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

Qualitymark

gadetra wrote: »

In my father industry, one guy decided to try and get the timber hauliers together to agree a set price, when it came down to it he was blacklisted from the sawmills and everyone undercut him.

Incredibly stupid. If they'd stood together they could have kept up a decent price for their work.

CramCycle

MOD NOTE: I am partially to blame for this and I apologise, this thread no longer has anything to do with Helmets. I will move the recent unrelated posts tomorrow into a separate thread. If everyone could go back to Helmet discussion in this thread for now.

tomasrojo

Qualitymark wrote: »

This is possible, but looking at places where the cycling infrastructure is mostly separated from cars - Amsterdam, Copenhagen (Milton Keynes?) - the result seems to have been that cycling gradually becomes the norm.

As galwaycyclist said, Milton Keynes never became a cycling city. Driving there was and remains much quicker and more convenient than cycling. Or so I've read -- probably in the link you provided!

Also, Amsterdam and Copenhagen always had very good cycling levels -- but they were dropping fast in the 60s and early 70s. It does look as if the measures taken by the authorities stopped the decline and allowed very decent though not spectacular increases in cycle use. (Not spectacular on a graph anyway; it's quite hard to make 30%-35%, say, look spectacular on a graph with cropping a bit.)

Seville still intrigues me (it didn't have good cycling levels to begin with), but galwaycyclist's point intrigues me too.

EDIT: Sorry Cram, wrote this while you were posting the warning.

Mr Rubicon Conundrum

Thanks to my helmet, I am sitting at my desk able to write this.

Fell off this morning at about 30km/h, my own fault. As I was sliding along, 2 thoughts came into my head:
1. That grating scraping noise is my helmet protecting my ear from being ripped off and my head from requiring any treatment

2. At least that lamppost will stop the slide

Its amazing how things slow down in the head to actually have these thoughts while you are actually in the middle of a potentially serious accident lasting a couple of seconds maximum.

RainyDay

Just came across this misguided but well-intentioned initiative - I wonder if there is a way to educate them on the most likely outcome of mandatory helmet laws;

http://www.headway.ie/news/2015/03/09/brain-injury-survivors-call-for-cycle-helmet-laws/

CramCycle

Mr Rubicon Conundrum wrote: »

Fell off this morning at about 30km/h, my own fault. As I was sliding along, 2 thoughts came into my head:
1. That grating scraping noise is my helmet protecting my ear from being ripped off and my head from requiring any treatment

2. At least that lamppost will stop the slide

Just to play the devils advocate, as someone who has come off at that speed as well, if you weren't wearing a helmet, would you have gotten your arms up around your head as reflexes would tell you too? Would your head have scraped? being lighter, would you have held your head up easier? How is your neck feeling after the helmet put strain on it dragging it?

Not saying you are wrong, but I am asking, would the accident have played out as it had with out the helmet? Would you have been more cautious, would you have been going slower, what caused you too fall, did the helmet inhibit your reflexes?

All things being equal (ie the accident occured regardless), would the way you reacted to the fall and therefore the effect it had be changed by the presence / absence of a helmet?

Like I said, I have no interest in whether a person wears a helmet or not on a push bike, it is in fact their choice and no one else, just a question

Qualitymark

RainyDay wrote: »

Just came across this misguided but well-intentioned initiative - I wonder if there is a way to educate them on the most likely outcome of mandatory helmet laws;

http://www.headway.ie/news/2015/03/09/brain-injury-survivors-call-for-cycle-helmet-laws/

Before educating anyone, perhaps read the press release, which gave me the chills:

In December 2013 Road Safety Authority issued a press release stating that the National Neurosurgery Centre at Beaumont Hospital treated 36 patients with head trauma as a result of a road traffic collision. Of those, 13 were cyclists; none of whom were wearing helmets.

The National Report on Traumatic Brain Injury in the Republic of Ireland 2008 gives an insight into acquired brain injury hospital admissions in the country. The report is based on data from patients warranting neurosurgical opinion. The report finds that 13% of the pedal cyclists admitted sustained severe traumatic brain injury, 76% sustained mild traumatic brain injury, 3% sustained irreversible brain injury, and the mortality rate was 7%.

