Ben Goldacre - Helmet 'Bad Science'

[GrumpyGregry]

I am absolutely convinced of the value of helmets if it is fitted properly and designed and tested to an appropriate standard.

I am absolutely convinced there isn't a cycling helmet on sale earth that is designed and tested to an appropriate standard.

I wouldn't call 30+mph to 0mph in a matter of a few feet a low speed off. Human beings aren't designed to operate at speeds much above 25mph.

Some, and I'm not saying you Linford, will counter with the plank of wood over the head and preference argument. It isn't a valid argument. If I shot someone in the head would anyone argue a cycle helmet would provide any protection?

 

[PpPete]

Now I know this may be anecdotal, but my friend was wearing my very nearly new carbon fibre crash helmet in 2009 when a car did a u turn on him and he T-boned it....I was behind him on another motorbike. he was doing 60mph at the point of impact and he did a superman impression. The first part of him to connect with the road after impact was his head/crash helmet.
He suffered zero damage to his head, and zero damage to his neck, although he was severely injured in other area's

The lid was damaged obviously but the shell withstood the impact and absorbed the energy.
When the insurance co finalises his settlement, we are going to bandsaw the lid apart to see the damage/compression to the foam from his head and the shells deformation. I'll post the pictures up when that happens.

I am absolutely convinced of the value of headgear if it is fitted properly and up to standard...now compare that to a low speed off which has been described here where
someones brains have been severely shaken up because there was nothing between them and the road to absorb the forces in play....

Please feel free to design and manufacture** a cycle helmet that will afford similar levels of protection.
Just to make life a bit easier for you - let's say design it for 30mph impact not 60 mph.
Oh - but don't forget that it must provide adequate ventilation.

** or sell the the design to a helmet manufacturer - and let me know which one so I can be first in the queue to buy one.

No? Then please wear a motorcycle helmet whilst riding your bike, since current cycle helmets are so inadequate.
Oh - you boiled your brain? As my kids would say "Soz mate". Would the rest of us notice any difference?

 

[totallyfixed]

Well, it makes a welcome change from the "helmet saved my life" statements, which I get thoroughly fed up of hearing. In fact this may be the first one not to! Always amazes me how many helmet wearers have accidents and are then quick to tell everyone about it, some kind of correlation going on there

 

[Linford]

Please feel free to design and manufacture** a cycle helmet that will afford similar levels of protection.
Just to make life a bit easier for you - let's say design it for 30mph impact not 60 mph.
Oh - but don't forget that it must provide adequate ventilation.

** or sell the the design to a helmet manufacturer - and let me know which one so I can be first in the queue to buy one.

No? Then please wear a motorcycle helmet whilst riding your bike, since current cycle helmets are so inadequate.
Oh - you boiled your brain? As my kids would say "Soz mate". Would the rest of us notice any difference?

I don't think that the ECE 2205 test is rated above 30mph...however, I have seen it work effectively at 60mph.

I feel though if you were to be totally honest by your argument, you'd not wear any head protection on a cycle if you felt it made you look like a knob...well the honest truth is that they pretty much all make us look like knobs, but that is not why we would want to wear them...now that bit is subjective as there are plenty of people who don't cycle would say that all people in cycling gear look like knobs irrespective of whether they are wearing head protection or not.

Venting is easy enough.... motorcycle helmets are made to insulate against cold, wind noise, wind blast rain etc and are rated on these things in tests, so a lot of time and effort has gone into trying to stop the things you are looking for in a cycle lid.

My hill ride has me starting off at the foot of it doing 15-20mph with a lid on, and by the time I've got to the top even when the temp is 5c, the lid is off, the gloves are off, I'm doing about 3mph, the jacket is unzipped and I'm cooking so I do appreciate where you are coming from....however, in this weather , I'm wearing a baseball cap under my lid to keep my head warm when riding in the town so there is a benefit for insulating your head in every day riding. Also when descending from the hill climbs, it is not unusual for me to be knocking on the door of 50mph as we have got some big hills here and do I think a cycle lid is up to the job...erm I don't want to test it.

I think to stick 2 fingers up to anything which will improve safety for cyclists because the ego of the 'against' might be a teeny tiny bit dented is a bit poor. I see people bitching and moaning on here about how dangerous the roads are and much of it is just finger pointing at others....there is a reluctance to take ownership of the problems...

 

[Dan B]

I wear a hat when it's cold, and take it off when it's not. Being made of wool, it fits quite easily into a pocket at such times. As a device for regulating heat loss, it is unarguably far superior to any hat made of rigid polystyrene

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

...I see people birching and moaning on here....

Are you sure you're not getting forums confused?

 

[Linford]

Are you sure you're not getting forums confused?

Not my cup of tea but the typo is a bit of a moment

 

[Wobblers]

I have personal experience of low and high speed accidents where the helmets have sustained extensive damage...I'm asking if he has too. It isn't unreasonable to ask as they saved a substantial injury in these instances.

I think you'll find that bone and expanded polystyrene have rather different mechanical properties. It is not possible to infer levels of injury from damage to a helmet. Certainly you can't look at a cracked lid and infer that it prevented a cracked skull - not when one requries a full order of magnitude more energy to sustain damage than the other [1]. No meaningful comparison is possible. Unless we get the same, ahem, "dummy" to repeat the same carefully controlled experiment several hundred times both with and without helmet to get a reasonable statistical analysis.

Do we have any volunteers?



[1] For the benefit of the very-slow-on-the-uptake, I ought to say that skullls are stronger - that's the benefit of half a billion years of evolution for you

 

[Linford]

I think you'll find that bone and expanded polystyrene have rather different mechanical properties. It is not possible to infer levels of injury from damage to a helmet. No meaningful comparison is possible. Unless we get the same, ahem, "dummy" to experience the same carefully controlled experiment several hundred times to get a reasonable statistical analysis.

Do we have any volunteers?

It isn't the bone which is the fragile bit, it is the mushy bit inside which is. His case has proven that bone is a poor absorber of energy and the contents of his skull got well shaken up. My mate who was subjected to many more G's than a 30mph off had no head or neck injury at all because the expanded polystyrene crushed when impacted by both the shell striking the road surface and my mates skull crushing it from inside. The lid did its job as intended.
Whats not to like ?

 

[Wobblers]

It isn't the bone which is the fragile bit, it is the mushy bit inside which is. His case has proven that bone is a poor absorber of energy and the contents of his skull got well shaken up. My mate who was subjected to many more G's than a 30mph off had no head or neck injury at all because the expanded polystyrene crushed when impacted by both the shell striking the road surface and my mates skull crushing it from inside. The lid did its job as intended.
Whats not to like ?

It is force - conveniently meaured as acceleration loads - that determines brain injury. Or mechanical diruption through major skull fractures. Bone is rather good at reducing injury - that's why it evolved, and is still around after 500 million years. An impact load sufficient to cause brain injury (often diffuse axonal injury - very serious) will not be significantly reduced by any helmet. We're talking 50 G's and above. It is not feasible to expect any material to be able to reduce that in any meaningful way in 0.02 m. This is elementary physics.

That's something I would expect any engineer to understand... so why don't you?

 

[ufkacbln]

I waited until page 5.....

 

[theclaud]

Whats not to like ?

 

[snorri]

Haven't we done all this before?
Has it ever been disputed that a helmet may prevent head injury in some bicycle crashes?

 

[Linford]

Are sure that your example hasn't got that on back to front ?

 

[Fab Foodie]

Are sure that your example hasn't got that on back to front ?

No, he's got the Bell end and the front .....