Help!

[thelawnet]

Again a no answer.

Again, nobody's telling you not to wear a helmet are they.

No sportives operate with 'no helmets allowed' policies. No schools are telling children not to wear helmets to school.

You love your helmet, and that is very nice.

You think it makes you safer. That's wonderful.

But your passive-aggressive approach to evangelism is decidedly ineffective.

 

[screenman]

You have so missed the point of this post, it is nothing to do with me. I was asked by a friend if I could point their 16 year old son who is doing a project on cycle helmets in the direction of literature about my OP, that was all, nothing sinister or too complicated.

I have read pages on rotational injuries, supposedly, extra size meaning head would not have hit the hard object if the person was not wearing a a helmet, supposedly.

Nothing, zilch, not one thing anywhere can I find a bit that says if the cyclist had not worn a helmet they would still be alive or less injured. I can seem to find plenty that says the reverse but so can my friend.

You might have missed my earlier line, so I will repeat it again. I do not give a monkeys if you wear a helmet or not.

 

[Bicycle]

I sometimes read these threads for sport. I occasionally post a question or comment, but the thread-hijackers from Zealotry-in-the-Wilderness are always on the lookout.

Like many cyclists, I generally ride helmetless but have no issue with those who don't. Every physician I know wears a helmet when cycling. That doesn't make them right, but to my (non-helmet-wearing) mind their view carries more weight than that of an IT nerd with a fixation about stats and a Cassandra-like conviction that the beastly Big Machine is about to clamp us all in helmets from birth.

I've been 'told off' over the years by many for riding helmetless and allowing my children to do so, most recently by our vicar(!). It's water off a duck's back. Not literally, of course.

For most of humankind this debate becomes farcical but strangely entertaining when the "I'm Right Brigade" load their weapons.

I've had very good, thoughtful and serious feedback over the months on issues about children in helmets and similar... usually offset by slightly foam-flecked, rabid craziness from one or two people who seem to give far too much of a flying fornicatory act about a matter of only mild curiosity. I note a certain inflexibility too in the views of some of those with stern opinions.

Every now and then I post something I think might gt a reaction and wait like a poacher near his snare. It'll fail this time, because I've announced my intention.

 

[martint235]

Still nothing then, that comes as no suprise to this helmet wearer.

I thought Nantmor's first post was fairly informative. Seems a bit harsh to dismiss it as nothing.

 

[sunnyjim]

You have so missed the point of this post, it is nothing to do with me. I was asked by a friend if I could point their 16 year old son who is doing a project on cycle helmets in the direction of literature about my OP, that was all, nothing sinister or too complicated.

I have read pages on rotational injuries, supposedly, extra size meaning head would not have hit the hard object if the person was not wearing a a helmet, supposedly.

Nothing, zilch, not one thing anywhere can I find a bit that says if the cyclist had not worn a helmet they would still be alive or less injured. I can seem to find plenty that says the reverse but so can my friend.

You might have missed my earlier line, so I will repeat it again. I do not give a monkeys if you wear a helmet or not.

But that's not quite the question you posed in the OP :

Can somebody please point me to PROOF! of an incident where a person actually died, or was more seriously injured through wearing a helmet.

You find plenty of opinion, assertion, belief, but no proof. Articles on the subject linked from here never seem to stand scrutiny with regard to producing robust proof of helmet efficacy. That in in itself should be valuable information for your friend's son's helmet project. He might try investigate or conjecture why there is so much dissagreement between both cycling and non-cycling people, and apparently no serious attempt at research by any institution qualified to perform it. Is it just that no one has a financial interest in finding proof either way? Is it just technically too difficult, or too expensive ? Try interview both a medic and a structural engineer. Maybe also a psychologist.

Looked at this way, the project could be both novel and interesting. It could hardly be less enlightenning than much of the debate here.

 

[screenman]

Sunnyjim, I will put that to them.

So I think we can say that there is no documented case easily found that says what I am looking for. But there is plenty of cases where people say a helmet did help.

Just a thought the structual engineering guy I use of mine wears a helmet, both on site and on his bikes. Hold on so do the two paramedics and my fireman son. I do know of a guy up the pub who does not wear one though, not sure what he does for a living though.