When my father was in hospital with dementia, one of his fellow patients was a young man - something like 21 or 23 at the time. If I remember right, he was 18 when he had a motorcycle accident. He had suffered irreversible brain injury. Before the accident he was a talented pianist. There was a piano in the ward, and he would sit down and start to play, and then cry out and smash at the keys with his fists at the jumble of notes that came out, and strike himself in the face with his fists, weeping.

galwaycyclist

RainyDay wrote: »

Just came across this misguided but well-intentioned initiative - I wonder if there is a way to educate them on the most likely outcome of mandatory helmet laws;

http://www.headway.ie/news/2015/03/09/brain-injury-survivors-call-for-cycle-helmet-laws/

I saw that and wondered why they were only calling for helmets for cyclists. Are they really concerned with head injury or is it more that they like telling cyclists what to do?

CramCycle

Considering 13% of 13 cyclists is 1.69 cyclists, I would query their sources.

Mr Rubicon Conundrum

Just to play the devils advocate, as someone who has come off at that speed as well, if you weren't wearing a helmet, would you have gotten your arms up around your head as reflexes would tell you too? Would your head have scraped? being lighter, would you have held your head up easier? How is your neck feeling after the helmet put strain on it dragging it?

Not saying you are wrong, but I am asking, would the accident have played out as it had with out the helmet? Would you have been more cautious, would you have been going slower, what caused you too fall, did the helmet inhibit your reflexes?

These are good points/ questions and no debate here will be able to confirm or refute them. However, I fell to my left, so it was LHS of helmet that scraped along the ground. My left arm was caught under my body and was no use to protect my head. My neck is ok, my shoulder and arm are sore from dragging along ground.

If it was to happen again, I think I would 100% rather have the helmet that not have it, as it stands - just a tiny scrape on one finger and elbow; and arm and shoulder pain - my head and face are untouched. I am happy with this outcome, could have been worse. Could it have been better without a helmet, no one will ever know!

mcgratheoin

CramCycle wrote: »

Considering 13% of 13 cyclists is 1.69 cyclists, I would query their sources.

The 13 cyclists is for 2013, the 13% is from 2008

CramCycle

mcgratheoin wrote: »

The 13 cyclists is for 2013, the 13% is from 2008

Serves me right for skimming

galwaycyclist

Qualitymark wrote: »

The National Report on Traumatic Brain Injury in the Republic of Ireland 2008 gives an insight into acquired brain injury hospital admissions in the country. The report is based on data from patients warranting neurosurgical opinion. The report finds that 13% of the pedal cyclists admitted sustained severe traumatic brain injury, 76% sustained mild traumatic brain injury, 3% sustained irreversible brain injury, and the mortality rate was 7%.

Am I correct in recalling that this meant that of all road-user groups, cyclists had the lowest rate of irreversible brain injury, lowest mortality and that the length of time in ICU or hospital generally was the lowest for cyclists among the groups studied?

monument

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Am I correct in recalling that this meant that of all road-user groups, cyclists had the lowest rate of irreversible brain injury, lowest mortality and that the length of time in ICU or hospital generally was the lowest for cyclists among the groups studied?

Sounds about right.

And, helpfully, Headway have the report on their website: http://www.headway.ie/download/pdf/phillips_report.pdf

RainyDay

galwaycyclist wrote: »

I saw that and wondered why they were only calling for helmets for cyclists. Are they really concerned with head injury or is it more that they like telling cyclists what to do?

I'd suggest that they are misguided more than anything else, which is why I suggested education might help.

Qualitymark wrote: »

Before educating anyone, perhaps read the press release, which gave me the chills:

Why would you assume that I haven't read the press release? Your assumption was wrong, btw.

Qualitymark wrote: »

When my father was in hospital with dementia, one of his fellow patients was a young man - something like 21 or 23 at the time. If I remember right, he was 18 when he had a motorcycle accident. He had suffered irreversible brain injury. Before the accident he was a talented pianist. There was a piano in the ward, and he would sit down and start to play, and then cry out and smash at the keys with his fists at the jumble of notes that came out, and strike himself in the face with his fists, weeping.

I'm not sure I see the relevance of your motor cycle story here? We can all come up with dreadful stories about the impacts of particular injuries, but that doesn't justify knee-jerk responses.

