The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[Tim Hall]

ANOTHER MOD NOTE (or another note from a Mod)
Some more posts have been Deleted.
This is very specifically the Helmet Debate thread, so please do not go wandering off into the countryside counting the number of helmet wearers/non-wearers and reporting your findings here. It adds nothing to the debate, which is repetitive enough as it is.

It could be useful for anyone posting to re-read the Special Rules that apply to the Helmet Debate thread.
It would be very beneficial if everyone kept to those Rules too ...

Thank you.

I would have thought the incidence of wearers versus non wearers a key part of the Helmet Debate myself.

 

[mjr]

This is very specifically the Helmet Debate thread, so please do not go wandering off into the countryside counting the number of helmet wearers/non-wearers and reporting your findings here. It adds nothing to the debate, which is repetitive enough as it is.

It could be useful for anyone posting to re-read the Special Rules that apply to the Helmet Debate thread.
It would be very beneficial if everyone kept to those Rules too ...

Could you clarify, please? The special rules say "personal experiences and anecdotes are fine in the context of this forum discussion" but are unpublished usage counts being classed as goading or a sort of circular argument, where one person says it's high, then another says it's low? How do they differ from the smashed helmet appeals and the saved-my-life/no-it-failed loops?

 

[Justinslow]

I would have thought the incidence of wearers versus non wearers a key part of the Helmet Debate myself.

And my recent post regarding me going to Snetterton circuit on Friday and me having to wear my helmet as that's the rules, which has just been deleted!
It does seem the mods are quite random In deleting stuff, as a quick look back at the thread sees errrrr lots and lots of irrelevant (and sometimes rude) stuff that hasn't been deleted. Just sayin.

 

[mjr]

And my recent post regarding me going to Snetterton circuit on Friday and me having to wear my helmet as that's the rules which has just been deleted!

Challenge that rule, if you're really anti-compulsion.

It does seem the mods are quite random In deleting stuff, as a quick look back at the thread sees errrrr lots and lots of irrelevant (and sometimes rude) stuff that hasn't been deleted. Just sayin.

I'm assuming the mods aren't acting unless someone clicks the "Report" link on a post. If you think something's rude, please Report it.

 

[Justinslow]

Challenge that rule, if you're really anti-compulsion.


I'm assuming the mods aren't acting unless someone clicks the "Report" link on a post. If you think something's rude, please Report it.

No I'm fine with it, I guess the circuit owners MSV are duty bound by the terms of their insurance policies so it's probably not their fault. Kids are allowed too, it's a good event and a worthy cause.

 

[Mugshot]

I once had a dubious claim in a helmet advert removed by the ASA; it was for the Las Victory Supreme which, at £189.99, stated -
"Don't take Jake or Jill's example and break your crown, instead wear the Las Victory Supreme crown with pride and joy and ride in absolute safety".

I thought that was me

Update;

Halfords Ltd


Dear Mugshot,


Thank you for contacting us at the ASA regarding a webpage for a helmet on the Halfords website. We contacted the advertisers, who gave us their assurance that the claim of “absolute safety” would be removed from the website.


On the basis of their assurance, we’ll close our file, and basic details will appear on the website, www.asa.org.uk on Wednesday 11th November.


Thank you for taking the time to raise your concerns with us.


Kind regards

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I thought that was me

Let's share it as a joint effort!

GC

 

[Mugshot]

Let's share it as a joint effort!

GC

Well it was certainly you that mentioned it on here, so I will happily share the (Las) Victory

 

[GrumpyGregry]

After my big off last year. I cannot say for sure that my helmet saved my life. What I can say for certain that it saved me from serious gravel rash to my face and head. The amount of plastic that was taken off the helmet and peak by the road surface could well have meant losing my nose or chin completely.

I wore my helmet some days and not others. I wear it every day now.

I can say for certain. With absolute certainty, that in "the off" of April 2014 my helmet did not a thing to protect me from injury.

And I've been concussed two or three times since '95 whilst wearing a helmet and mtbing. If you aren't falling off you're not trying hard enough.

