Why are UK cyclists fixated on helmets

[Globalti]

My son, my cycling buddy and I have all had a bang on the head while wearing helmets. In each case the helmet broke and the texture of the road was imprinted in the outer shell. That all three of us survived (son was unconscious for a couple of minutes) is enough to convince me that a helmet can swing the outcome of an accident in favour of surviving.

The OP is being disingenuous; surely he knows that on the continent far more people commute on slow sedate town bikes in separate cycle lanes, whereas in the UK we are forced to share the roads with incompetent drivers, meaning fewer cyclist and a higher accident rate?

 

[MontyVeda]

But then why aren't they upsold with a car or a coat and umbrella?

That's not the point... the thread is about why are UK cyclists fixated on helmets.. I reckon one of the main reasons is because 'the bloke in the bike shop said i needed one', before spouting a few emotive statistics about how dangerous cycling is without one. The same way lots of people walk out of a home electronics shop with a £100 HDMI lead because the bloke said the picture quality of their new BluRay player would be crap if they'd only spent £50 on a HDMI lead, or heaven forbid, a fiver!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

If TLH catches me leaving the house bike in hand without a lid on she fixes me with a gimlet eye and says "Gregry!" and I put on mine. So I wear one for her piece of mind not mine. If she doesn't see me leaving I don't wear one.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

And if she sees you coming back, what then eh?

She says "Gregy!" in a (very) different tone of voice.

 

[MontyVeda]

If TLH catches me leaving the house bike in hand without a lid on she fixes me with a gimlet eye and says "Gregry!" and I put on mine. So I wear one for her piece of mind not mine. If she doesn't see me leaving I don't wear one.

you're not alone there.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Helmet broke? Did you read the link I posted back up there?

Catastrophic helmet failure.

With the emphasis on FAIL.

It didn't do what its designers intended because its designers designed it to pass the lame safety certification tests not protect your noggin in an off above jogging speed.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

you're not alone there.

That said I think she has hidden all my caps!

 

[NorvernRob]

Two things from me.

Firstly, comparing cycling in the UK to Holland is ridiculous. There's no need to wear a helmet in holland, due to the fantastic cycle infastructure and massively high bike usage there's very little chance of an RTA compared to the UK. Plus the vast majority of bikes are steel jobbies that potter about at 10mph.

I'm also at a loss as to how anyone can say wearing a helmet doesn't protect you in any way. Even if it's a small amount then it's better to wear one surely? It takes seconds to put one on and take off and makes no difference to a ride.

Maybe someone wants to try simulating an impact test? Put a helmet on and give it a crack with a house brick. Then take it off and do the the same, and come back and say which hurt the most.

If that's not a good enough test, try running into a wall head first both with and without.

I don't care if somebody else doesn't want to wear a helmet, it's none of my business. But don't call people 'sheep' or 'brainwashed' when common sense tells you they must offer at least some protection.

 

[theclaud]

Two things from me.

Firstly, comparing cycling in the UK to Holland is ridiculous. There's no need to wear a helmet in holland, due to the fantastic cycle infastructure and massively high bike usage there's very little chance of an RTA compared to the UK. Plus the vast majority of bikes are steel jobbies that potter about at 10mph.

I'm also at a loss as to how anyone can say wearing a helmet doesn't protect you in any way. Even if it's a small amount then it's better to wear one surely? It takes seconds to put one on and take off and makes no difference to a ride.

Maybe someone wants to try simulating an impact test? Put a helmet on and give it a crack with a house brick. Then take it off and do the the same, and come back and say which hurt the most.

If that's not a good enough test, try running into a wall head first both with and without.

I don't care if somebody else doesn't want to wear a helmet, it's none of my business. But don't call people 'sheep' or 'brainwashed' when common sense tells you they must offer at least some protection.

Ah! "Common sense". Stands to reason.

It it melon time?

 

[Dave 123]

I can see that this is a tempting point of view. What you are loosing is your ability to portray cycling as an ordinary everyday activity.

It is an every day activity. By wearing a protective hat I loose nothing.
AND as a short haired old fart it keeps the sun off me bonce....

 

[Profpointy]

Two things from me.

Firstly, comparing cycling in the UK to Holland is ridiculous. There's no need to wear a helmet in holland, due to the fantastic cycle infastructure and massively high bike usage there's very little chance of an RTA compared to the UK. Plus the vast majority of bikes are steel jobbies that potter about at 10mph.

I'm also at a loss as to how anyone can say wearing a helmet doesn't protect you in any way. Even if it's a small amount then it's better to wear one surely? It takes seconds to put one on and take off and makes no difference to a ride.

Maybe someone wants to try simulating an impact test? Put a helmet on and give it a crack with a house brick. Then take it off and do the the same, and come back and say which hurt the most.

If that's not a good enough test, try running into a wall head first both with and without.

I don't care if somebody else doesn't want to wear a helmet, it's none of my business. But don't call people 'sheep' or 'brainwashed' when common sense tells you they must offer at least some protection.