The most likely outcome of mandatory cycle helmet legislation is that less people will cycle. Cycling therefore becomes more dangerous for the remaining cyclists, who lose the 'safety in numbers' effect. And as a society, we have much bigger obesity problems and traffic problems.

For the record, I've read the press release and the report. I've seen that far more head injuries occur at home than on the road. [Mandatory stairs helmets anyone?]. I've seen that of the injuries that occur on the road, many more occur in cars than on bikes. [Mandatory driving helmets anyone?]. I've seen that in relation to the injuries to cyclists;

In the NSU, 15 out of 29 (52%) pedal cyclists and 6 out of 18 motor-cyclists (33%) were reported to be without a helmet. Nine of the 10 motorcyclists without a helmet had a GCS <9 (a severe injury) but no statistical difference is injury severity was proven for either pedal or motorcyclists.

Remind me again what problem we are trying to fix here?

enas

Mr Rubicon Conundrum wrote: »

If it was to happen again, I think I would 100% rather have the helmet that not have it, as it stands - just a tiny scrape on one finger and elbow; and arm and shoulder pain - my head and face are untouched. I am happy with this outcome, could have been worse. Could it have been better without a helmet, no one will ever know!

A few years ago (well, over 5 years ago, time flies so fast), I also fell at speed, without wearing a helmet (was just cycling around town). I think I always refrained from mentioning this event on this forum, but since you're bringing this now...

I must have received quite a strong blow, since I lost consciousness quite badly, and have no recollection of the last few seconds before falling. But I had a smallish fracture on my left elbow, which, in combination with the location of road rash, indicates that I must have protected by reflex my head with my arms. Thankfully, I sustained no head injury whatsoever. I could go on and pretend that helmets are, consequently, useless, but decency makes me abstain from this. More seriously, if I was wearing a helmet (which I tend to do when in "road cyclist mode"), would I be pretending that "a helmet saved my life"? Who knows, probably. Maybe it's a natural fear-induced reaction.

Incidentally, and this is why I'm reacting to your story, my worse injury in this accident (the only one so far, fingers crossed) was that my left ear got almost completely torn off in the process. I was pretty lucky that they've managed to stitch it back almost seamlessly (incidentally, treated as a public patient at CUH, and very satisfied with the level of care, just to counterbalance the general negativity towards the healthcare system in this country). Now this was far from a life-threatening injury, but the whole thing was nevertheless very unpleasant (there was a good few stitches too all over the left half side of my face). Would a helmet have prevented this? It probably would. This is an aspect that is often overlooked when discussing helmets (non-life threatening soft tissue injuries). Would it have made head-related injuries worse? Who knows. Would you choose "cosmetic" damage over head injuries? That's not a decision I want to take. Is there any conclusion to draw on the general subject of helmets from my own anecdote? Absolutely not. But for sure, I hope that won't happen again, with or without a helmet. By the way, I still believe that helmets are unnecessary for normal every day cycling.

Beasty

enas wrote: »

I must have received quite a strong blow, since I lost consciousness quite badly, and have no recollection of the last few seconds before falling. But I had a smallish fracture on my left elbow, which, in combination with the location of road rash, indicates that I must have protected by reflex my head with my arms. Thankfully, I sustained no head injury whatsoever.

To be clear, if you lost consciousness you without doubt suffered some brain injury

enas

Beasty wrote: »

To be clear, if you lost consciousness you without doubt suffered some brain injury

Fair enough -- I should have said, I escaped with only very mild injuries, but no severe injury, nothing that required any specific care other than close monitoring for the next few hours followed by a clear MRI scan.

SeanPuddin_

My father in law was in Halfords and was told helmets are compulsory by law enforced by the new FCNs, nearly forcing him into an unwanted purchase. A lot of misinformation out there.

tomasrojo

SeanPuddin_ wrote: »

A lot of misinformation out there.

A friend of mine over a decade ago who was buying a bike was told by the shop owner that the local Garda had told him (the owner) to tell customers that helmets were compulsory.

