Why wearing a helmet could effect your legal status

[Red Light]

At least 3 hours every weekday and long rides at the weekend. I have a charity ride starting next friday. 666 miles to Newcastle and back with a half marathon (the Great North) in the middle

Three hours every weekday is about 200-300 miles a week leaving you 100-150 miles for each day of the weekend taking 5-10hrs/day. As I said, how do you find time for living and working?

 

[JonnyBlade]

Three hours every weekday is about 200-300 miles a week leaving you 100-150 miles for each day of the weekend taking 5-10hrs/day. As I said, how do you find time for living and working?

I also get 45 minutes to an hour every lunchtime. I have been training pretty much none stop and if there's time in a day I'll use it. Why are you so concerned? If you're that interested in why I'm doing it then why not visit http://www.facebook.com/pages/Hell-in-the-North-in-aid-of-Combat-Stress/207919065910324 and have a look.
Once it's over then my days won't be from 0700 to 2000 for a while!

 

[JonnyBlade]

It might have saved a bump or scrape but you can fairly easily show it was unlikely to have saved anything greater.

And you know this how?

 

[Red Light]

And you know this how?

Assuming you are correct and that helmets protect 100%, at current helmet wearing rates for every cyclist whose head was saved there should be another two whose head's weren't saved because they weren't wearing a helmet when they had their accident. Head injuries other than small bumps and scrapes are classified as serious injuries. There are about 2,500 serious cyclist injuries a year of which 38% or about 900 are head or face injuries. So there is a maximum of about 450 accidents a year in which the fact they wore a helmet might have saved them a head injury. The chance that one of them was you is extremely small. The chance that four of those were you is extremely small to the power 4 or vanishingly small.

 

[JonnyBlade]

Assuming you are correct and that helmets protect 100%, at current helmet wearing rates for every cyclist whose head was saved there should be another two whose head's weren't saved because they weren't wearing a helmet when they had their accident. Head injuries other than small bumps and scrapes are classified as serious injuries. There are about 2,500 serious cyclist injuries a year of which 38% or about 900 are head or face injuries. So there is a maximum of about 450 accidents a year in which the fact they wore a helmet might have saved them a head injury. The chance that one of them was you is extremely small. The chance that four of those were you is extremely small to the power 4 or vanishingly small.

You are missing so many factors. I remember reading about a local man who was punched and died as a result. By all accounts it was not a 'massive' hit. However, the poor chap was not equipped to take such a hit. Masses of others have walked away from far worse head injuries. So you can say that it's not about the helmet, it's about the head that's in it.
However, it's one of those things that you cannot pin down so it then is all about personal opinion and there are bound to be differing opinions, none of which can physically be proven either way I suppose.
I choose to believe they do their job though and how can you say that on this occasion I am not living proof?

 

[abo]

Three hours every weekday is about 200-300 miles a week leaving you 100-150 miles for each day of the weekend taking 5-10hrs/day. As I said, how do you find time for living and working?

1.5 hours each way commute. Up at half-six, out at seven. Get to work at half-eight, shower and breakfast to start at 9. Finish 5:30, home by 7 in time for dinner.

No different to many, many people going to work by car or PT (minus the shower at work bit I guess), it is no different to when I used to get the train up to Newcastle from Stockton, to go to work.

As for the weekend riding, some people are just mental

 

[Red Light]

You are missing so many factors. I remember reading about a local man who was punched and died as a result. By all accounts it was not a 'massive' hit. However, the poor chap was not equipped to take such a hit. Masses of others have walked away from far worse head injuries. So you can say that it's not about the helmet, it's about the head that's in it.
However, it's one of those things that you cannot pin down so it then is all about personal opinion and there are bound to be differing opinions, none of which can physically be proven either way I suppose.
I choose to believe they do their job though and how can you say that on this occasion I am not living proof?

I'm not missing any factors but two. They are all covered by it being based on national statistics covering all types of cyclists. The factors I have missed out are that helmeted cyclists could be massively more dangerous riders and have a disproportionate number of accidents or there's a conspiracy going on with the police and hospitals to hide the truth.

But you seem to be making a case that a helmet is irrelevant (not that I disagree with that view). Its all down to whether you have a head that is not equipped to take a hit, helmet or not (although I disagree with that as its nonsense except in a few very rare cases)

Oh, and I didn't say you were not living proof, just that the chance that you are is vanishingly small. In fact we can estimate it. You claim you ride about 25,000 miles a year. The chance of a head or face injury is one in five million miles so at your mileage your chance of a single head or face injury accident is about 1 in 200. Your chance of four in a year though is 1 in 200 to the power 4 which is 1 in 1.6 million. You've a six times greater chance of winning the national lottery jackpot and six time greater chance of dropping dead on the Great North Run than you have of having four head injury accidents in a year. But there is a one in 1.6 million chance you could be right.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

I'm not missing any factors but two. They are all covered by it being based on national statistics covering all types of cyclists. The factors I have missed out are that helmeted cyclists could be massively more dangerous riders and have a disproportionate number of accidents or there's a conspiracy going on with the police and hospitals to hide the truth.

