Helmets - (my case study)

[palinurus]

Best not mention helmets for pedestrians, someone'll only take it up.

I can imagine being berated by passing motorists as I stroll, bareheaded, down the road to get a paper.

 

[4F]

You should get a trike, they are great fun, very comfortable and can be quick.

Which model is yours Lee ?

 

[ufkacbln]

Helmets are made to withstand certain repeatable tests in a laboratory. They claim to approximate to various "real world" accidents.

However there are so many variables it isn't possible to come up with a definitive answer. The most obvious being the surface you fall on and the speed. I point impact on the skull, rather like one of those emgency hammers to break a window will require no effort whatsoever to kill you - think edge of pavement kerbstone

There are also many types of head injury with some brain injury being near impossible to diagnose e.g. if you developed memory issues, alzheimers or epilepsy at a later date would it be possible to link this to an earlier accident?

There isn't some magical cut-off like 12mph where a helmet can potentially be useful.

Sadly a kerb shape is not included in many of the tests!

So a lot of helmets out there are not tested for this very "real life" incident.....

There is also the work of Professor Hurt in the US that is showing how modern helmets are failing to stop "diffuse" (those that occur with the brain moving inside the skull) either due to the decrease in absorptive material or rotation as the vents and protrusions catch causing faster deceleration.

There are also increasing numbers of cases where these "snag points" are causing the helmet to be removed from the rider - completely voiding the point - again not tested as you are allowed to tape tha helmet to the headform in some tests!

 

[4F]

Best not mention helmets for pedestrians, someone'll only take it up.

I can imagine being berated by passing motorists as I stroll, bareheaded, down the road to get a paper

Ever heard of paperboys / girls ?

 

[ufkacbln]

What more can I say?

 

[4F]

What more can I say?

I was wondering how long it would be before you showed up

 

[hackbike 666]

Tis simple logic grasshopper hackers. The only time imo you will come off a bike and hit the back of your head is at some serious speed and then hitting something, getting some air and twisting before you land.

Depends on your luck and whether you hit an object,railings,car someones fist or someone throws a brick at you*.

*=which happened to me a year or two ago.

As you said

 

[hackbike 666]

I can just see BentMikeys trigger finger itching out there.

 

[twowheelsgood]

I am sure though that the tests they have to pass to be acceptable for use are only done up to 12 mph hence the mention of that figure. Of course it is impossible to determine whether they will be of any use up to or over that speed as all depends on the type of accident and the way you fall.

What my experience has shown is that you can crack you head slipping over as a pedestrian just as you may coming off your bike.

To summise: 2 falls on bike, no head contact with ground
1 fall as ped, head hits ground

You are always playing the odds in any activity. This is a function of opportunity (frequency) versus the possible severity of the accident. Both are much higher for cycling than being a pedestrian which is why a helmet is a good idea for cyclists.

None of this means that people don't fall and hurt themsleves doing other activities.

It's similar to an observable trend the United States. Every time there is an air crash before a holiday the number of road accidents increases because people, not understanding the risk factors involved decide to drive instead.

 

[John the Monkey]

Best not mention helmets for pedestrians, someone'll only take it up.

I can imagine being berated by passing motorists as I stroll, bareheaded, down the road to get a paper.

I've posted about this before, but whilst in my local chippy, I noticed that one of the other patron's sons (little lad of 8 or 9, I'd guess) had been decked out in a hi-viz reflective tabard. TO WALK TO THE CHIP SHOP.

We are, I think, as a society, on the verge of acquiescing completely to the idea that it is entirely acceptable for motor traffic to move at whatever speed it pleases, with drivers distracted by any number of things, and that all the rest of us can do is stay out of the way. A society in which if you get hit by these idiots, it's some way your fault for not being conspicuous enough, and if you are injured, for not taking specific precautions. The idea that it's reasonable for motorists to slow and be more cautious when visibility or road conditions are poor is certainly endangered, if not entirely extinct.

Rant over, sorry everyone.

 

[twowheelsgood]

"There is also the work of Professor Hurt in the US that is showing how modern helmets are failing to stop "diffuse" (those that occur with the brain moving inside the skull) either due to the decrease in absorptive material or rotation as the vents and protrusions catch causing faster deceleration."

How effective is a helmet compare to your skull alone for "diffuse"?

 

[hackbike 666]

Hang on they use helmets in other activities.

Look at American Football.

I've shot myself in the foot haven't I?

 

[4F]

You are always playing the odds in any activity. This is a function of opportunity (frequency) versus the possible severity of the accident. Both are much higher for cycling than being a pedestrian which is why a helmet is a good idea for cyclists.

OK lets look at this another way. In both instances when on my bike I have fallen to my left and not hit my head. Would it be unreasonable to suggest that had I been wearing a helmet it is possible that the extra weight and size of the helmet would have made my head contact the ground thus giving me the false impression that the helmet saved me when in fact the opposite was true ?

 

[Arch]

We are, I think, as a society, on the verge of acquiescing completely to the idea that it is entirely acceptable for motor traffic to move at whatever speed it pleases, with drivers distracted by any number of things, and that all the rest of us can do is stay out of the way. A society in which if you get hit by these idiots, it's some way your fault for not being conspicuous enough, and if you are injured, for not taking specific precautions. The idea that it's reasonable for motorists to slow and be more cautious when visibility or road conditions are poor is certainly endangered, if not entirely extinct.

Hear hear!

I've seen crocodiles of school kids out walking, all wearing hi vis tabards - although in that case I guess it's more useful for teachers to keep an eye on kids and spot if one of them has wandered off. Same for the teachers - would be good so that a kid could spot them in a crowd quickly. But for road safety, it's mad.

How do we ever get back from this? Or is that it now?

 

[John the Monkey]

How do we ever get back from this? Or is that it now?

I'd say proper enforcement of traffic law, a regular re-test for all drivers, automatic retesting for anyone found to have caused a reportable accident would be a start. With that in place, measures like shared space &c can start to be implemented.

People have to begin to see using the roads as something that entails a responsibility for the safety of others (especially in cities and residential areas). It should be a matter of pride to be a skilled driver (as in, someone who can read the road ahead &c, and to the extent that is possible, "look after" the interests of other road users, rather than someone who drives like a second-rate stuntman).

We need a huge change in our attitude to motor transport in general, and to the private car in particular, imo, and some deeply unpopular measures will have to be taken to achieve it, I think.