You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The 'broad church' analogy is fitting
Most churches also have an unfounded belief in the power of their religion to save.
steve b - thankyou - Showing TJ is just a..........
experienced or not? makes a huge difference
Not really, you may have 50 years experience on a bike, doesn't make you less likely to have an accident
Justify this action and your conclusions that it medium high?
i dont have to justify this, crashing your bike happens on a daily basis compared to say, falling out an aeroplane and generally, whether your aware of it or not, your head will come in to contact with the ground.
why - no evidence to support your view
well its my view for a start, and plenty of people who have hurt there head would support this. If every risk assessment requires scientific proof they would never get complete, but then you know this
again - no evidence.
Wrong, it was me who crashed so there is evidence.
Simple as this TJ.IF you decide when on your tandem journeys not to wear a lid and harm comes to you or your riding friend, then thats fine, but dont expect me to sympathise with you when this does
I haven't read any more than the title and first post of this thread (no point) so forgive me if I've missed something (doubt it v. much). anyway, I often don't wear a helmet while I ride, whether it's on my Roadbike, XC, DH or BMX is irrelevant.
today I cracked my lid off a tree almost hard enough to knock me off my bike while leaning in on a fast but tight corner, if I hadn't been wearing it I wouldn't have hit the tree at all. 😕
No one seems to be considering the effect of a simple impact of the head on the ground. There have been any number of instances of individuals dying after confronting yobs, or during fights in the street. In virtually every case the person has suffered a single punch, but died after, as a result of their head hitting a kerbstone. Explain, please, how a head hitting the ground after a punch is different to a head hitting the the ground after a bike goes sideways. Every time I've hit the deck on a bike my head has had some sort of contact with the ground, last time at walking pace on damp tarmac. Now, I have [i]no[/i] idea what damage I may have done to my head, my left knee suffered enough, but I [i]do[/i] know, looking at the damage to the peak on my Xen, that I would have suffered, at the very least, severe lacerations to my left temple, probably requiring hospital treatment. I can't honestly imagine there is anybody out there who would voluntarily suffer head trauma rather than wear a crash hat. Or maybe some people just get an adrenaline rush from the risk. I do know that hitting the deck on rough stony ground at 15-20mph is going to be even more damaging than my impact at 5mph. A fractured skull is a fractured skull, no matter how it's aquired. Hey, but it's your choice, think of it as evolution in action, nature's way of culling the clumsy or stupid. I'm not that stupid.
Steve - you need to sort that confusion. A hazard cannot be a likelyhood
The likelihood or incidence depends on other factors.
There are many systems of risk assessment - I know of several and have been trained professionally to assess risk.
There is also a school of thought developing within industrial risk assessment that there is no such thing as an accident, only an incident caused by incorrectly assessing the risks and failure to mitigate such risks - loosely phrased as incidents happen because people don't do things correctly.
Yup
But being Brits we LOVE to blame everything on accidents... It makes us feel all nostalgic and invulnerable, the idea that "things that just happen for no apparent reason"... Haha. Christ, I love teaching people about hazards and risks and how to minimise them (sad I know!), cos their faces are a picture when you ram home to them the cause and effect of what they do, and how their negligence has the capability to cause severe harm!
TJ, I see your argument, you make a good point. But I think it's been argued before, and I agree on this one, why when something such as an MTB helmet is so unobtrusive (lets face it, all decent MTB helmets these days, you hardly notice you're wearing them if they fit correctly in the first place!) not wear it anyway? Even if the risk is low, when it is so easy to minimise that risk even further, why would you not do so?
And that is my main point!
if I hadn't been wearing it I wouldn't have hit the tree at all.
Best not wear a lid ever then GW, even when racing DH, based upon your own experience of it causing more harm than good! 😉
From the Oxford English Dictionary->
"Hazard is the potential to cause harm; risk on the other hand is the likelihood of harm (in defined circumstances, and usually qualified by some statement of the severity of the harm). "
[url= http://www.agius.com/hew/resource/hazard.htm ]Check here if you don't believe me[/url]
My bad but you get the point, a Hazard can potentially cause harm if a risk is not mitigated.
mboy, I think my first post gives an answer to your point.