Ok, I'll answer....

if helmets are "bound to help" - and I don't think I'm misrepresenting you here, why have they not helped in Australia, and Ontario - both places which have introduced compulsion, which has seen helmet wearing rates gone up from 10% to 90% (or whatever it is), have see cycling rates go down, and paradoxically killed and seriously injured RATES - wait for it_ GONE UP !

There's something going on here - so the "it's obvious innit?" argument doesn't seem to be enough.

Regarding the "hitting with a brick" thought experement - lets try another one - swing the bring to just miss your head by 10mm - then try again wearing a helment - I think you'll find it hurts a lot more with the helmet on !

And if it's "bound to help" - do you also wear one whilst walking, riding in a car, climbing stairs - and above all if going out drinking beer ? This is a serious question worthy of an answer by the way.

And we haven't even covered risk compensation by cyclilsts, by drivers - the going closer to helmeted cyclists paper by a recent researcher, never mind the strangled children in Scandinavia - think of the children after all!

For the record, I used to wear a cycle helmet, and thought those who did not were obviously stupid so I understand where you're coming from, but once you look into it, it may be obvious, but not necessarily true

 

[Dave 123]

I see perfectly well. I loose nothing. Neither do you if I wear one. I loose nothing if you don't.

Bandannas are the headwear choice of Emperor Nobbers- FACT!

 

[NorvernRob]

Show me where people have called you brainwashed, or a sheep.

because of media power, brainwashing and a good business opportunity.

I think it might partly be because cycling in the UK is a bit of a subcult and conforming to the rules is very, very important in a subcult. The helmet debate is just one way to thrash out the rules. In other countries cycling is just something you do, like wearing socks or eating sandwiches, and conformism doesn't need debating.

I don't wear a helmet to conform or because I'm brainwashed. I wear one because I'd rather have one between my head and the road should I fall off.

I'd like to pop in again and ask a serious question. Helmet believers/wearers always end their posts with 'But I don't care at all whether other people wear helmets or not', or similar.

Why don't they just shut up about it then? In the creep towards possible compulsion they have nothing to lose - but we have.

Because this is a thread about helmet use? Who do you care if others want to wear one, why does it offend you so much?

Why do you think the 90%+ of helmet wearers are wrong and you're right? Why does there even have to be a wrong and a right?

 

[NorvernRob]

Ok, I'll answer....

if helmets are "bound to help" - and I don't think I'm misrepresenting you here, why have they not helped in Australia, and Ontario - both places which have introduced compulsion, which has seen helmet wearing rates gone up from 10% to 90% (or whatever it is), have see cycling rates go down, and paradoxically killed and seriously injured RATES - wait for it_ GONE UP !

There's something going on here - so the "it's obvious innit?" argument doesn't seem to be enough.

Regarding the "hitting with a brick" thought experement - lets try another one - swing the bring to just miss your head by 10mm - then try again wearing a helment - I think you'll find it hurts a lot more with the helmet on !

And if it's "bound to help" - do you also wear one whilst walking, riding in a car, climbing stairs - and above all if going out drinking beer ? This is a serious question worthy of an answer by the way.

And we haven't even covered risk compensation by cyclilsts, by drivers - the going closer to helmeted cyclists paper by a recent researcher, never mind the strangled children in Scandinavia - think of the children after all!

For the record, I used to wear a cycle helmet, and thought those who did not were obviously stupid so I understand where you're coming from, but once you look into it, it may be obvious, but not necessarily true

I don't think anyone is stupid for not wearing a helmet - it's their choice and I don't care. I just take offence to being accused of being brainwashed because I choose to.

I walk at 3-4mph, and can't remember ever falling down and banging my head.

I drive a car every day and wear a seatbelt, as well as being surrounded by a ton of metal.

I've never fallen and banged my head whilst climbing stairs.

I've fallen and banged my head whilst drunk once yes. I'm pretty sure it would have hurt less with a helmet on, but I don't think I really need to explain why I nor anyone else wears one to go out drinking.

However, over the years I spent cycling when younger I have fallen off plenty of times and banged my head several times - one in particular was a nasty crack on the back of my head and I felt sick for hours. That's why I choose to wear a helmet whilst cycling - I've banged my head more times falling off bikes than I ever have or will doing all other activities put together.

I'm older now, and more sensible, and maybe I'll never fall off and bang my head again. But maybe I will, or maybe someone in a vehicle will do it for me.

I'll never accept that cycling without a helmet on is safer, it's that simple. I'm free to make my choice and others are free to make theirs, that's how I would prefer it to stay.

 

[DefBref]

My take on it is that its the Health and Safety culture of the UK that is moving towards that if you see a hazard then you must do something to reduce that hazard, whether or not there is actual evidence that it does. Where I work has the same attitude, they do risk assement but do actually not understanding what risk actually is. Risk takes into account the hazard and the likelyhood of it happening and the severity of injury, however the UK in general and my place of work especially seems to confuse risk with hazard only and so if there is a hazard then you must reduce it no matter how likely or effective your chosen method is. So I have to wear a plethora of PPE for hazards which have a very minor chance of occurence and if did occur would only result in minor injury, where in fact if risk assement was correctly undertaken, you would not have to wear the PPE as the probability of the hazard occuring and injury occuring is so low to not make it worth the effort.