Helmet or not

[Smokin Joe]

Montage, read the piece of arrogant nonsense I highlighted in your post and you will realise who is talking like a tit.

And if you want my valid argument as to why I don't wear a helmet, re-read post 26.

 

[montage]

Pretty poor argument, as most people reading this will not be a Pro racer...
Sorry but this has just turned into an uneducated brawl - I have put my point accross as strongly as I can, and I hope that people reading this thread will take that into consideration.

Smokin Joe, if you want to have a childish argument over the internet then I am sure somebody else will oblidge - you haven't said anything constructive or worth while, just attempted to boost you own internet prowess by developing an personal argument rather than debating the issue at hand.

This case is closed - I shall not be reading any further comments by yourself on this thread as not only are they nonsense, but you have also spat at my comments on my friend's injuries which does sadden me.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Take your ball and go home, I dare say the game will carry on without you.

 

[Danny]

This thread seems to be shaping up nicely - and Cunobelin hasn't even noticed it yet

 

[wafflycat]

If you want to wear a lid, do so. If you don't, Fairy Nuff. The benefit of wearing one in terms of injury prevention is not entirely clear. Wearing a lid can offer a little bit of protection form low-impact bumps, but it is NOT designed or intended to save your bonce in the event of a major off. If you do have a major off, it may well stop some fool legal/insurance bod trying to do you out of compensation on the dubious grounds of contributory negligence. But they are NOT designed to save your bonce from major impact. Don't think that wearing a lid offers you some kind of all-round invincibility from idiot drivers - it doesn't.

The best thing a cyclist can do, IMO, is learn to cycle safely and assertively (not aggressively) to minimise risk as much as reasonably possible in the first place. Indeed, I'd place wearing gloves as being more important a bit of safety kit than wearing a lid.

Remember, that for well over a century now, cyclists have been cycling without the benefit of a lid.. and survived..

Personally - I wear one, but mainly out of habit and the knowledge that if I am hit, some fool lawyer can't defend his/her client by saying "if only the deceased had been wearing a helmet, m'lud, it would not of mattered if my client had been drunk behind the wheel of the car.." if you get my drift.

A lid is just a small part in the cyclists' toolkit as regards cycling safely.

 

[johnnyh]

the odd thing is, it takes 2 seconds to put a helmet on, it weighs nothing and it doesnt impair vision/comfort... even if there is only a small chance of a bash on the bonce, what have you got to lose by not wearing one?

 

[bonj2]

I only posted late last night and was amazed at all the replies. I didn't realise it was such a touchy subject.

As you can probably see, the controversy stems not from the simple choice of the individual as to whether to wear one or not, but from the incredulity of some members of the "pro-wear" camp at what they see as the idiocy of the "non-wearer" camp.
When you think about it the intentions of these more militant, evangelistic "pro-wear" folk are very good, touching really - they can't stand the thought of a fellow cyclist getting a serious head injury that they are sure could be prevented or at least lessened so easily and with so little discomfort or fuss, BUT, the methods and arguments they resort to in order to get this point across ("non-wearers aren't serious cyclists"/"all the pros wear them"/"you can't value your head very much" etc etc) simply serve to get up the noses of those who choose not to wear a helmet.

 

[bonj2]

This thread seems to be shaping up nicely - and Cunobelin hasn't even noticed it yet

his "speed rating" argument doesn't convince me, though he'll surely be along to fill in anyone who's unclear on the specifics of it himself soon...

 

[montage]

the odd thing is, it takes 2 seconds to put a helmet on, it weighs nothing and it doesnt impair vision/comfort... even if there is only a small chance of a bash on the bonce, what have you got to lose by not wearing one?

This sums it up beautifully
My helmet does have one of those lame visors on though...they can impair vision from incomming planes....so a bike helmet is not suitable for those men on runways with table tennis bats.

 

[Arch]

Pretty poor argument, as most people reading this will not be a Pro racer...
Sorry but this has just turned into an uneducated brawl - I have put my point accross as strongly as I can, and I hope that people reading this thread will take that into consideration.

You have, and I'm sure people are capable of making their own minds up. The point is that you've stated your case, and then told Joe not to state his, because you don't like it. If your case is that strong, you shouldn't need to censor the opposition.

Personally, I wear a helmet less than I used to, especially when I'm doing what I normally do, short hops about town. If I went out for a day ride, I'd wear it, as part of the whole lycra get up. But for just coming across town, esp in the cold, I'm wearing a fleece hat. Don't tell my mother, please, anyone. The downside is that I've got out of the way of using my helmet cam.... Most of my day to day cycling friends don't wear one either.

There ARE, by the way, potential ways in which a helmet could hurt you - twisting injuries to the neck due to the shape, and over confidence in the rider because they think they are ok because they are wearing a helmet. So it's not as simple as 'it can only be good'. Most 'anti' helmet people are not anti helmet, but anti compulsion. Compulsion suggests that cycling is dangerous, and that puts people off. And the very best safety thing for cyclists is to have lots more cyclists on the roads. So putting people off is a hazard too.

In more civilised countries where cycling is 'normal', like the Netherlands, helmets are not the norm.

 

[stranger]

It's odd really. I wouldn't dream of riding my horses without my riding hat--but a cycle helmet simply never even occurred to me.

I suppose I could cycle in the ridng hat couldn' t I?

 

[roadiewill]

No, its probably not designed for the impact a bike crash produces

 

[roadiewill]

...just like a cycle helmet isnt suitable as a motorbike helmet...

 

[Arch]

No, its probably not designed for the impact a bike crash produces

Having worn both, I don't think that's the main issue. Horse riding helmets are barely ventilated, compared with cycle helmets, and wrap much more around the head. Unless you rode very gently, you'd get very hot.

If you do ride gently, I suspect it would offer just the same protection in the case of a slow fall or slide. But it wouldn't deform and cushion like a cycle helmet in a hard impact.

On the other hand, a crop wielded in the right (offside) hand is quite good for getting a little extra space, and makes a satisfying smack noise on any car that comes too close...

 

[fossyant]

I've worn a helmet for many years. I've fell off many times and have never banged my head on the ground in a crash...until....just before Christmas.

I has hit side on by a car travelling at 25-30 mph - the force of the impact flipped the bike from under me and as I crashed to the ground, the helmet hit the ground and scraped along the road.....

Had that been my head, I'd have had at least serious road rash/cuts. As it happened I got up, helmet scuffed and a headache.