You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
It's nicely indicative of the abuse the Non-Hats receive when they choose not to wear a helmet.
It's not really about Non-Hats and Hats though is it..?
It's about thickie pig-headed reactionary ne'er do wells and helmet wearers isn't it..?
If I fell off, mashed my brains and my wife had to spend the next 50 years feeding me through a tube as I dribble at her, that's other people's business - hers, as well as mine. Hypotehtically, if I were to be too pig headed to take any kind of precaution against this, then other people who also care about me could easily be justified in entreating me to do so.
Ah the mysterious brain mashing dribble inducing catastrophic injury that can only be averted by a piece of material not tested past an impact speed of 12mph - read lots and lots of reports of these and how even though they don't exist they allow people to take a sanctimonious high ground. Perhaps if you and your family are that worried, the safe carefree and once again safe activity of cycling isn't for you.
I couldn't care less if others choose to wear a helmet or not on or off-road. I've hit my head on tarmac though without a helmet and it hurts, a lot, I wasn't planning to crash either. These days I choose to wear a helmet as it protects my noggin from road rash and some impacts and there's very little downside other than helmet hair and having to clean the pads once in a while. I don't wear one thinking it will save me if I go under the wheels of an HGV or over the bonnet of a driver doing 60mph whilst temporarily blinded by the sun.
Seriously though, until you've tried it, I wouldn't underestimate the ouch factor of your head scraping along tarmac.
they allow people to take a sanctimonious high ground
But don't go up there without a helmet - it's really high and that ground is pretty shaky! 😀
Would you drive a car with no seat belt on the assumption that you wont be in an accident? No.
Err, yes, actually. The only think that makes me wear a seatbelt routinely is the annoying bloody alarm that goes off if I don't put it on (must figure out how to disable that at some point).
Anyway, this line of debate has been dealt with I think. I know these threads like to go round in circles but another cycle of 'why don't you wear a helmet when driving/walking/sleeping/cooking/etc' really isn't necessary 🙂
Friend of mine had a cycle accident recently and she smacked the back of her head on the road. Helmet was cracked, but she managed not to be concussed or have a cracked skull.
They can't save you from everything, but I think they can minimise injuries on occasion, and I'd rather do that if I can.
Why's that then?
Because all your doing is making assumptions on a drivers behaviour based on a cyclist wearing a helmet.
A dangerous driver is dangerous regardless of what you wear on your head.
FuzzyWuzzy - Member
I couldn't care less if others choose to wear a helmet or not on or off-road. I've hit my head on tarmac though without a helmet and it hurts, a lot, I wasn't planning to crash either. These days I choose to wear a helmet as it protects my noggin from road rash and some impacts and there's very little downside other than helmet hair and having to clean the pads once in a while. I don't wear one thinking it will save me if I go under the wheels of an HGV or over the bonnet of a driver doing 60mph whilst temporarily blinded by the sun.
Seriously though, until you've tried it, I wouldn't underestimate the ouch factor of your head scraping along tarmac.
+1
Debating how/if motorists may behave differently when cyclists are wearing a helmet is just silly.
Ignoring some of the effects of helmet wearing and concentrating only on the one which supports your argument is silly.
Because all your doing is making assumptions on a drivers behaviour based on a cyclist wearing a helmet.
Assumptions based on academic studies of the behavior of drivers. Clearly you know better though.
Obviously. I wear a helmet.
read lots and lots of reports of these and how even though they don't exist
It does happen. James Cracknell, and a bloke I used to work with. My ex-colleague ironically was walking at the time not cycling, but it was still a case of head vs car.
(I know what you'll all say, but as previously mentioned the reason I don't wear one when walking is that I deem being hit by a car to be less likely than when I cycle in traffic)
Seriously though, until you've tried it, I wouldn't underestimate the ouch factor of your head scraping along tarmac.
Been there, done that. Couldn't remember how I made it home from where I crashed (which was less than a mile), got taken to hospital to get checked for concussion and ended up with a big lump over one eye which made it hard to open. No lasting damage though. Hence why I tend to wear a helmet when riding in similar circumstances (in the dark and wet). Hence why I'm also somewhat sceptical about all the anecdotes about helmets having saved people's lives (or having saved them from a lifetime of dribbling and being fed through a tube), when the majority of the incidents appear to involve less impact than my crash did. Maybe I have a very thick skull, but I suspect that in reality whilst a lump of polystyrene does save people from what I experienced fairly often, it saves people from death a lot less often than they think.
It does happen. James Cracknell, and a bloke I used to work with
Last time I checked Cracknell wasn't dribbling. If your ex-colleague who wasn't cycling is, then your post is somewhat ironic.
