[Closed] Helmet on road?

Good choice crikey. I'm mostly not wearing a Specialized S3. I was going to not wear a Prevail, but that proved a bit to pricey for little extra benefit.

This is probably a waste of time, but is this the summary so far:

a) Some people are saying you don't have to wear a helmet to cycle, they're not really going to make a difference in a RTA, but do in some cases. (and most of this lot say they actually wear them some of the time)

b) some people are saying that if you don't wear a helmet everytime you get on a bike you are going to end up dead.

c) one person says they'd ignore you if you fall off a bike without a helmet on but really they wouldn't but they might do, so respect them.

d) someone's got no trousers on and is rubbing themselves.

e) everyone should give up and ride their bikes (after doing a full risk assessment and deciding on appropriate PPE obviously)

Sorry Terry, that isn't going to end the debate....

Much more succinct summary in the first seven words of that post, Terry!

For comedy value, here is me, on the busy roads, wearing a helmet AND high-viz vest:

[img] [/img]

You all wear a high-viz vest right? Common sense really. Be lunacy not to. Darwinism in action. I wear mine in bed. 😀

I have just ridden my road bike without a helmet............

How cool was that ?

I've found that the straps act like a kind of drainpipe when you're sweating, which was a bit odd until I realised what was happening, Ikept thinking it was rain drops on my legs. ..

But,yes I'd recommend one.

Where's the neon 'Caution! Cyclist' sign, massive airzound horn, and panniers carrying a paramedic's emergency first aid kit? You're just not taking this safety business seriously are you?

or comedy value, here is me, on the busy roads, wearing a helmet AND high-viz vest:

which one are you?

Sorry Terry, that isn't going to end the debate....

Was a bit thick of me 🙁

I agree with ned.

which one are you?

I'm the black guy.

*What am I looking at in this thread?*

[img] [/img]

Beep boop, "Caution, this cyclist is not wearing a helmet", beep boop

Good choice crikey. I'm mostly not wearing a Specialized S3. I was going to not wear a Prevail, but that proved a bit to pricey for little extra benefit.

I wore a cheaper Specialized Echelon in 38 degree heat in France recently. It was remarkably well ventilated considering the buckets of sweat pouring off me, cycling up Alpe d'Huez.

My first helmet and my latest.

The Sub 6 is from 1992...

[img] [/img]

More power to you if you can wear a cat on your head...

Shoulder, yes

But head?

EDIT: He's wearing a hat, a helmet and a cat. Where does he stand on this issue?

Those Catlike helmets always make me think of the rather creepy "breast rash larvae" hoax that was doing the rounds a while ago:

[url= http://www.snopes.com/photos/medical/breastrash.asp ]Snopes link possibly NSFW[/url]

GrahamS your argument is now using safety equipment which allows you to perform a task more safely causes injury

Demonstrated quite effectively on lots of building sites where eye protection is causing extra slips, trips and falls. I'm not sure if the research has been carried out but the numbers were showing a trend when I left the business.

Interesting how "common sense" risk analysis is so cultural biased.

I understand that back in days of unharnessed high steel, workers in North america wore steel toe-capped boots so that their toes aren't crushed by errant steel. High steel workers in the far east reckoned that it's more important to guard against the risk of falling off and dying than the risk of losing some toes, and wore(wear?) sneakers so they can fell the edges of the beams beneath their feet.

Both common sense, but both are cultural conformity with the norm, a cultural understanding of what's best.

"Common sense" does not really exist - it's all a product of our personal experiences and prevalent culture. If they are largely the same, then you'll agree. Otherwise, nope.

That's why it's common!

I've never worn my lid on my commute or when i did a bit of roadie riding and some 10 TT's ,but do every time on the MTB, After watching helicopter heroes this morning tending a guy who fell off on road going down a hill I think I should start.

Ironically, people do not always agree about which particular perceptions, judgements and understandings are "common sense". So although the term originated in philosophy, it is often seen as an inexact and subjective term, to be avoided in precise discussion.

Ho, ho! No danger of finding any precise discussion on here!

"Common sense" does not really exist - it's all a product of our personal experiences and prevalent culture. If they are largely the same, then you'll agree. Otherwise, nope.

I disagree.

Common sense should be called 'commonly accepted belief'. It's often not sense at all 🙂

Well, blow me down, I have learnt something from (because of) a helmet thread.