Go on one last post
Raddogair - you really think experience has no bearing on how likely you are to crash? Apart from that I thought you were talking about the general situation and replied thus - if you're talking about a specific then we are at cross purposes.
GW - no need to red the whole thread - its the usual arguments.
Xipe - you need to look at your technique 😉 - seriously in 40 yrs of offraod biking I have never hit my head apart from once on a branch when wearing a helmet - I attribute some of that to Judo and breakfalling and protecting your head - active / passive safety again.
mboy - I find helmets uncomfortable and sweaty and inconvenient and I'd rather ride without one.
But I think it's been argued before
No, really?!
wear one if you want, dont if you dont. End of stupid discussion.
Same old arguments, same old anecdotes, same old stuff trotted out regarding helmets.
If they work in the way you assume, it will be clear as day in the statistics.
It's not clear, because the evidence that they work isn't there.
It's an inch of polystyrene, not a magic helmet, and it WILL NOT protect you from a serious injury.
If it did, and the evidence was there to prove so, we would be made to wear them by law.
Tedious, but you really need to look at the evidence available;
[url] http://cyclehelmets.org/ [/url]
Raddogair - you really think experience has no bearing on how likely you are to crash? Apart from that I thought you were talking about the general situation and replied thus - if you're talking about a specific then we are at cross purposes.
Experience doesn't mean your any good at it!!. Christ, i've got 10 years experience on Lewis Hamilton driving but i'm sure he's better than it than me ( although to be fair, i've never raced him so don't officially know). And as for crashing yourself TJ, thats fantastic news, no really it is. I'm glad you've done so well but...... doesn't mean your any good at this sport. I'm sure i'd quite happily ride stuff you wouldn't but thats not because i'm wearing a helmet, its probably because your minimising the chances of you crashing.
3 weeks ago I crashed and hit my shoulder and head hard on rocky ground and cracked my Giro Hex through. After the initial "ooooofff" had subsided, I rode for another 3 hours - albeit gingerly (I had torn some ligaments in the shoulder)
Thanks Giro (I bought another Hex)
crikey, TJ has said that he takes tricky sections cautiously (walks?) when not wearing a helmet. Ergo, he appears to believe that they can, in fact prevent injury. I have landed on the road on my head and hand at speed. I broke 5 bones, none of them were my skull.
A full face helmet in a car would reduce head injuries. Are we compelled to wear them by law?
I;ve not read all the answers but my response being...
I've banged my head lots of times while out riding, offroad and on road. I doubt any of these impacts would have killed me, nor do I think my helmet will save me in a serious accident but I do know for a fact my helmets have stopped me being hospitalized.
I also think that anyone who rides 'harder' becaue they're wearing a helmet or any safety gear is a complete ****wit. Helmets have stopped me getting lots of nasty head injuries, some of which would have been permanent, they're cheap, light and once it's on you rarely notice it. Up to you though. If your head is worth nothing to you, wear nothing on it.
Rich - prevent minor ones - serious life threatening injuries they are not very good reducing or preventing. Its all about the amount of energy involved.
TJ, in my worst crash I generated enough force through my wrist to snap the end off my radius. My head hit the floor at the same time. I don't think that amount of force going through my skull would be a good thing. Do you? And if you think they only prevent minor injuries, why do you wear one at trail centres since you find them so uncomfortable?
Ok as an Emergency care practitioner ( ex Paramedic) who has spent the last 15 yrs covering the mountain bike popular routes around the South Downs...I cannot pin point any particular incident where I have been called to a biker who's life has been saved by wearing a helmet - but have been to countless accidents where the cyclist is back at work after a few days...as opposed to a longer recovery time.
It really is a personal preference - and one that I certainly wouldn't harrang someone for not adhering to.I am way too busy in my job and have seen too much innocent trauma to start taking the moral high ground about anything!
I think that the points emphasising the merits of riding to the safety clothing that you are wearing are extremely valid...but we all know that it is not always the obvious that catches us out.