A hefty dose of (anecdotal) front-line realism [url= http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/how-to-ride-safely-by-cyclist-doctors-who-save-lives-8727773.html ]from 3 cycling medics involved in the London Air Ambulance[/url]:
"There seem to always be calls for compulsory helmet use after a cycling death. Whilst helmets are important our experience in pre hospital care suggests many of the cycling deaths occur when a vehicle has driven over the chest or pelvis causing terrible injuries."
Grim 😐
Although I am loathe to add any more to a thread which promised so little and delivered even less, apart from GrahamS being the voice of reason, I had a helmet tale to tell.
3 riders, all on the same size bikes, all the same height, took a corner in single file on black ice.
We were riding to a coach pick up to race the Inter regional champs and had to get to the coach at 4 am, all on cross bikes.
We all came off at the same point, doing the same speed. One of us got concussion; he was wearing a helmet. The other two had no head injury at all.
I was the one wearing the helmet, and the impact split it.
Helmets make your head bigger and easy to bump in some falls, and the helmet crack didn't save me from anything.
We got beaten at the champs too.
"There seem to always be calls for compulsory helmet use after a cycling death. Whilst helmets are important our experience in pre hospital care suggests many of the cycling deaths occur when a vehicle has driven over the chest or pelvis causing terrible injuries."
70% of cycling deaths are due to head injuries
70% of cycling deaths are due to head injuries
Evidence please?
70% of cycling deaths are due to head injuries
Source??
Even [url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/helmet-on-road/page/14#post-5194905 ]the heavily pro-helmet figures that Dale_rider posted the other day[/url] said that
"A specialist biomechanical assessment of over 100 police forensic cyclist fatality reports predicted that between 10 and 16% could have been prevented if they had worn an appropriate cycle helmet.Of the on-road serious cyclist casualties admitted to hospital in England (HES database):
10% suffered injuries of a type and to a part of the head that a cycle helmet may have mitigated or prevented"
70% of cycling deaths are due to head injuries
That's the reported cause of death - how many would have died of other injuries had their head been totally protected (with a motorbike style helmet)?
Klunk - Member70% of cycling deaths are due to head injuries
Do you have a reference for that, ROSPA just says
"A study of 116 fatal cyclist accidents in London and rural areas found over 70% of the cyclist fatalities in London had moderate or serious head injuries in London, and over 80% of those killed in collisions on rural roads." at no stage do they seem to mention that the head injuries are the cause of death nor do they state what proportion were wearing helmets
The-Potential-for-Cycle-Helmets-to-Prevent-Injury-Review-.-D.Hynd-UK-2009-1.pdf
appendix.H Table 7-20
That's [url= http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_road_user_safety/report_the_potential_for_cycle_helmets_to_prevent_injury___a_review_of_the_evidence.htm ]the same TRL review[/url] that Dales_rider and I quoted from?
You might want to consider the critique of it here:
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1230.html
Do you have a proper link for that so we can check the context?
You might want to consider the critique of it here:
that critique mentions nothing on the 71% of deaths are due to head injuries ?
From Klunk's link:
“[it was] impossible to definitively quantify the effectiveness or otherwise of cycle helmets based on the literature reviewed”
Yet that's exactly what they did. Sounds like quality research.
This link might work aracer:
http://www.trl.co.uk/downloads/download_report.asp?id=6528&submit=Download
Doesn't seem to for me, Graham - presumably you registered which I couldn't be bothered with. Google is my friend though:
Yeah thought that link might sneak you round the registration bit 😀
Just looking at this table Klunk and the first thing I'm struck by is that it shows 33% of those fatalities wearing helmets [i]also[/i] died from head injury as the main cause (though the sample size is 12 so not exactly brilliant).
and the helmet crack didn't save me from anything.
Are you suggesting that a helmet that breaks doesn't do its job?
Cos if so, you're wrong.
Riding along a flat road to reach a bridleway and my mate cut across in front of me taking my front wheel away, I landed head first onto the road.
Bit shaken I rode on but after 2 hours I passed out and slid under a cafe table.
Woke up in hospital and the A&E consultant said, "Good job you were wearing a helmet otherwise you'd be clogging up an ITU bed."
All the evidence I need.
the A&E consultant said
Last time I checked doctors are not given any training in forensic crash investigation.
My missus, a doctor, would probably have said the same thing and she doesn't understand why you don't fly backwards when you jump in a moving train 😀
@GrahamS - I'd rather take his advice than that of a bunch of IT managers!! 😉
Fair enough - like I said I'm not here advising people [i]not[/i] to wear a helmet.
(Software Engineer by the way, but close)
Good job you were wearing a helmet otherwise you'd be clogging up an ITU bed
Just like I did when I hit the road with my head. Oh, hang on...
Actually from your symptoms it sounds like you had a rotational injury 😈
[b]Case Study[/b]
Subject: Euro
Total number of hours riding a bike: 20000+
Percentage of time spent riding a bike without helmet: 90%
Number of crashes: No idea - easily more than anyone on this forum.
