Discussion in 'Helmet Discussions' started by jonny jeez, 1 May 2017.
This is exactly my point, you have explained it better than me though.
No, good Cyclecraft means you can avoid most collisions which is the basis of H&S in workplaces, you should try to minimise the risk before you start providing PPE to protect people. Avoiding is better than protecting.
I make mini-KB wear a helmet because her Cyclecraft skills are inevitably less developed than mine.
I think we've seen a transition from cycling primarily as transport to cycling primarily as recreation/fitness/ sport (sort of a continuum) and this has coincided with the rise of the hat.
Falling off is a relatively common thing for cyclists, if @jefmcg 's thread is anything to go by. Thankfully the number involving head injuries seems to be low ( but - full disclosure - I am in the head injury group)
So ... You are likely to fall off at some time. You are more likely to bang your hips or elbows than your head.
None of that answers the OPs question of whether they are needed because to do that you'd need to consider whether they work, and the thread would melt.
Why do I wear one then? That's nobody's business but mine.
I don't agree with everything you say here. I do agree that the choice is ours and as such doesn't need justification.
However the two things I disagree with is that cyclists dont seem to fall of frequently.
From jefs thread (of our small group) it represents around once every 10,000 miles. That could be 2-10 years a rider.
Then consider the riding universe...asia, Netherlands and the frequency looks far lower.
Which is my point really, does this ...global...frequency justify wearing protective gear.
The second point I disagree on is the efficacy of a lid, I don't see that this is wholly relevant to its necessity. After all, if it were truly necessary, we could design lids that worked.
That's really what this thread is about. Its not about why we wear them or how they work, its about whether the risk of head injury is significant enough to warrant wearing protection in the first place.
You are very well placed to have an opinion on that by the sounds of it, I hope your head injury wasn't a bad one by the way.
From general observations whilst touring in other countries, I feel we as a nation are more risk averse, and worried that we will sued by some injured party than our Euro neighbours.
Perhaps the most obvious example of this would be the signs on quaysides warning of deep water. Well of course the water is deep, how would ships be able to berth if the water wasn't deep?
Plastic cones in shopping centres and railway stations bearing warnings of wet/slippery surfaces due to the adverse weather even during drought conditions, ignoring the fact the signs themselves creating a tripping hazard.
Educating children to believe all strangers present a danger.
Never leaving home without a mobile 'phone, as if it radiates some invisible safety barrier against all ills.
Wearing a plastic hat when cycling seems a natural progression.
Are our decisions based on cultures?
So, the percentage of helmet wearers is less in some countries than others, is this because the risk is different , due to infastructure etc. Or is it simply cultural? We are used to wearing them so we do and they don't.
That wouldn't completely explain the rises and falls of helmet use over time because no-one was used to wearing them so no-one would wear them and then no-one would be used to wearing them so ...
The only European country ever to record a helmet-using majority was Ireland (a sudden surge from around 20% to nearly 50% between 2010 and 2011, then it went just over in 2012) and that's reduced again now.
Maybe, but are there other cultural factors? Is it linked to society and how we perceive things? Do they look at things differently in the Middle East? I'm not sure there's a link but it's an interesting thought
Separate names with a comma.