Gwylan
Guru
- Location
- All at sea⛵
But I know I've been saved
Non-helmet helmet? Or something like that.
- Thread starter scotsbikester
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
But I know I've been saved
Happy_Days
Active Member
No. MIPS is designed to enhance the protection provided by helmets.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
who is coercing who
she is happier
and I go with that
I could refuse and she would respect it
as with a lot of other things
Ian H
Ancient randonneur
That's not how I read 'reducing rotational injuries caused by helmets'.
CentralCommuter
Über Member
You sound happily married😂
Happy_Days
Active Member
Helmets don’t cause rotational injuries.
While I feel that helmet use should be a personal choice, the evidence is overwhelming that they provide protection. (Albeit, limited protection—a few millimetres of polystyrene is hardly a forcefield.)
Ian H
Ancient randonneur
...some doctors have expressed concern that cycle helmets might make some injuries worse by converting direct (linear) forces to rotational ones. These injuries will normally form a very small proportion of the injuries suffered by cyclists, but they are likely to form a large proportion of the injuries with serious long-term consequences. In this way helmets may be harmful in a crash, but this harm may not be detected by small-scale research studies.
https://www.cyclehelmets.org/1039.html
Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
As with both sides of this debate there are a lot of "mights" and "mays" in there.
Happy_Days
Active Member
That argument has been widely researched and found to be incorrect.
Undoubtedly, helmet usage isn’t the most important thing in our safety when we ride. And in any case, helmets only offer limited protection. But the overwhelming evidence is that helmets provide protection—not harm—in crashes.
There are reasons not to wear a helmet, such as it could encourage drivers to pass more closely. And we know from Australia that mandatory helmet usage is deleterious for cycling. However, avoiding rotational brain injury is one reason to wear a helmet equipped with MIPS (or equivalent).
Especially true for those having helmet mounted cameras. Fo those who think the camera would break iff look at what happened to Michael Schumacher.
Its not a case of taking care its what happens unexpectedly. I wasn't expecting to get a puncture doing a sharp right turn and because of the extent of gravel lose control and crash into an overhanging tree branch. Result a bust front wheel from the impact on the wall, a cut on the nose and an ear and a broken collarbone despite still being sat on the bike. Hospital nyrses were convinced my helmet saved me from further facial damage.
- Location
- Inside my skull
What an odd comment to make. The OP should be free to say they will not be wearing a helmet and that's the end of it.
- Location
- Glasgow
- Location
- Inside my skull
OT, but that's not how a healthy relationship works.
Just saying
Of course it is, mutual respect for each others viewpoint, but ultimately it’s up to the OP. There should be no emotional blackmail about how the other feels. Maybe it’s different in your marriage, but I wouldn’t force my wife to do something she doesn’t want to do, to make me feel better.
ebikeerwidnes
Guru
- Location
- Z’ha’dum
but if the other person has a serious problem with you doing something then that should be a part of your decision whether to do it or not?
Comparison with a seatbelt does not stand up. Seatbelts are proven to save lives and prevent serious injuries. Helmets may prevent or minimise some minor injuries, but are of limited value in serious impacts.