It encouraged me to think about what common sense means. I've been working on the usage of it as "good reasoning" i.e. "Don't you have any common-sense?" said to someone who's done something a bit silly.

Which ignores a great other part of what how it's used and what it means: [url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_sense [/url]

Common sense should be called 'commonly accepted belief'. It's often not sense at all

This.

Particularly in the cycling world there are many things that would appear to fit into the 'But it's common sense!' approach which are actually not true.

Nothing like a philosophical tangent to kill a thread. fingers crossed...

...you'd have to be a nutter to get on a bike without a helmet on.

imnotverygood - Member

...you'd have to be a nutter to get on a bike without a helmet on.

*Holds hand up*

Young Lady Falling off her bike without a helmet and looks fine:

[img] [/img]

(its Friday!)

Oooh strappy shoes and toe straps - that's a recipe for blisters!

Speaking from experience ?

but on the plus side she would get a wide pass

Been happening for years.......

[img] [/img]

[url= https://www.google.co.uk/#safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=Cycle+helmets+and+contributory+negligence&oq=Cycle+helmets+and+contributory+negligence&gs_l=hp.12..0i30.25331.37783.0.39044.2.2.0.0.0.0.952.952.6-1.1.0....1...1c.1.22.psy-ab..1.1.925.JemIDIs0TCc&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.49784469,d.d2k&fp=6769dcabd6d20fb9&biw=1226&bih=825 ]judges do need much of an excuse to give lenient sentences [/url] as we have less rights than the average dog when involved in a rta.

You are an idiot if you don't wear a helmet!

Reply deleted as point made previously upthread.

Martin Porter has written some good stuff on the legal side of things.

e.g.
http://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/nlj/content/personal-injury-blame-victim

"Smith had not been wearing his cycle helmet and that, asserted Finch, made him at fault and partly responsible for his own brain damage"

"However, Smith was spared a reduction in his damages by the defendant's inability to prove that a helmet would have made any difference."

few more in here too...

see page 4

"Phethean-Hubble v Coles [2011] EWHC 363 (QB) HHJ Wilcox
Child cyclist rides from pavement onto road into the path of (child) motorist sustaining serious brain injury in the resulting collision. The Judge followed Smith v Finch finding both that the cyclist was at fault in not wearing a helmet and also that it had not been established that a helmet would have made any difference. The division of responsibility or causing the accident was one third cyclist and two thirds motorist (a decision that may well not survive appeal). The finding that a helmet would not have made a difference was not appealed. Shorrock was not cited"

[url= http://www.scotsman.com/news/fury-at-sheriff-s-helmet-claim-in-cyclist-death-case-1-2920362 ]he spared double road killer Gary McCourt from jail.[/url]

How about this one from the US, where a driver kills a child cyclist while doing [b]84mph[/b] in a 45mph limit, and the SUES the child's parents because he wasn't wearing a helmet!?! 😯

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/driver-convicted-of-killing-child-sues-victims-parents--28447/

That's just because the US legal system is rubbish though - he will lose his claim, but it costs him nothing to bring it.

costs him nothing to bring it.

But sadly it costs the family money to defend it! What a crap system.

I doubt if the money is their main complaint.

Last bloke who tried something similar dropped the case:

[i]Hundreds of protesters gathered outside the courthouse and the pending lynch mob convinced Delgado and his lawyer that continued litigation would be a bad idea.[/i]

Here's hoping.

Sadly this man has killed TWO cyclists.

[img] [/img]

Helmeted or not and the real debate is how we get pricks like this off the road for good.

Some shocking decisions on this and I do agree with this comment

“He says that Mrs Fyfe not wearing a helmet contributed to her death. That’s a bit like saying if I am shot while not wearing a bullet-proof vest then it’s my fault.

You may as well arguing owning a bike and going on the road contributed
However she would have been fine had she not been hit

Can car drivers payouts be reduced if they chose to drive a car without airbags or a poor safety rating?

Been happening for years.......

[img] [/img]
br />

No[i]t[/i]ice how she is p[i]r[/i]otecting her head by h[i]o[/i]lding it away from the ground? That's something we [i]l[/i]earn as young children. The more you do it, the more instinctive it becomes. Those banging their heads all the time were wrapped in cotton woo[i]l[/i] as k[i]i[/i]ds a[i]n[/i]d didn't [i]g[/i]et the chance to hone their self preservation skills. Probably best they wear a lid every time they 're on a bike.

obvious troll is obvious not to mention incredibly slow off the mark

If that ^^ is aimed at me then please clarify.