 

[Theseus]

Sunnyjim, I will put that to them.

So I think we can say that there is no documented case easily found that says what I am looking for. But there is plenty of cases where people say a helmet did help.

Just a thought the structual engineering guy I use of mine wears a helmet, both on site and on his bikes. Hold on so do the two paramedics and my fireman son. I do know of a guy up the pub who does not wear one though, not sure what he does for a living though.

If you are trying to be objective about this, the impression you give is that you have a pro-helmet agenda.

A fairer restatement of the above would be:

So I think we can say that there is no documented case easily found that says what I am looking for. Just as there is no documented case where a helmet saved a life. There are plenty of cases where people say a helmet did help, but these can not be proven as there was no way of knowing if the incident without a helmet would have resulted in injury

 

[screenman]

Touche thank you for correcting me.

Does this mean that people are far more likely to say that a helmet helped, or that the people without a helmet are no longer able to write.

No pro-helmet agenda, this country has enough rules to abide by already.

 

[martint235]

Does this mean that people are far more likely to say that a helmet helped, or that the people without a helmet are no longer able to write.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who have crashes without a helmet and are still able to write. I've had several crashes without a helmet and have posted on CC before about the worst. However as the surgeon had no real evidence with which to back up his advice (which was both for and against wearing a helmet) it was generally dismissed by the forum.

In brief I ran into the back of a dumper truck (not a skip truck) head first at around 25 mph. The damage was some stitches and some pulled muscles in my back. I don't think a helmet would have helped. The surgeon thought it may have saved me some stitches but may also have made the back damage worse although as I said, no evidence base to back either up.

 

[martint235]

Where did this happen?

Queen's Road, Peckham across the one way street from the Fire Station Sept 1996. I've always had a hard head, this just proved it to me.

 

[StuartG]

My most severe head injury occurred in a cycle lane and I wasn't wearing a helmet.

I was running and deceptive surfaces and lighting made the gutter invisible and losing my balance I fell and hit my head on a safety bollard. Blood everywhere but I am still able to write (sort of). A helmet might have helped. Should I urge English Athletics to recommend all road runners wear one?

Alternatively if this cycle lane and bollards (which most cyclists avoid) had not been there then no injury would have occurred. Just shows what harm a 'safety' feature can do.

Given that this debate is ruled by anecdote I hereby claim QED.

 

[screenman]

There is me getting all excited that somebody had found something.

 

[martint235]

Not Brixton Road, near the junction with Southey Road. A different person then

No, this happened when New Cross still had two one way systems. I was avoiding a breakdown in the right hand lane and swerved out ending up behind a truck just as he broke heavily. V brakes don't come close to air brakes

 

[Dan B]

So I think we can say that there is no documented case easily found that says what I am looking for. But there is plenty of cases where people say a helmet did help.

That's not exactly a fair comparison, is it, between "PROOF" on the one hand and "they said" on the other.

I fell over backwards a few years ago and narrowly avoided striking my head on the ground. I say if I'd been wearing a helmet I'd have received a nasty blow. But proof? How would I go about proving it?

 

[sunnyjim]

Sunnyjim, I will put that to them.

So I think we can say that there is no documented case easily found that says what I am looking for. But there is plenty of cases where people say a helmet did help.

Just a thought the structual engineering guy I use of mine wears a helmet, both on site and on his bikes. Hold on so do the two paramedics and my fireman son. I do know of a guy up the pub who does not wear one though, not sure what he does for a living though.

Still clinging to the belief in that you /your friend's son are honest men in the pursuit of truth, there's a good start. Learning to assess information - opinion vs fact, anecdote vs data, technical analysis vs understandable emotional response, risk assesment. These things will stand him in good stead throughout life regardless of whether helmets are vital aids to safety or overpriced lumps of congealed Angel Delight. If the young gentleman is under age. 'though, I'd suggest he interviews the pub guy before opening time. If possible, try get a hold of EN1078 (BSI charge, but there may be free academic access)- the space devoted to ensuring the helmet doesn't cause injury may be surprising. If of a technical bent, the calculations of forces involved in a crash are well within the scope of school maths. Get him to consider how much energy 100J really means, and how energy varies with speed in a crash.
Don't forget to ask him to report back here.