But you seem to be making a case that a helmet is irrelevant (not that I disagree with that view). Its all down to whether you have a head that is not equipped to take a hit, helmet or not (although I disagree with that as its nonsense except in a few very rare cases)

Oh, and I didn't say you were not living proof, just that the chance that you are is vanishingly small. In fact we can estimate it. You claim you ride about 25,000 miles a year. The chance of a head or face injury is one in five million miles so at your mileage your chance of a single head or face injury accident is about 1 in 200. Your chance of four in a year though is 1 in 200 to the power 4 which is 1 in 1.6 million. You've a six times greater chance of winning the national lottery jackpot and six time greater chance of dropping dead on the Great North Run than you have of having four head injury accidents in a year. But there is a one in 1.6 million chance you could be right.

You do realise that all of the above will be discounted by something along the lines of " Well I know that happened, and you weren't there!" or " Statsitics can prove anything" or maybe "I don't care, I believe my helmet(s) helped"

 

[benb]

You do realise that all of the above will be discounted by something along the lines of " Well I know that happened, and you weren't there!" or " Statsitics can prove anything" or maybe "I don't care, I believe my helmet(s) helped"

See also "I went to a homeopath and then felt better, therefore homeopathy works."

 

[Red Light]

See also "I went to a homeopath and then felt better, therefore homeopathy works."

So does smoking.

 

[JonnyBlade]

1.5 hours each way commute. Up at half-six, out at seven. Get to work at half-eight, shower and breakfast to start at 9. Finish 5:30, home by 7 in time for dinner.

No different to many, many people going to work by car or PT (minus the shower at work bit I guess), it is no different to when I used to get the train up to Newcastle from Stockton, to go to work.

As for the weekend riding, some people are just mental

I'm in that club lol

 

[JonnyBlade]

I'm not missing any factors but two. They are all covered by it being based on national statistics covering all types of cyclists. The factors I have missed out are that helmeted cyclists could be massively more dangerous riders and have a disproportionate number of accidents or there's a conspiracy going on with the police and hospitals to hide the truth.

But you seem to be making a case that a helmet is irrelevant (not that I disagree with that view). Its all down to whether you have a head that is not equipped to take a hit, helmet or not (although I disagree with that as its nonsense except in a few very rare cases)

Oh, and I didn't say you were not living proof, just that the chance that you are is vanishingly small. In fact we can estimate it. You claim you ride about 25,000 miles a year. The chance of a head or face injury is one in five million miles so at your mileage your chance of a single head or face injury accident is about 1 in 200. Your chance of four in a year though is 1 in 200 to the power 4 which is 1 in 1.6 million. You've a six times greater chance of winning the national lottery jackpot and six time greater chance of dropping dead on the Great North Run than you have of having four head injury accidents in a year. But there is a one in 1.6 million chance you could be right.

25,000 miles a year? I wish. I have an increased cycling rate because I am training for a charity event. Did you read the link?
So you're a betting man? Odds smodds, take into account the law of sod and chaos then odds mean very little. Odds can change, 4 broken helmets and no broken head is there to see You seem to be pretty knowledgeable and stick by your own opinions but I say tomato vs tomato. It's all about interpretation. If a helmet saves one cracked head or one life then for me it's so worth it. Whether 2 or 2 million suffered head injuries whilst wearing helmets in the grand scheme means nothing in reality.

It's not all black and white all the time. Are you an IT programmer by the way?

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

25,000 miles a year? I wish. I have an increased cycling rate because I am training for a charity event. Did you read the link?
So you're a betting man? Odds smodds, take into account the law of sod and chaos then odds mean very little. Odds can change, 4 broken helmets and no broken head is there to see You seem to be pretty knowledgeable and stick by your own opinions but I say tomato vs tomato. It's all about interpretation. If a helmet saves one cracked head or one life then for me it's so worth it. Whether 2 or 2 million suffered head injuries whilst wearing helmets in the grand scheme means nothing in reality.

It's not all black and white all the time. Are you an IT programmer by the way?

Bugger! I had" statistics " , "common sense" and "broken helmets" , but I forgot about "if it saves ....................... it is worth it" How could I have missed something so basic!

 

[Red Light]

25,000 miles a year? I wish. I have an increased cycling rate because I am training for a charity event. Did you read the link?

Well after listing the four accidents you had in the year you said "I suppose though if I'm travelling around 500 miles per week then I'm bound to find myself in more predicaments than most?" with the clear implication you did that every week for the year in question. 500 miles a week times 56 weeks is 28,000 miles. The odds of you being right have just got dramatically worse.

So you're a betting man? Odds smodds, take into account the law of sod and chaos then odds mean very little.

No, I'm not a betting man. I know even with odds smodds and the laws of sod and chaos included the bookmaker will still always win overall. But there are plenty of people who lose their money week after week because a win they or someone they know once had has convinced them they can beat the odds.

Odds can change, 4 broken helmets and no broken head is there to see

I agree. The odds that the helmet did nothing just got better.

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable and stick by your own opinions but I say tomato vs tomato. It's all about interpretation. If a helmet saves one cracked head or one life then for me it's so worth it. Whether 2 or 2 million suffered head injuries whilst wearing helmets in the grand scheme means nothing in reality.

It's not all black and white all the time. Are you an IT programmer by the way?

No opinions, just the logical conclusions of the evidence. But yet again we've run into the evidence vs faith conflict.

And no I'm not an IT programmer.

 

[ufkacbln]

Gosport is one of the most boring places in the UK




Only because I have lived there for the last 20 years

Bleeding newcomers, settle in a place and making judgements!