Good luck!..because that is what our faint existence often amounts to in my experience!
Never once thought "damn I wish I wasnt wearing a helmet.." But I have had on occasion reason to thank **** that I am. Yes its upto the individual but dont expect ANY sympathy when you go @rse over tit & bend your noggin!
TJ the argument about helmets being uncomfortable just doesnt wash Im afraid & if your honest you will admit that..Oh Im not going to go round the houses with you on this one (regarding severity of injury) as I have a feeling we have done that before.. 😉
But hey carry on - its a free world etc etc ect..
I read about 1/2 of this thread, enough to see it's the same old same old being spouted by TJ, who's never had an accident and knows he won't if he's not wearing a helmet. TJ, I REALLY hope you never come to regret you decision. Honestly, I really do.
FYI, it's when you're pootling, when you're relaxed, when you're confident that the accidents tend to happen. I once went on a ride in the Lakes. Low level steady ride with Mrs PP. I discovered that I'd left my newly washed helmet pads back at the tent, and for about 10 seconds I considered not wearing my lid, because I thought I'd be safe. In the end I covered the scratchy velcro with some tape and put it on. 2-3 miles into the ride, I went slowly sailing over the bars trying to ride something that looked rather innocent, and bashed my head on a rock. No, it most likely wouldn't have killed me, but I'd have been off to hospital for a few stitches and my day would have been ruined.
Apart from that incident, I've gone through 3 helmets on the road, 2 of which were simple lack of attention caused by outside factors, with no obvious dangers about.
I don't find it odd that those of us that have tested their helmets (Like Jedi) wouldn't go without them, whilst those that haven't sometimes do, either......
EDIT
There are many systems of risk assessment - I know of several and have been trained professionally to assess risk
So have I.
So, how would I hande this situation if I was at work?
Well, we've had it drummed into us that it's the people that think they are fine, that have been doing a task for years, that are one of the highest risks. And only last week I was on a course where it was again reiterated that we should challenge someone or something that we thought was wrong or unsafe. Because again, ignoring an issue is when the accidents happen.
If I was to do a full RA on cycling, It would be concluded that it was a pretty risky task. After minimising said risk by making sure the equipment was up to scratch, and that the route taken was as safe as possible, the next thing would be PPE, for visiblity if cycling on the road and crash protection in all instances.
Don't try muddling me with H&S BS, TJ.... 🙂
Serious question as I wasn't riding before helmets became deemed necessary, but was there a big problem with a lot of head injuries amongst mountain bikers prior to the majority using them?
But then, it's never going to be sorted out and it'll always be a contentious issue with ingrained camps on both sides, just look at how long the helmet debate has raged within the climbing community, and shows no sign of abating there either!
PP... if you are going to use the H&S angle, shouldn't you also do as you say and make sure the route is as safe as possible? In which case you'll be riding along the flatest, easiest route.
But nobody on here ever really does that, they, like you and I, look for the 'fun' trails to ride. So why is it acceptable for us to take that particular risk, but not to take a risk of not using a helmet on a flat ride?
PP... if you are going to use the H&S angle, shouldn't you also do as you say and make sure the route is as safe as possible? In which case you'll be riding along the flatest, easiest route
I did say that. 🙂
But in the case of MTBing as a leisure activity that's rarely the desired option. And that increases the risk.
Have we covered spine protectors yet? (sorry, haven't read the thread)
Evangelising that you should wear a helmet but not bothering with a spine protector seems a bit mental to me (but I guess dogmas are mostly irrational by default). It only takes one unlucky roll onto a small stone or tree stump..
funkynick - MemberSerious question as I wasn't riding before helmets became deemed necessary, but was there a big problem with a lot of head injuries amongst mountain bikers prior to the majority using them?
simply no - there has never been any epidemic of head injuries.
Peterpoddy - you totally misrepresent what I say and you are full of inaccuracies yourself - the worst of which is:
If I was to do a full RA on cycling, It would be concluded that it was a pretty risky task
This is one of the cornerstones of the argument - cycling is very safe. It simply is not a risky activity unless you chose to make it one. The numbers of folk killed or injured each year show this.
You show your ignorance of H&S and of risk assessment.
Reack
RepacK - MemberTJ the argument about helmets being uncomfortable just doesnt wash Im afraid & if your honest you will admit that.
I don't understand - helmets are uncomfortable and sweaty. All of them - every single one. - in comparison to having nothing on your head
Hmm, lid wearing seem a real hornets nest of an issue!
Working at a trail centre its intersting to see the kind of riders we see about and how they asses the potential hazards of being out in the forest. It amazes me sometimes the lack of preperation and forethought that some people have, when did taking responsibility for your actions and self become a thing of the past?
PP... I know you did.. 🙂
And you are right, taking the easy line is rarely what we are looking for in this sport. But, and there was always going to be one of those wasn't there, why is that increase of risk acceptable, but choosing to go for a pootle without a helmet not?
For example, who is more likely to have an accident? Someone riding to the shops on a cycle path, or someone riding the trails at a trail centre?
If it's selfish to ride to the shops without a lid, then surely it is even more so to ride a trail centre...
A gnarly trail on which you must wear a helmet or you will die
[img] 
[/img]
Oh good grief.
Wearing a helmet = a good idea, probably
Not wearing one = well, it's your head
Banging on sanctimoniously about it = 🙄
Normal XC ones are simply not that good - if they save your life you are left seriously injured. If you are left with no injury they saved you from a minor injury.
As I recall, this assertion of TJ's is based on some pretty motheaten old studies, which were carried out around the time of Etto bucket lids with flouresecent lycra covers. Modern lids are MUCH better, with better retention systems, lower profiles, and more coverage of your head. People are also more knowledgeable about how to get a helmet that fits properly, and shitty "one size" helmets are much less common these days.
I suspect that for many of the people who don't wear lids, it isn't because they've made a balanced risk assessment or sworn off all forms of riding except Ambient Jeycore Lite. It's because of concerns about fashion (c.f. BMX, where no-one who wears a lid ever gets more than a footnote in Ride or Dig amgazine) or people thinking "It'll never happen to me".
Note also that this is an entirely separate debate to whether their use should be compulsory.
mr agreeable - find some studies that show your point then. Thats the best stuff I can find.
In some ways modern helmets have got worse - less and harder grade of poly and the testing regime remains very simple and obviously flawed.
Helmets are simply not that effective - and worse than helmets for other sports.
You should be agitating for better research and testing on cycle helmets 'cos a lot of what is out there is Richter poor quality.
I prefer evidence based stuff rather than faith - and the evidence is that helmets do not improve safety by any measurable amount
The big question is, I think, is that if you have a helmet, why aren't you wearing it? Surely the act of buying one must show that you appreciate it does something for you if you crash. You can't tell they're on nowadays so that's no excuse (and the bloke who said he can't hear as well when wearing one made me laugh out loud!!!). So why not? I assume you wear gloves and padded shorts and shades (there's always going to be someone who says they don't, just to be a smartarse).
If someone buys a £100 bike and doesn't buy a helmet because of cost doesn't wear one I can see why not. If you have you £2k niche machine but decide not to wear your £50 helmet as you feel like you've "assessed the risks and decided methodically that it'll be within acceptable limits for my intended skill schedule" (or other drivel as quoted above) then I'm afraid you're just making a fool of yourself.
It's because of concerns about fashion
I dunno, I always* wear a helmet for off-road biking, but I often ride to work on a cycle path without one, and it is much more pleasant/less sweaty. I'm sure fashion might be an issue as well.
*did forget my helmet once but as Id driven up to Grizedale I thought I'd go for a ride anyway - got some very dissaproving looks. I thought I'd try and take it easy but it didn't really work out like that
This pretty much sums it up for me
Wearing a helmet = a good idea, probablyNot wearing one = well, it's your head
last time i had a big off i hit head first to the rocks i crushed my helmet and it also broke and i ended up in intensive care i was pretty glad i had it on as i dont know what i would have been like without it. it may have been not as bad but i'll take my chances and keep wearing one
TandemJeremy - Member
mr agreeable - find some studies that show your point then.
There are more recent studies on cyclehelmets.org but according to you these don't test rotational impact so they're worthless. 🙄
If harder helmets are a bad thing then why do you wear a pisspot when you go out jumping on your tandem?
If less polystyrene is a bad thing than why do you bang on about rotation injuries and assert that wearing a helmet is a sure fire way to end up paralysed?
Testing for lids needs to be better but I'm not convinced that one lid which passes SNELL is automatically safer than one OF near-identical construction which hasn't been tested. They are not complicated things.
Bottom line, helmets aren't perfect but unless you can bail perfectly every time they are better than nothing.
sticks hand up in the air like a 5 year old at scool me me me.
last year i had a crash. high speed,head came into contact with a tree stunp(kind of top of head first) once the dust had settled and i realised my mates all had looks of horror on there faces it was pointed out that my helmet was in three bits. my head was fine.
so TJ what i am saying is that i am not up for running the other part of this test.
but yes you shouldnt have folk tutting at you cos you dont bother.
This is one of the cornerstones of the argument - cycling is very safe. It simply is not a risky activity unless you chose to make it one. The numbers of folk killed or injured each year show this.You show your ignorance of H&S and of risk assessment.
No ignorance at all. But you're showing your blinkered view. 🙂
And it's a blinkered view that causes the problems in many cases
Lets look at the facts - (CAUTION - This is going to get silly now, but let's follow it through... 🙂 )
You're balancing on 2 wheels.
Fairly high speeds can be attained fairly easily.
On the road you're small, virtually unprotected, travelling a lot slower than other traffic, and hard to see.
Off road the surface is astonishingy bad in comparison, and infinately variable. The bike spends time off the ground either by accident or design
Weather can make a big difference. (either hot or cold or wet etc)
Bikes can very easily be knocked off their chosen path by poor surface or wind. Even looking behind you can easily cause a weave.
The operator is untrained in most cases
There is no legal reqiurement relating to the mechanical state of the bike, or to PPE to be used.
There are few if any active safety systems on a bike (EG - ABS on a car. Airbags are passive safety, or I as I prefer to put it, 'emergency features' for when the safety has failed!)
Off the top of my head that's the risks I can think of.
Right in front of me right now are 2 blokes cutting several broken and rusted RSJs out of my weighbridge and welding new ones in. The RA/SWP I did for that had nowhere near as many hazzards (Hot work, traffic management, lifting, slips trips & falls basically) as I've just listed above. I have an inkling that if cycling were a 'work related task' it would simply be concluded that it was too risky and we'd have to find another way of achieving the task. (Told you this was going to get silly!)
The way a RA works is that you identify the risks then quatify them. If a risk is too high, steps are taken to reduce the risk to an acceptable level. If the level of risk can't be reduced below the acceptable level the task is not to be carried out.
A RA is not a 'ticket to ride' it's a logical way of assessing a task before you start it.
If I had the time and a way to host it, I'd do a RA, SWP, and Permission to Proceed for cycling for you. But sadly I don't. 😉
TJ, a couple of questions:
Do you own a helmet?
Do you have a) a ridiculously shaped head, b) a particularly bad skin disease or c) a dramatic and unconventionally hard to style hairdo, that would make a helmet unusually uncomfortable or socially suicidal?
And I am not joking, please let me know.
double post
Lets look at this from another angle.
We get a lot of accidents at the centre the majority of which are head and upper torso. I would much rather go pickup someone with a bust lid and some gravel rash rather than try to keep someone alive with severe head trauma while waiting for the medics to arrive, suddenly the forest isn't such an inviting place to be.
God theres a load of repetitive nonsense on this thread!
I wear a helmet all the time, my head feels cold if I don't and they look cool. They're also especially effective in the rain. I admit that a hat might be better suited to my needs, but I've got a helemet and it doesn't absorb water when it rains.
In my experience (12 years) as my experience has developed I've started to crash more often, my riding has developed, so I'm pushing the boundaries more often I guess. The analogy of not being able to drive as well as Lewis Hamilton even though you've watched him drive for a long time made me laugh, complete bollocks!
I agree with TJ to an extent, there is absolutely no way I would ever crash riding the trail pictured above and if I was doing trails like that I might consider not wearing a helmet on a hot day. But then I'd probably go for a different route as I quite enjoy rides with a relatively high probability of death.
What I find most interesting about this thread (Lets be honest the vast majority of whats been written above is utter crap thts already been said countless times on here and all over the internet) is all these accidents you're all having where you hit your head. I don't mean this in any sort of, 'I don't believe you' kind of way, but are you all a bit crap at crashing somehow? Now, over the years I've crashed a lot, pretty much every time I've had enough advanced warning to be able to effect an exit strategy that protects the most valuable bit of my body. I always cut my knees and arms, but rarely anything else, I've never broken any of the bones that get mentioned on here a lot, I've hit my head once. I hit my head earlier this year going over the bars down Chapel Gate, I hit the side bank of the deep gully. It's rare to ride down sometihng with a steep side like that, so I'm prepared to take that one as an anomaly.
I'm not saying don't wear a helmet, because I do, but has the art of crashing been lost over the years or do you all like to bleat on a bit and exaggerate to make a point?
robdob... what is actually wrong with assessing the risk of something before doing it, and then choosing whether to do it or not based on that assessment? You seem to have some problem with this...
Genisis - I have not advocated not wearing a helmet at a trail centre
Mr Agreebale - I simply have not said what you say I have and you need to have a look at the research
TJ, wasn't pointing fingers. Just a personal view 🙂
do you all like to bleat on a bit and exaggerate to make a point?
😆
It is, and has to be, all about free choice.
I made my choice in about 91 / 92. Wearing a lid was deeply unfashionable at the time - but a girl where I lived staggered sideways after being passed too close by a car. The car wasn't speeding (busy rush hour city centre traffic). The car didn't actually hit her - she panicked and in attempting to move sideways staggered and tripped, hit her head on a rough stone wall and died of her injuries...
Totally unscientific, but this otherwise inoccuous incident took someone's life. The lack of speed and lack of vehicle impact suggests to me that a helmet WOULD have made a life saving difference.
In another seemingly low risk incident, a colleague died cycling with his family - low speed, country lane, inocuous little tumble and head impact. Other freinds have had higher speed crashes, where they are convinced that a lid has saved them, and like most of us, I have had a few endos where head / rock / stump impact has left me dazed and confused, and thankful for wearing a lid...
SO, I wear a helmet - my choice. The risk management arguments about type of trail, speed, aggressive / cautious riding are fatuous - you believe that you control those factors, but like religion, it is BELIEF, not fact. You may be able to limit the risks, but as has been posted above, the seemingly stupid little low speed fall can do as much damage as a high speed stack
rkk - my point is that if you actually look at thee risks involved in some forms of riding they are so low as to be acceptable to me to take - yo really are talking millions to one chances.
I've no problem with that, it just seems very odd that someone would admit to a helmets usefullness by buying one, but thinks that they can predict the future with enough accuracy to be happy about not using it.
*bangs head on desk*
some mountainbiking is risky - then I wear an appropriate helmet. Some mountainbiking is not risky - then I don't wear a helmet.
Its not about predicting the future - its about assessing risk
rkk... if someone had tripped, fallen and hit their head while walking, would you now be wearing a helmet walking down the street? If not, why not if as you say all the risk management arguments are fatuous...
I've no problem with that, it just seems very odd that someone would admit to a helmets usefullness by buying one, but thinks that they can predict the future with enough accuracy to be happy about not using it.
You are constantly making judgements about risk, whether you are aware of it or not. It's not predicting the future, it's having common sense and making your own judgement about acceptable levels of risk vs levels of precaution. It's a constant trade-off and there are no absolutes.
Do you wear a helmet sat up there on that high horse?*
*Did anyone use this one yet in this thread? 😛
TandemJeremy - Member
rkk - my point is that if you actually look at thee risks involved in some forms of riding they are so low as to be acceptable to me to take - yo really are talking millions to one chances.
I absolutely agree - individually, the chances of being on the recieving end of one of these freak accidents is incredibly low, but us humans are very bad a risk perception, and it is probably risk perception rather than risk itself, that drives the majority on their decisions to waer / not to wear a helmet.
*bangs head on desk*
So you don't wear your helmet even though you are clearly prone to hitting your bonce on the neareast hard surface?
All we need is kaese to chip in.
funkynick - Member
rkk... if someone had tripped, fallen and hit their head while walking, would you now be wearing a helmet walking down the street? If not, why not if as you say all the risk management arguments are fatuous...
Ordinarily, no... although that scenario may well be far more common than the mtb one being discussed, especially if alchohol / Friday / Saturday nights are included.... However, if at work, then yes, I might well be wearing a helmet.
ETA - and I don't mean ALL risk management arguments are fatuous - just those that are being put forward about high risk / low risk trails. Yes for a "high risk" fast rocky descent the injury rate will probably be higher than for a flat cycle track. The risk of injury is present for both, but our preparedness might be significantly different
I went for a potter around Rutland water with a mate yesterday and didn't bother with a helmet - although I did initially consider it.
Normally though I wear a helmet - I would rather there was some polystyrene between my head and a rock, as rocks are way harder than my delicate noggin.
There was a comment earlier about polystyrene in modern helmets being harder than in older ones. I assume this is because manufacturers have tested various types of polystyrene and found one that is soft enough to slow down the deceleration of your head in a 'typical' collision, but is hard enough that your head doesn't just plough straight through it.
I find in wooded singletrack I will occasionally whack my helmet on a low branch. Now there is the arguement that had the helmet not been there, my head would have cleared the branch - perhaps true. But I would still rather have a helmet to whack branches out of the way with.
And - what the hell would I mount my helmet mounted torch on, if I didn't wear a helmet?!
Ho do people do it?
They go on like they have a jedi power to know whether wearing a helmet is going to be worth it or not. I wish i had that. Ahh well like all the other mere humans im just going to have to wear one all the time 😉
Stumpy - actually the harder polystyrene is because modern vented helmets have so many holes in them that to meet the testing they have had to make the poly harder which is arguably not so good in an actual crash. Its a flaw in the testing regeime
Its a flaw in the testing regeime
In that by making them nicer to wear you're more likely to wear one? 😉
No PP - in that by making the poly harder they have removed some of its impact reducing properties. the manufacturers know this is not good but they have to meet the testing standards
rkk... so the fatuous ones are just those you disagree with then! 😉
Just out of interest, does anyone know the helmet wearing rates for places like Holland and Denmark? Last time I was in Denmark there were bikes everywhere and no-one wearing helmets... has this changed at all?
to be honest with you TJ i am amazed you can be bothered to asses the risk
before each ride. Personly i just wack me lid on and get out the door.
half the time i dont know where im going anyway.
As nonk says ^^. To me, it's just part of going out on a bike - I always wear a helmet. Not wearing one feels wrong in the same way that driving a car while not wearing a seatbelt feels wrong
There is a scientific test for this. Smack TJ round the head with a piece of 2x4 while he's wearing a helmet. Then do the same when he's not wearing one.
Then see which has caused the most damage...
I wonder if there's anything that TJ hasn't been trained in. I admire him, I really do.
Anyway, here's a risk assessment scenario. You're out with your mate & riding in say, Wark Forest & mainly riding forest roads with little or no intention of riding anything technical at all. You need to be back at the car by X Oclock cos it's an hour to get home & your'e taking the missus out at Y Oclock & if your'e late she'll kill you.
Helmet or not? (for the ride, not protection from the missus)
When we did our north sea cycle trip 400km up the west coast of Denmark we saw very few people with helmets on, probably less than 5 percent.
That chart tells me that the more people who cycle, the less of them die irrespective of whether they wear a helmet or not.
Much as I hate to say it, TJ is right. Sort of.