But that FCN (dis)information leaflet put out by the RSA and Gardaí was deliberately misleading and seems to have been fairly successful in misinforming people.

mcgratheoin

SeanPuddin_ wrote: »

My father in law was in Halfords and was told helmets are compulsory by law enforced by the new FCNs, nearly forcing him into an unwanted purchase. A lot of misinformation out there.

Bring it back and get a refund.

tomasrojo

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Bring it back and get a refund.

Nearly, he said.

mcgratheoin

tomasrojo wrote: »

Nearly, he said.

Baby teething leads to sleep deprivation

Cramcycle wrote:

Serves me right for skimming

What he said

Beasty

enas wrote: »

Fair enough -- I should have said, I escaped with only very mild injuries, but no severe injury, nothing that required any specific care other than close monitoring for the next few hours followed by a clear MRI scan.

MRI scans may detect a bleed, but not other types of brain injury. I had all the scans done, and was released from hospital the next day. The A&E department basically gave me a few tablets and arranged for me to follow up with certain bone (rather than brain) specialists. I convinced a lot of people, including myself, I was a lot better than I actually was.

It was only a month or so later when speaking to a different maxillofacial specialist (one who works with the Irish Rugby team), that I was advised to see a neuropsychologist. It was only 4 months after my own accident that I finally got to see him and start to understand the scale of brain injury suffered. He did various tests and followed up to check on progress.

Without doubt I am much better than I was when I first saw him 16 months ago. Equally though it remains quite clear to me that I still have some way to go. What is equally clear is brain injury is really not very well understood by the medical profession. Those who do know something acknowledge they are only starting to scratch the surface, which is why you do see a lot of concern shown with all head injuries in certain sports nowadays (and indeed multi-billions being put aside in American football to deal with claims they expect to come their way from players as they suffer the long term consequences of multiple concussions in their later life)

tomasrojo

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Baby teething leads to sleep deprivation

I remember it well (not my own teething; the kids'). It does pass!

Qualitymark

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Baby teething leads to sleep deprivation

In the immortal words of PH Pearse, teeth hurt you in their coming and their going.

enas

Beasty wrote: »

It was only 4 months after my own accident that I finally got to see him and start to understand the scale of brain injury suffered. He did various tests and followed up to check on progress.

Thanks for your recount, and I'm sorry to hear that you have such a difficult recovery. So what exactly were the symptoms of the initially undetected head injury? And what tests did the neurologist do? What treatment did you receive?

(I hope I'm not derailing the thread too much -- I genuinely think my question is relevant to this thread.)

tomasrojo

Wearing a helmet makes cyclists take more risks, study indicates

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/wearing-a-helmet-makes-cyclists-take-more-risks-study-indicates-199184#tcG2DoS5hE0tBepS.99

Rather roundabout way of showing the effect, but I guess that's the point: trying to prevent the participants realising what the researchers are trying to measure.

ciara1052

I've been cycling around Dublin for years now and had my first fall there a week ago in the city center (It was completely my own fault too). Unfortunately, I hit my head fairly hard off the ground (eyesight went blurry, nauseous and hearing going funny) and ended up with a few other bruises. All everyone said to me after was 'why weren't you wearing a helmet?!'. Even though I'm aware about the research (I've kept an eye on this forum) no one believes it (I suppose it seems counter intuitive) and now I've been kind of pressured into getting a helmet (people are coming from a good place I suppose).

After coming back to this thread I'm second guessing it. I've googled the MIPs helmets that seem to have some sort of validation online but they're fairly expensive. I got quite a shock and may invest in one anyway because I'd hate to have another fall with more severe consequences and be stuck thinking 'what if' . Anyone have any advice about picking out a helmet/where to go in Dublin that have the MIPs ones?

CramCycle

ciara1052 wrote: »

After coming back to this thread I'm second guessing it. I've googled the MIPs helmets that seem to have some sort of validation online but they're fairly expensive. I got quite a shock and may invest in one anyway because I'd hate to have another fall with more severe consequences and be stuck thinking 'what if' . Anyone have any advice about picking out a helmet/where to go in Dublin that have the MIPs ones?

Not sure where have them but I know that the most reasonably priced one is the Giro Savant for 100euro if you like a road look, or you can get the Giro Sutton, also 100euro but looks more like a commuter/skater helmet, both with MIPS