Number of times i've hit my head by falling off a bike: 2
Number of times i've hit my head and the helmet actually protected me: 1
There you have it fact fans. 50/50 chance of a helmet offering some protection if you hit your head in a bicycle crash. 😀
My missus, a doctor, would probably have said the same thing and she doesn't understand why you don't fly backwards when you jump in a moving train
Deepends which way you are facing.
Deepends which way you are facing.
Actually, if the train is accelerating, you would move backwards slightly, wouldn't you?
[URL= http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff215/sputnik_photos/2d9de0198c31bff6e294d19bbaf13665_zps4f53672e.jp g" target="_blank">
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff215/sputnik_photos/2d9de0198c31bff6e294d19bbaf13665_zps4f53672e.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Sometimes a hat is not enough...
[URL= http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff215/sputnik_photos/796bb2af365470b5d6f9d5d77e9860d1_zpse21ea7f2.jp g" target="_blank">
http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff215/sputnik_photos/796bb2af365470b5d6f9d5d77e9860d1_zpse21ea7f2.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Those pics are the best thing in this thread by a long way.
That's a lovely pic. I'm guessing she rides pretty hard looking at how she's snapped her frame clean in two just behind the headtube. Even more hardcore, it's a fixie. That takes some doing.
She'll need that (massive) helmet though - she only has one brake on those tiny handlebars and it's not connected to anything. 😕
It was connected, she broke the cable in the crash doing extreme downhill on her rigid fixie. She's that hardcore.
That explains the bruises under her eyes.
Nasty wounds/bruises on her face. Imagine what she would have looked like without a hat?
[sorry Graham...x-post!]
p.s. I was smiling about this thread during a ride last night. The one thing that no-one has mentioned so far (I believe) is branches. Took a couple of solid branch hits on the helmet last night and was relieved that this was one of the 9/10 rides not the 1/10 version!! Didnt help with the shredded shin though!!
al has made her a unicycle and she is perfectly wise to wear a massive helmet before testing his prototype
teamhurtmore - That's true - I got a low branch on a night ride. Felt like a baseball bat to the head, and was with my massive helmet [oooh eeer].
Branches and hidden brambles in bracken are my current bugbears.
Everything seems really overgrown (well my cheeky trails anyway) at the moment. I had a couple of "moments" in 7' high inpenetrable bracken and thorns on "usual" trails last night. Disappeared completely and the subsequent camouflage made me look like i should be on the archery thread!!
The thing I most commonly bang my helmet on (ooer!) is the door frame of the shed 😳
GrahamS - MemberThe thing I most commonly bang my helmet on (ooer!) is the door frame of the shed
I have quite a good record of accidently headbutting the missus. 😳
Not wearing a polystyrene hat saved my life!
While riding home from the pub without my polystyrene hat on my head(the eagle eyed among you will have probably spotted the root cause of the problem from the last sentence) I attempted to slide the round a loose gravel corner. The wheels dug in, I high sided, and found myself flying head first parallel to the ground.
When I hit the ground the first point of contact was my shoulder. As soon as it hit the ground I started rolling. The end result was that I had a very sore shoulder, quite a bit of grazing on the side of my head, and a severe lecture from the missus about drinking to much.
Had I been wearing my polystyrene hat the first point of impact wouldn't have been my shoulder it would have been my head. I can't tell you how much energy my shoulder absorbed in the impact but I can guarantee you it was more than the 0.2 inches of compression in the helmet would have.
Had I been wearing the lid I'm sure I'd be sitting here saying that the helmet left me 'only' concussed and not dead.
I still always wear my helmet mountain biking.
Funny thing with the branches, I think the only times I've clocked my head on low branches has been while wearing a helmet.
This is pure personal observation, no axe to grind, no risk compensation theories or anything! Promise!
I'm guessing it's because your upwards peripheral vision is compromised, especially if you're sporting a peak.
That's why I've ripped the peaks off all my helmets.
Except the full face helmets obviously. Who ever heard of a full face helmet without a peak. Farcical notion.
The Future, would you ?
Can't see youtube at work. If it's the inflatable collarbaghelmet, no.
I saw a lady this morning with her (child's?) helmet so far back on her head, she was into polystyrene fascinator territory.
Had I been wearing my polystyrene hat the first point of impact wouldn't have been my shoulder it would have been my head. I can't tell you how much energy my shoulder absorbed in the impact but I can guarantee you it was more than the 0.2 inches of compression in the helmet would have.
How do you work that one out? Your shoulder took most the impact then you grazed your head. Ok. The extra thickness of a helmet will cause your head to hit the ground sooner. Agreed. But your shoulder is still taking a large amount of the impact. The impact on the helmet would be minimal if your head only had light grazes after the fall. By the way you describe the crash if you had been wearing a helmet and it had hit the ground first your shoulder will still be taking most the impact.