We all constantly make decisions on risk and how to mitigate them. Most of us at some point in our mtbing have seen a trail and decided not to ride it because it's too steep/difficult/sketchy and we think there's a good chance we'll crash/get injured (obviously this being STW, there will be a disproportionate number of riding gods who've ridden down vertical cliffs but the point still stands in general). TJ is simply saying the same thing and is clearly willing to take more of a risk with his head than most of the rest of us - that's not inherently right or wrong but just his choice.
Now, I don't agree with his decision for myself, simply because while I think the risk of head injury is relatively low (notwithstanding PP's RA which uses a different scale on risk than most of us would use outside of work) the potential impact is very high (eg potential brain damage). Wearing a helmet is not an issue for me - I don't find them uncomfortable and it seems like common sense to me that in general (again not always but on balance) they will prevent/reduce far more injuries than they will cause - so on the basis that I can mitigate (not eliminate) the risk of head injury, I always wear a helmet.
TJ's choice is his own. Sanctimonious posts about people looking after you for the rest of your life and so on are BS since we all choose to do a sport that does have risks of injury with similar consequences that don't require a head injury (eg spinal injuries).
That chart tells me in which countries drivers are more respectful and aware of cyclists on the road.
It is difficult to draw conclusions from that chart and other data - one common theme is that all the data on helmets is of rather poor quality.
However it is clear that in countries where they don't wear helmets head injury rates are lower. Why this is is hard to say but it is a real effect
Is there any basis in fact for any cycling statistics though???
Motorcycle forums bemoan the comparison of cycling and motorcycling injury / fatality statistics, becasue the data collection is so very different...
For motor vehicles:
- annual mileages are fairly well understood (important for the per mile / km statistics). All vehicles have an odometer, and disclosure of vehicle mileage is compulsory at MoT and is normally stated for insurance purposes.
- all injury incidents are legally reportable, so if you are a car / motorcyclist (or cyclist invloved in an incident with a motor vehicle), your injury will be counted in the stats.
- all motor vehicles require compulsory insurance - even those incidents that are not reported as injury incidents still get captured as most / many will be notofied to the insuranbce companies.
- Councils / Highways Agency / developers spend a lot of money on transport surveys / modelling to evaluate routes / improvements. provides more data on vehicle miles for each mode of transport.
For cycling:
- No requirement to record bike mileage, register bikes, know the number of bikes in use etc - so very little basis to state bike miles / km for comparison of injury / incident rates.
- No legal requirement to report injuries (except as above with motor vehicle), so many cylcle injuries are either unreported or based on A&E admissions stats.
- No universal insurance requirement.
Surely the No of incidents / mile for cycling must surely be highly conjectured, and even if it has been established, still based on very different data set and population to similar data for motor vehicles.
and that doesn't even account for getting off the public highway!!!!
Does it really matter,if people choose to ride a MTB without a helmet then on their HEAD be it......
So as Ian Munro asked earlier - do all you "must wear a helmet" types wear spine protectors? You are increasing your risk of spinal injury you realise and spinal injuries appear to be more common than serious head injuries
Just out of interest, to those who only wear a helemt on certain occations, what is it that makes you NOT want to wear a helmet?
Are they uncomfortable?
Do you feel that they limit your riding abilities(more freedom)?
Do you feel they are too heavy?
Stuart - I find them sweaty and uncomfortable. They get in the way of my sunglasses ( can't just push 'em on my forehead) The helmet is a ruddy pest when going into pubs and stuff. The straps irritate. I simply don't like riding one thus only wear one when risks are high
Thats fair enough. Mine doesnt bother me so i wear it all the time. Each to their own, just try not to die!
I had an accident at leith hill recently on a bit of trail I've ridden at least 50 times without incident.
The resultant crash was hard enough to split the expanded foam of a Bell Triton in half down the middle and I had a very sharp rock lodged in one of the vents above my temple.
My head was badly bruised and I was concussed for a day or so.
I'm sure I would have been significantly more damaged had I not been wearing it and would suggest based on my expereince that helmets are a good idea.
That's my take on it anyway.
I still dont wear one on the road or local towpaths etc as I assess the risk as lower but for any serious riding I always do.