits you at low/high speed and your unfortunate enough to land head first?

At my typical speed, a helmet might leave me with a prettier face for the coffin, it certainly won't save me, at best it will leave me a live quadraplegic rather than flat out dead.

helimachoptor wrote: »

what annoys me..

Parents out with their kids... Kids have helmet, parents dont.

So parent doesnt want to see the kid smash their heads off the ground, but its ok for the kid to see the parent do it

My kid doesn't wear one, problem solved.

Tenzor07

CramCycle wrote: »

I got given out to for not wearing a helmet the other day, the lady proceeded to tell me how a helmet had saver her husbands life on several occasions during crashes and falling off..

Jeepers, 7 times at say €100 a go, this guy definitely needs stabilisers!

ford2600

The reaction to reach for PPE first, second and third, when faced with many risks is a common approach in my experience.

However in the hierarchy of risk control, PPE is the last option to consider in a properly organised system attempting to control risk.

The other stuff that really matter ALL the time like, bike handling, road craft, maintenance etc is not something that can be accomplished by just wearing something; so lots of people don't bother to do the hard bit properly and reach for helmet and assume it'll be grand. A lot of the same people also insist on it for the people who do know how to cycle safely.

It's very similar to the nonsense seen on countless building sites; signs everywhere, hi vis and helmets aplenty but all types of stupid/dangerous work practices.

How much protection they provide I'm no sure.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8971066

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2716781

These suggest they are highly effective but this raises more questions than anything

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CG4QFjAHahUKEwimjpnnwZHGAhXBiSwKHdsoAJo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cyclehelmets.org%2Fpdfgen.php%3FPageNo%3D1159&ei=Dqx-VabPNsGTsgHb0YDQCQ&usg=AFQjCNGqSKLDSGhWNcMl9rBowJM-VbQymA

CramCycle

ford2600 wrote: »

It's very similar to the nonsense seen on countless building sites; signs everywhere, hi vis and helmets aplenty but all types of stupid/dangerous work practices.

How much protection they provide I'm no sure.

Safe pass (for anyone who has done it, what a waste of time and resources, the chance to do something good, and its ruined by someone who seems to have never worked on a site, presenting a ppt that looks like they just googled stuff and through it up with no research or experience), hi vis, helmet, steel cap boots.

My father worked on sites for years, as do many of my friends, the stupidity of some people, walking into clear danger areas, site inspectors walking up behind people using heavy cutting equipment with no warning, lads walking in behind lorries that are about to tip.

But sure, they have followed the rules, so it must be grand.

Chips Lovell

jon1981 wrote: »

Is it not simple as as this: foam padding between my head and concrete/car/whatever is a good thing? obviously when cycling at any speed on the road with traffic and unpredictable road users!

You're falling victim to the safety fallacy, the assumption that if a safety measure exists, then it is logical to take it. Follow that logic and everyone would be a fool not to cycle around in body armour.

The real thorny question is, what is the level of risk that warrants adopting additional safety measures.

Cookie_Monster

jon1981 wrote: »

Cars have an array of safety equipment to protect the driver and passengers. Other than a helmet and road awareness/experience, what has a cyclist got?

lights, good tyres and brakes are pretty major safety equipment.

and realistically in a 100+kph crash cars have very little equipment that will do you any good either.

it really depends how you look at it and what you want to leave outside the box or not.

RainyDay

jon1981 wrote: »

We are talking about cyclists.

Cars have an array of safety equipment to protect the driver and passengers. Other than a helmet and road awareness/experience, what has a cyclist got?

You have noticed the death toll on the roads, which actually involves very few cyclists, right? Surely you'd wear a helmet when you're driving to reduce the chances, given that 200+ people each year are killed on the roads and thousands more maimed, even with your 'array of safety equipment'.

niceonetom

jon1981 wrote: »

Fascinating that the a helmet debate can spawn so much! Is it not simple as as this: foam padding between my head and concrete/car/whatever is a good thing? obviously when cycling at any speed on the road with traffic and unpredictable road users!

Ok you can be as careful as you like, lit up like a christmas tree, brakes that will stop you on a penny, tyres that are glued to the road in any condition... but what about the careless twat that hits you at low/high speed and your unfortunate enough to land head first?

ah sure he was only going at 10 kph when he was knocked off the bike, how did he end up in a coma?

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

Beasty

I've been thinking about the role my helmet played in my accident, and there is little doubt in (what remains of!!) my mind it helped. It helped because I did not break any bones above the "helmet line" - if I had there's a fair chance I would have suffered more damage to the brain than I did. Equally though the number of fractures I suffered in areas where there was absolutely no protection (my arms, and other parts of my face) almost certainly also helped as they absorbed a hell of a lot of the shock, that otherwise would have led to my brain bouncing even harder off the inside of my skull. The thing is though, none of us will ever know for certain. Maybe a fractured skull would have absorbed more of the shock - provided fragments didn't then impale the brain I may not as suffered as much as I did

Yes - quite complicated this head injury lark .....

tomasrojo

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

The real thorny question is, what is the level of risk that warrants adopting additional safety measures.

Also, if the Winton Professor for the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge University says that the direct benefit of your favourite safety measure is too modest to capture, how hard should you promote it, when there are other options you could explore to improve safety?

buffalo

tomasrojo wrote: »

Also, if the Winton Professor for the Public Understanding of Risk at Cambridge University says that the direct benefit of your favourite safety measure is too modest to capture, how hard should you promote it, when there are other options you could explore to improve safety?

I had to Google that one, it sounded too far-fetched to actually exist.

tomasrojo

buffalo wrote: »

I had to Google that one, it sounded too far-fetched to actually exist.

Blackadder: Baldrick, I have a very, very, very cunning plan.
Baldrick: Is it as cunning as a fox what used to be Professor of Cunning at Oxford University but has moved on and is now working for the U.N. at the High Commission of International Cunning Planning?
Blackadder: Yes it is.
Baldrick: Hmm... that's cunning.

.

LeoD

You'd have to be mad to go out for a cycle without a helmet, what with the birds of prey attacks and all those everyday risks we all face.

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/check-out-the-damage-a-bird-of-preys-claws-did-to-a-national-champs-helmet/

As it says in the article, "Had he not been wearing his helmet, the damage inflicted by the buzzard would have been to the junior cyclocross and MTB champion’s head"

tomasrojo

By a bizarre coincidence, the BBC pointed out just this deficiency of the Hövding:

Are there caveats? [...] Additionally, the Hövding does not protect the rider from falling objects

http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20140626-no-helmet-no-problem

They neglected to mention buzzards, which strictly speaking do not fall on your head. Of seeking many hazards there is no end, as Ecclesiastes might have said.

Beasty

tomasrojo wrote: »

They neglected to mention buzzards, which strictly speaking do not fall on your head.

What if it's just been shot?

:pac: