The CycleChat Helmet Debate Thread

[MontyVeda]

OK, so you said:-



To support this argument you posted research into traumatic brain injury. Let's take a closer look. Firstly the falls data. The incidence of falls correlates to the age of the person falling. The older you are, the more likely you are to sustain a brain injury. For anyone under 50, the data is fairly evenly divided between RTCs and all falls.

In fact the research itself states in the opening:-



So the research you are using to back up your assertion, doesn't actually support what you said. It doesn't break down into they type of RTC, who is involved and what types of vehicle were involved. The "Falls" part of the data includes falls from height which presumably therefore includes extreme sports, and rock climbing.

Finally you made a presumption about the data which wasn't made in the audit. You also only support your argument in respect of severe brain injury. This data therefore specifically excludes anyone who did not sustain a severe brain injury as they had protected their head. So by definition, if cycle helmets *did* provide the ultimate protection against severe brain injury, it would still be the case that "The majority of severe head injuries are caused by falls; tripping over a rug, tumbling off a curb, falling on steps, etc" but it wouldn't be an argument that cycle helmets are not effective.

So the posted data would seem to support that risky behaviour such as driving a vehicle (RTC) and falls from a height are a significant factor in severe head injury rather than the opposite.

Do you don a helmet before getting in a motor vehicle (as either passenger or driver)?
Do you don a helmet just in case you fall? (forget the bike, I'm asking about falls in general)

Do you believe that collisions involving bicycles make up a significant proportion of all RTCs?
Do you think a significant proportion of 'all falls' are due to people rock climbing or partaking in extreme sports?
Do you believe that cycle helmets are designed to protect against severe brain injuries?

 

[classic33]

Sounds very much like you should wear a helmet indoors!

What's your skull made of?
View attachment 528511

From the same natural materials as yours.

The point being made, is where do we draw the line? Bearing in mind that folk say they don't offer any extra protection, and that those who wear them have more injuries due to compensating for the wearing of one. Actively seeking further injuries in one case.

 

[Profpointy]

A useful study in the BMJ suggests that the risk of not wearing a helmet are greater than the risks of wearing a helmet:-

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/9/9/e027845.full.pdf

Admittedly I only skimmed it but it seemed to simply compare the injury rates of helmetted and unhelmetted cyclists actuall

Yes. Quite right that it doesn't include data which would not be helpful as it doesn't meet the criteria for the study. I think that's how most retrospective studies work. What is notable is that the data available which met the criteria of the study, does suggest that those cyclists wearing helmets generally fared better than those who did not.

Generally speaking medical studies do tend to find that some protection to the head is likely to reduce injuries to the head. On balance therefore I personally find that helmets do seem to be a good idea, even if they just help prevent the more minor injuries. I have yet to see or find any evidence that wearing a helmet contributes to worse outcomes. The one that gets waved about is that mandatory helmet wearing reduces cycling uptake. That study is quite old now however, and probably out of step with changing attitudes to cycling and safety.

It doesn't take account being more likely to hit your head if your head is bigger. That would confound your conclusion surely?

It also takes no a count of the proportions of cyclists wearing helmets in the first place and if the two groups are doing the same type of cycling or not. This is explicitely stated

The two groups seem to have different types of injuries though, but it's not clear what you can conclude from that

For example, the helmetted lot have fewer brain injuries but more spinal, chest and limb injuries. Are they doing different types of cycling perhaps ?
More spinal injuries might mean more neck twisting due to helmets, but more chest injuries suggests to me they are doing different sorts of cycling with different risk.

 

[Profpointy]

sp why bother on a motor bike? or while rock c;limbing, or doing extreme sport, or moto gp. the question is whether you would wear a helmet to protect your head when undertaking an activity that has a higher risk. balancing on 2 wheels at 10 to 20mph is inherently risky.

Interestignly even Australia is now finding that helmets are a good idea:-

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...-serious-head-injury-by-nearly-70-study-finds

Yebbut they seemingly do help for motorcycling. This doesn't mean the must help for other activities.

Wearing gloves can help protect your hands in some circumstances but make you more clumsy and more likely to have an accident in others

 

[icowden]

It doesn't take account being more likely to hit your head if your head is bigger. That would confound your conclusion surely?

Not really. Even if you were more likely to hit your head, if the helmet is giving protection to it, you still have a net benefit to wearing a helmet. There are increasing studies which show that protection for your head does in fact offer some protection. It obviously won't save your life in many situations, but I don't see that not wearing a helmet is somehow better than wearing one.

There is an increasing culture of helmet wearing and it is good to challenge the efficacy of helmets which is leading to better helmet technology such as mips and wavecel. I just see the argument of "don't wear a helmet because it's pointless" as being counter to the safety benefits of doing so. I am still waiting to see any scientific study which shows that it is materially more dangerous to wear a helmet.

I'm happy to have my mind changed, but it's going to take some proper research to persuade me. A helmet would have stopped me fracturing my nose. A helmet did save my brother in law from a more serious injury when he got down with the kids and tried a wheelie. His helmet split in half and he had minor concussion but all the red gooey stuff stayed inside. It seems likely that that would not have been the case had he not been wearing one.

 

[Milkfloat]

Not really. Even if you were more likely to hit your head, if the helmet is giving protection to it, you still have a net benefit to wearing a helmet.

How have you got to hitting your head whilst wearing a helmet is better than not hitting your head at all?

Anyway - regarding helmet safety, it is far more complicated than is it better to hit your head with or without a helmet. It is about attitude and perception to risk by riders and crucially drivers, the fact that it shows cycling to be dangerous when it is not, blame, and most of all it is about removing choice.

 

[SGG on a bike]

I'm in two minds about wearing a cycling helmet. I do wear one mostly, but not convinced of its effectiveness in the event of a crash. Most of the designs look and feel flimsy at best and relatively few actually fit well enough not to move around in the case of a crash. I strongly suspect they'd be of little benefit at best, but wear one partly due to convention and also because it might actually work.

I had a motorcycle accident some years back where I high-sided coming off a roundabout locally at about 45mph. Pic below shows the state of the helmet afterwards. No injuries other than a few bruises and a friction burn on my backside, but it could have been a lot worse. As you can see, the accident ripped off the visor, it's mechanism and most of the air vents attached to the shell. I don't know if they're designed to break away in the event of a crash, but it would make sense of they did with the exception of the visor.

About five years ago, the company I was working for at the time introduced a "bump Cap" policy throughout all of their depots after someone walked into some scaffolding on a rack. As an engineer looking after access equipment I was constantly bumping my bump cap on the canopies of the machines I was working on (clamshell design with little overhead clearance) where I don't recall ever hitting my head on them in the previous 10 years of working on the same machines.

 

[Dave Davenport]

I used to do quite a lot of work on tube trains, when they bought in having to wear a bump cap when under rolling stock in the depots I was forever whacking my head and straining my neck, which never happened before.

 

[Eziemnaik]

Have to love Spanish helmet law:
- you are supposed to wear a helmet at all times unless one of the following:
- riding in urbanized terrain (but depending on the road, some might be considered illegal to ride on without helmet - imagine a quiet A or B road passing through a sleepy town - legally you are obligated to wear a helmet while on that road, even if only crossing it) - Caminó de Santiago - you have to wear a helmet, that nice singletrack next to the coast - you have to wear a helmet, Cuenca - you have to wear a helmet, a bike lane outside of urbanized terrain - you have to wear a helmet

- situation of an extreme heat ( but the definition of an extreme heat might be very different to you and the officer of the law, hence do not be surprised if on a Sunny 30deg day you get stopped by police)

- while climbing (again, what consists climbing depends only on the whim of Guardia Civil)

- if you are professional cyclist (however you would not be allowed to participate in any event

- if you can provide a medical proof of not being able to wear one

Now, Spanish police is a very strange beast. It is quite fractured, with different agencies having different duties, which are often overlapping each other. Worth to know as the one most likely to pull you on a side of the road is Guardia Civil, and they are somewhere between Carabinieri and Waffen SS as far as policing is concerned.
Going fine is 200€ plus

 

[Drago]

Trust me, they're not as bad as the Guardia Nacional in Portugal! They slap you about and then deport you. They clearly have a grudge about young squaddies having a bit of light hearted fisticuffs with the locals. I dread to think what theyd have done to us if we'd been on bicycles! Probably execution or somesuch.

 

[Dave Davenport]

I've ridden in Spain quite a bit, never worn a helmet and never been stopped.

 

[mjr]

Trust me, they're not as bad as the Guardia Nacional in Portugal! They slap you about and then deport you. They clearly have a grudge about young squaddies having a bit of light hearted fisticuffs with the locals. I dread to think what theyd have done to us if we'd been on bicycles! Probably execution or somesuch.

Portugal is surprisingly relaxed about cycling, in my limited experience. They probably need to be, because some of their cycle routes make Sustrans look Dutch (most bizarre was a route signed through a ruined house and down a ramp to its basement formed of rubble compacted onto the stone stairs) and I don't see any legal way of getting a bike to/from some of the stuff I saw unless there's a law implying "except cycles" for most traffic signs (not as far as I could tell).

 

[Eziemnaik]

I always thought Portuguese fall down on their backside

I've ridden in Spain quite a bit, never worn a helmet and never been stopped.

Same as me untill I was

 

[Cycling_Samurai]

In the great debate of whether or not to wear a bike helmet whilst cycling, it should be painfully obvious that some protection is better than none at all. Having experience with wearing a motorcycle helmet whilst having a hard object impact your head, should convince anyone to wear a helmet. I wasn't aware that their is no standard for bike helmets as there are for motorcycle helmets.

 

[matticus]

In the great debate of whether or not to wear a bike helmet whilst cycling, it should be painfully obvious that some protection is better than none at all. Having experience with wearing a motorcycle helmet whilst having a hard object impact your head, should convince anyone to wear a helmet. I wasn't aware that their is no standard for bike helmets as there are for motorcycle helmets.

Welcome to the fray, young Samurai warrior!

I believe you are mistaken about bike helmet standards - how did you reach this conclusion?