Why wouldn't you wear a helmet

[ufkacbln]

Anyway, helmets are ridiculous.

You're taking the Pith

 

[Brandane]

This isn't about helmet effectiveness/ineffectiveness its about attitudes to helmets.

If we acknowledge a helmet offers a bit more protection during low speed impact to your head than
A) Nothing
B) a cloth cap

and if you accept you CAN fall off your bike, however rarely - it can happen

So for the sake of a few quid you could avoid a nasty bang on the head. gravel rash, possible stitches, mild concussion, in the even of an accident,

why wouldn't you wear a helmet ?

you probably wear gloves to protect your hands

so whats it about helmets that you don't like?

You're asking us to make a few acknowledgements there!

"This isn't about helmet effectiveness/ineffectiveness, it's about attitudes to helmets".
Surely that's a huge factor in helmet attitudes though; they are influenced by peoples perception of their effectiveness/ineffectiveness!

"If we acknowledge a helmet offers a bit more protection during low speed impact to your head than
A) Nothing
B) a cloth cap"
What if we acknowledge that they are an ineffective, ugly, overpriced piece of plastic*? Cleverly marketed by big companies making a huge wedge of cash from people who have been conned into being followers of a passing fashion?

Why WOULD you wear a helmet?

*I am not claiming that this is indeed the case; just trying to highlight the pointless nature of starting a debate with conditional acknowledgements.

 

[Fab Foodie]

What's this thread about, again?

.... dick waving (again) it seems .....

 

[theclaud]

If only we could collectively acknowledge one person King Dick and leave it.

Do you, perchance, have a list?

 

[Fab Foodie]

Do you, perchance, have a list?

I'd clearly be up for the position, but at my age, the competition's too stiff ....

 

[raleighnut]

If only there was a song about that.

NSFW

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvCAHaTomww&feature=player_detailpage

 

[anothersam]

What's this thread about, again?

According to the OP

its about attitudes to helmets.

Mission accomplished? Again?

. . .

(I'll use any excuse to post links to videos from Caddyshack.)

 

[Pumpkin the robot]

The condition of the helmet prior to the accident would need to be established before any claim could be made

Helmets through general wear and tear, being dropped or in a previous impact will suffer from unseen defects and weaknesses. They also deteriorate over time, none of the helmet replacement policies extends further than two years

Are any of the cracks in the helmet caused by these defects and in fact demonstrate a helmet that was compromised in its function?

Would the helmet have offered greater protection had it not been previously damaged?

The helmet was about 6 months old and had not been dropped if it helps.

 

[Profpointy]

If only we could collectively acknowledge one person King Dick and leave it.

what's a well respected tool brand got to do with things

 

[Fab Foodie]

what's a well respected tool brand got to do with things

Well as King Dick was originally from Abingdon :-)

 

[Licramite]

You're asking us to make a few acknowledgements there!

"This isn't about helmet effectiveness/ineffectiveness, it's about attitudes to helmets".
Surely that's a huge factor in helmet attitudes though; they are influenced by peoples perception of their effectiveness/ineffectiveness!

"If we acknowledge a helmet offers a bit more protection during low speed impact to your head than
A) Nothing
B) a cloth cap"
What if we acknowledge that they are an ineffective, ugly, overpriced piece of plastic*? Cleverly marketed by big companies making a huge wedge of cash from people who have been conned into being followers of a passing fashion?

Why WOULD you wear a helmet?

*I am not claiming that this is indeed the case; just trying to highlight the pointless nature of starting a debate with conditional acknowledgements.

My point was , Effectiveness is a complete Excuse -you hide behind statistics ect to prove helmets are no good
But if they invented a perfect helmet that protected you 100% - you still wouldn't wear one, not from the replies so far - after all
cyclings not dangerous, walkers don't wear them, don't want to, you can injure lots of other bits of body, been riding 40 years never needed one,

 

[broadway]

My point was , Effectiveness is a complete Excuse -you hide behind statistics ect to prove helmets are no good
But if they invented a perfect helmet that protected you 100% - you still wouldn't wear one, not from the replies so far - after all
cyclings not dangerous, walkers don't wear them, don't want to, you can injure lots of other bits of body, been riding 40 years never needed one,

Do you wear you your helmet as:

"If we acknowledge a helmet offers a bit more protection during low speed impact to your head than
A) Nothing
B) a cloth cap"

And if you don't why not?

 

[summerdays]

My point was , Effectiveness is a complete Excuse -you hide behind statistics ect to prove helmets are no good
But if they invented a perfect helmet that protected you 100% - you still wouldn't wear one, not from the replies so far - after all
cyclings not dangerous, walkers don't wear them, don't want to, you can injure lots of other bits of body, been riding 40 years never needed one,

I'd wear one ... (I do normally just not all the time), have they got anywhere near yet ... one that would be GUARANTEED to protect me even in 50% of the accidents (proven scientifically using proper realistic tests).

 

[Brandane]

My point was , Effectiveness is a complete Excuse -you hide behind statistics ect to prove helmets are no good
But if they invented a perfect helmet that protected you 100% - you still wouldn't wear one, not from the replies so far - after all
cyclings not dangerous, walkers don't wear them, don't want to, you can injure lots of other bits of body, been riding 40 years never needed one,

Correct; I wouldn't wear one. There is a small risk factor involved in cycling, just as there is with getting out of bed in the morning, but the risk factor is not big enough IMHO, to justify shelling out the cash for - and then wearing - an ugly piece of plastic perched on top of my head.

 

[Licramite]

Correct; I wouldn't wear one. There is a small risk factor involved in cycling, just as there is with getting out of bed in the morning, but the risk factor is not big enough IMHO, to justify shelling out the cash for - and then wearing - an ugly piece of plastic perched on top of my head.

or is it you wouldn't put an ugly head under a pefectly crafted and designed peice of plastic?