So you're saying we don't learn to protect our head from damage in fall when young?

You're also saying practice doesn't make perfect, and someone who has never done something before will be just as adept as another who has repeatedly rehearsed?

I throw your troll accusation back in your face! (and apologize for [s]not spending my life on here[/s] being so slow)

You're also saying practice doesn't make perfect,

So you are saying the unhelmeted have practicised crashing till they are perfect at it and your non trolling argument is they crash more so they get injured less

Ok, this is my first time contributing to the helmet debate, but I couldn't resist.

I always wear a hemet when riding on and off road, but I have given this issue a lot of thought. My reasoning is:

1. Helmets are designed to reduce head injuries in certain types of scenario

2. As far as I can understand, these scenarios correspond to impacts at "cycling speed" with hard surfaces

3. Whilst helmets are not *designed* to reduce head injuries with motor vehicles travelling at "motor vehicle speed", they may well provide some marginal benefit over not wearing a helmet in such a scenario

4. Real world crashes of type 2 above are a definite possibility. I have experience of such crashes on and off road (thankfully none involving motor vehicles). In most of the crashes, my legs, arms or shoulders took the brunt of the impact. In a minority, I also banged my head. One of the crashes resulted in me having slight concussion, another just in a very stiff neck the next day. I cannot say whether I would have sustained more severe head injuries had I not been wearing a helmet, just that I believe that the impacts experienced were within the design basis for the helmets.

5. Whilst an argument could be made for not wearing helmets because they are not designed to protect the wearer in crashes of type 3 above, this would not reduce the likelihood of the wearer being involved in a crash of type 2 above.

6. I do not personally experience any disbenefit with helmet use, so the risk/benefit trade off is a simple one. I can cope with being sweaty, and have very short hair.

That's just my reasoning. I'm happy with wearing a helmet.

Interestingly, there is a similar debate in the yachting community with respect tot the wearing of life jackets on yachts (racing vs cruising etc). The RNLI have a "Useless unless worn" campaign.

Anyone that chooses not to wear a helmet is stupid.

Anyone that chooses not to wear a helmet is stupid.

Anyone who makes blanket statements without considering the issue properly is likewise afflicted.

Or are just trying to re-ignite a thread that has run its course.

There's no issues, Helmets protect your head more than not wearing one so therefore your stupid not too. It isn't rocket science.

Shuttup fool just because you dont care about your wife and kids and who you leave behind ...yadda yadda hyperbole, poor example, it saved my life etc

I am praying for a religious thread - we have had Gypsies

Graham - really leave it they can either read the thread or spout ignorance but I salute your indefatigability if you try 😉
Here I started them off for you

Helmets protect your head more than not wearing one

Is this a rule for everything you do or just the activity of cycling?

 

Oh dear so I'm ignorant for not reading the whole thread and because I think people who don't take precautions to protect themselves are stupid. You can't cover every scenario that could happen to you whilst riding a bicycle but wearing helmets defiantly reduce the risk of hurting your head if you come off and hit your head. But argue to the contrary I will just ignore you.

Oh dear so I'm ignorant for not reading the whole thread

Yup. If you want to consider some of the arguments with an open-mind then go back and read the thread.

Funnily enough one of the main topics was the patronising hypocritical insults that the Hats feel obliged to dole out to the Non-Hats. 😕

As a hat he is not wrong on that point - there was abit from the noin hats as well but it seemed to be largely humour, stupidity or frustration;[ a minority of] the hats seemed to mean it

Oh dear so I'm ignorant for not reading the whole thread ...... But argue to the contrary I will just ignore you.

Exactly why have you joined in then?
You dont want to rea dyou dont want to listen
Politely many /most of the issues have been covered and by far more erudite contributors

Oh dear hot under the collar aren't we, just hope you don't hit your heads and leave it at that 🙄

but wearing helmets defiantly reduce the risk of hurting your head if you come off and hit your head.

How exactly would I wear a helmet defiantly? No straps? A jaunty angle? Or with a rebellious expression on my face?