ANOTHER MOD NOTE (or another note from a Mod)
Some more posts have been Deleted.
This is very specifically the Helmet Debate thread, so please do not go wandering off into the countryside counting the number of helmet wearers/non-wearers and reporting your findings here. It adds nothing to the debate, which is repetitive enough as it is.

It could be useful for anyone posting to re-read the Special Rules that apply to the Helmet Debate thread.
It would be very beneficial if everyone kept to those Rules too ...

Thank you.

First rule of the helmet thread, no talking about helmets?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Could you clarify, please? The special rules say "personal experiences and anecdotes are fine in the context of this forum discussion" but are unpublished usage counts being classed as goading or a sort of circular argument, where one person says it's high, then another says it's low? How do they differ from the smashed helmet appeals and the saved-my-life/no-it-failed loops?

@Justinslow and @GrumpyGregry in complete agreement. Shock! Horror!

 

[mjr]

No I'm fine with it,

OK, so the next time someone writes that no-one here is arguing for compulsion, I'll refer back to you being fine with it.

I guess the circuit owners MSV are duty bound by the terms of their insurance policies so it's probably not their fault.

That's just a guess. I guess that at least one of the organisers is a helmet enthusiast and OK with removing other cyclists' freedom of choice.

Kids are allowed too, it's a good event and a worthy cause.

It's a ride around a motor racing circuit on a former airfield on a Breckland plateau. Not only do I not see that as boring to cycle on, I would have thought there was a lot less to cause a crash or hit your head upon, but any crash impact speeds are more likely to exceed the EN tests.

 

[Justinslow]

OK, so the next time someone writes that no-one here is arguing for compulsion, I'll refer back to you being fine with it.


That's just a guess. I guess that at least one of the organisers is a helmet enthusiast and OK with removing other cyclists' freedom of choice.


It's a ride around a motor racing circuit on a former airfield on a Breckland plateau. Not only do I not see that as boring to cycle on, I would have thought there was a lot less to cause a crash or hit your head upon, but any crash impact speeds are more likely to exceed the EN tests.

It's no different to the many many sportives held in this country, it's just a condition of the ride, don't go if you don't like it, I don't have problem with it as I don't mind wearing a helmet.

Actually your wrong, theres probably going to be loads of wannabe speed freaks trying to get all the KOMS round the track giving it the beans weaving round all the kids ask me how I know this......

Seriously though, the above paragraph was in jest, it's for a great cause and it's not something you can do everyday so in my book is (and was last August when I did it before) an enjoyable ride.
It'd be rude to not try and set a fast lap of a racetrack though.

And before you flame the speed freaks, everybody gave everyone loads of room on the track and there were no incidents to my knowledge.

 

[steveindenmark]

How does a cycling helmet protect your chin unless it's a full face MTB one?

Let me make myself clear. I am not a fan of helmets and I think each of us have the right to choose to wear one or not.

When I came off I was going fast and went right over the top. The thing I remember the most is sliding face down along the road and hearing the peak and helmet grinding away. I dont think helmets were designed to take anything but the lightest of impacts and I am just lucky that I slid rather than piled in head first. I doubt if one would save you in a heavy heavy impact accident. But on this occasion it saved me from a lot of facial injury. My arms are still scarred from the off.

 

[mjr]

It's no different to the many many sportives held in this country, it's just a condition of the ride, don't go if you don't like it, I don't have problem with it as I don't mind wearing a helmet.

To all those who don't have a problem with people being forced to do something if they themselves were going to do it anyway - what happens when it's something which you find obnoxious?

Also, my approach to anti-freedom sportives has been to go and do the ride if I wanted to (assuming it's an open-road one), but I didn't register (because what's the point if they're just going to harrass me before the start and disqualify me at it? There seems little point making paperwork for everyone) or use the event facilities (because I've not paid). I don't see why I wouldn't ride a route on public roads just because the commercial organiser refuses my money - it's their loss.

 

[Mugshot]

my approach to anti-freedom sportives has been to go and do the ride if I wanted to

Has anybody questioned you when you've done this? Yes I know it's public roads and you're not using the facilities and you've every right to be there etc etc but I was wondering if anybody in a tabard had ever approached you?