Helmets: Should you wear one?

[alfablue]

Whislt I'm not in favour of compulsion either, I must clarify the following point:

I have also read that brain injury results from the brain hitting against the inside of the skull, so wearing a helmet would not make any diffrence to this.

The whole point of the helmet is that the decelleration forces between brain and skull are lower because some of the force is dissipated by the helmet, much like crumple zones prevent the full force of impact being transferred to the passenger cell in a car.

 

[HJ]

Whislt I'm not in favour of compulsion either, I must clarify the following point:

The whole point of the helmet is that the decelleration forces between brain and skull are lower because some of the force is dissipated by the helmet, much like crumple zones prevent the full force of impact being transferred to the passenger cell in a car.

This presupposed that are accidents involve head injury, which the large majority don't, and that the collision speed is less than 15 mph, above that speed helmets are in effective.

Making the wearing of cycle helmets compulsory has proved to be counter productive in all countries where it has been tried see cyclehelmets.org for details. If you look at the actual risks faced by cyclists, you find that the one thing that make cycling safer is having more cyclist on the road. Making cycle helmets compulsory discourages people from cycling and therefore makes cycling more dangerous.

People who cycle on a regular basis have a longer live expectancy (even if they don't wear a helmet) then people who drive regularly and have a sedentary life style (just look at most drives). Resent research for the RAC show that outwith London only 7% of the UK population cycle regularly, inwith London that drops to 5%!

So if you want to live longer, don't live in London, get on your bike, and don't worry about wearing a helmet unless you want to make a fashion statement (in which case get a CC cycle shirt instead

 

[alfablue]

All well and good hairy, but I don't see how that relates to my point, which you quote.

 

[HJ]

Er um, once I got started I forgot about that bit

 

[Tynan]

this reminds of arguments the motorcycles boys have about wearing hi viz and motorists used to have about seat belts, you can always make an argument

I've always worn since my first bike came with one for free, if there's any chance of cracking my skull on tarmac, I'm wearing one, the rest of the body gets better nearly every time, brains not so much

Helmets work well up to 15mph, please don't pretend that they cease to be effective at 15.1mph, they just start to fail to protect you from damage in an impact

I've had some lary accidents on cycles but the helmet never touched anything, I've had some relatively low speed ones on a scooter and the full face helmet most certainly did crack the road and I'll tell you for free that in the slo mo second that it was about to happen, that helmet felt real good, mind you so did the armoured jacket and back protector

of course it can be enforced, a lot more than laws against stealing, murder, rape and the like, why do people make up such silly arguments against things they don't want?

but otherwise, whatever

if I wanted anything make obligatory, I want coppers to pull cyclists riding in the dark without lights, they really does strike as criminal every time

 

[Elmer Fudd]

I never do but I'd wear a helmet if
(a) they didn't look like a pudding bowl had been stuck on me head and I was waiting for a haircut and
( it didn't make me look like a knob.

(second thoughts, forget (, I can do that without a helmet )

 

[asterix]

Am I the only person who, when wearing a helmet, invariably finds that motorists come closer?

No, you're not alone in this. This has been welll documented recently. The CTC mag and Cycling Plus both had articles about this research.

I don't wear a helmet any more.. ..I have also read that brain injury results from the brain hitting against the inside of the skull, so wearing a helmet would not make any diffrence to this. .[/QUOTE]

It makes sense to me. Over 2 years ago whilst using the cycle lane inside queuing cars a passenger opened their door in front of me. My right arm bore the brunt (as evidenced by a considerable lasting indent on my bicep and a deep cut on my forefinger), after being stopped I seem to have toppled over and awoke in hospital 24 hours later without any idea where I was or how I got there (despite a 40 mile ambulance journey with sirens and lights!).

My main injury was apparently a skull fracture and a sub-dural haematoma revealed by MRI scan. What I can't understand is that my head was not injured externally in any way, no cuts, grazes or lumps that might be expected after my unhelmeted head struck something. In fact my head was externally pain-free, so did it strike something hard or not?

Neverthless, my speech, sight, hearing and memory were severely affected and although largely recovered, I still have some of the effects - e.g. occasional dizziness and nausea, impaired sense of smell (I can't smell gas, petrol, diesel or wine, cheese or perfume for example).

There is a compensation claim pending via the CTC as fortunately there were excellent witnesses although I still remember nothing about the accident. As mentioned in this thread, the insurance company are suggesting contributory negligence, solely due to my not having worn a helmet.

 

[Tynan]

bloody hell, sorry to hear that

2 years later ad it's still rumbling on?

 

[HJ]

The insurance company doesn't have a case there, there is no requirement to wear a helmet and unless they can prove that wearing helmet stops you being hit by a car, they can't prove that you were in any way negligent. Insurance company's are swindling bastards

 

[alfablue]

If the insurance company can prove that injuries would be less had a helmet been worn then they might be able to reduce damages, regardless of there being no legal requirement to wear one. They probably can't prove that, and in any case it is probably a ploy to try to settle outside of court.

 

[mailman]

As a kiwi, wearing a helmet is part and parcel of cycling in NZ. When ever I see someone not wearing a helmet I cringe in my seat and hope they never come a cropper one day!

Its a mind set and you have to get people in to the space where they wont hesitate to put a helmet on. Of course the helmet mindset in NZ was helped along by helmets being made compulsory (and for good reason) and huge public safety drives.

So when ever I see arguements along the lines of "if you make it compulsory people wont go cycling" as a bit of a joke. The fact is, helmets are there for your own personal safety and if you wont wear one then perhaps you shouldnt even be out there on the roads?

As I said, its a mind set and one that needs to be changed in this country.

Mailman

 

[Brock]

...As I said, its a mind set and one that needs to be changed in this country.

Mailman

Errr.. why does it? Because you say so? I still haven't seen anything that convinces me that I need to augment the millions of years worth of evolution in my cranium with a fashion accessory which will increase my chance of head impact.
If you're scared of head injury, wear a motorcycle helmet.

 

[asterix]

If the insurance company can prove that injuries would be less had a helmet been worn then they might be able to reduce damages, regardless of there being no legal requirement to wear one. They probably can't prove that, and in any case it is probably a ploy to try to settle outside of court.

Yes the solicitor believes that too. Although the claim has taken a long time, my understanding is that this is because compensation will be quite a large sum, 'contributory negligence' or not.

Despite my experience and the views pushed by mailman (why does he cringe in his seat, is he a recumbent cyclist?), I don't see why UK roads should be made so dangerous that helmet wearing is an essential part of cycling. What else must we do to pander to the irresponsible, impatient car-user? I had been commuting for more than 20 years injury-free before this happened. Much of my cycling is now done in France where motorists are far more considerate of cyclists than they now are in the UK.

 

[Tynan]

'a fashion accessory which will increase my chance of head impact'

don't wear one, fine, your head but ffs don't make up crap like that

 

[Brixtonfixed]

I've just changed my position on helmets following a big crash in a sportive. My head hit the deck very heavily as I bounced down the road after coming off at about 30mph, putting a big dent in the helmet I was uncharacteristically wearing. Now I *know* that it's impossible to say what would have happened without the helmet. But my guess is a big dent in my head.

I still don't wear one all the time, but for anything that is going to get fast and risky -- competitive rides, club runs, fast training, a (new) helmet is now worn.

Still don't believe in compulsion: cycling should be about the freedom to choose.