Oh dear hot under the collar aren't we,

I fail to understand why anyone would enter a debate, refuse to read the topic, refuse to listen, then accuse others of being "emotional or angry" 😕

Its a strange place on here sometimes

Here's a sweeping generalisation:

Those who insist on wearing a helmet on every ride are fairly new to riding a bike. They maybe rode as a child (without a lid no doubt) and have discovered mtb (or road) now they have matured and are all grown up. It's part of the biker uniform and being of a certain age, are sensible enough not to ride without a helmet. The fact that they are only really getting to grips with how to ride a bike suggests that it's a prudent decision. Sadly, some of these fine folk think that everyone should [i]safety up[/i] as they do, hence the insults directed at those who wear a lid only when they think they might need one. Obviously there'll be the odd exception to this.

back in from page 8, anything new? Anyone care to summarise? [img] [/img]

Anyone care to summarise?

Some general agreement, or at least acceptance of alternative positions, followed by a light-hearted interlude, then more recently new folk showing up on the thread to repeat the pro-hat lines from the first two pages. 😕

be fair a non hat also turned up to call hats scared noobs who like the "uniform" so the insults /caricatures have been in both directiosn

It [i]is [/i]part of the uniform though Junkyard. Gloves and lid are the basics a shop will sell a new rider. Most of us would recommend the same, so it's not just a shop thing. And where you getting the 'scared noob' thing from? Someone new to an activity simply won't the experience of someone who has been doing it a while longer. I don't think that's an insult.

So your assuming I might read something earlier on in the thread that may change my understanding/reasoning behind not wearing a helmet. Also why is it that seasoned bike riders think they are superior and so highly skilled that their bike handling prowess will save their skull. More stupid insults coming my way I expect.

So your assuming I might read something earlier on in the thread that may change my understanding/reasoning behind not wearing a helmet.

Given that the current limit of your understanding/reasoning appears to be [i]"your stupid not too"[/i] then yes.

You don't have to agree of course, but you should at least consider that other people's viewpoints may be based on something more than stupidity.

Do you wear a high viz vest and helmet cover? Got mirrors fitted to your bike? Wear a neck brace and spine protector?

Your [sic] stupid not too 😀

More stupid [s]insults[/s] comments coming [s]my way[/s] from flippinheckler I expect.

I thought it was a troll, but it seems he really can't be bothered to read the thread to see how his "arguments" have already been addressed.

It is part of the uniform though Junkyard.

And where you getting the 'scared noob' thing from?

Someone new to an activity simply won't the experience of someone who has been doing it a while longer. I don't think that's an insult.

More stupid insults coming my way I expect.

All I've said was its stupid not to wear a helmet for obvious reasons. No matter how science based the argument for and against are I would rather wear a helmet than take risk. I don't need to read a load of waffle to reach that conclusion.

I am not aware of a uniform for cyclist

Seriously? You've never seen bike specific clothing? Helmets, gloves, pads, shirts, shorts and shoes designed specifically for cycling in. The tour was on last week and all the participants wore the [i]road [/i]uniform. Not only do i find that hard to believe, but i'd bet some monies that you yourself have a uniform or two.

Still don't see where i said 'scared noob' but this little exchange has showed me how you may have come to that conclusion. You just make stuff up 'cause you're bored 😀

can you lot agree on the [naughty words] summary!

You've never seen bike specific clothing?

Still don't see where i said 'scared noob' but this little exchange has showed me how you may have come to that conclusion. You just make stuff up 'cause you're bored

The fact that they are only really getting to grips with how to ride a bike suggests that it's a prudent decision. Sadly, some of these fine folk think that everyone should safety up as they do

All I've said was its stupid not to wear a helmet for obvious reasons.

Ah the irony of being accused of ignorance by someone who can't be bothered to read the arguments. 😀

Why do I have to read the arguments?

To stop you being ignorant of the debate you have just entered 💡

I'm not ignorant just understand the merits of wearing a helmet rather than not, just because people have been lucky enough get away without being injured from not wearing a helmet doesn't mean they will be impervious to getting that knock on the head that could prematurely end their cycling days.

So if you're not ignorant then what are some of the arguments put forward against wearing a helmet?

Do you really think the best way to convince someone is to insult them and to refuse listen to anything they say?

Other people have managed fairly considered arguments on both sides - maybe you should read them?

maybe you should read them?

No thanks, I understand what a helmet is for thats why I wear one!

Yes clearly you do understand everything about this debate who could think that - is it anyone who has read the thread -
This simplistic argument has been debated near the start of the thread but dont let the facts get in the way

It is not as clear cut as a helmet will save my life and there is also the issue of risk compensation.
They have been extensively debated in the thread