Helmets!

[Gaddmeister]

Re:

Got the link?

 

[The Ken]

So the hoary old argument that it's not about you, it's about your loved ones rears its ugly head. That is the most disgusting type of emotional blackmail the helmet lobbyists trot out. "If you don't wear a helmet you don't love your kids."

It wasn't emotional blackmail it was a statement of fact based on real experiences to enable people to make their own decision. I also stated "make your own risk assessment " meaning decide for yourself what you want to do. We are adults, we are allowed to make our own choices, but they should be well informed choices.

The reality is for me that as the main breadwinner if I have a serious accident that could be lessened by wearing a helmet then it is worth wearing it. And hopefully I'll still be well enough to still provide for them after having an accident whilst doing something I love.

My main gripe is saying helmets offer little or no protection as that wrongly skews an argument. Even a woolly hat offers more protection than a bare head as it reduces the initial friction of an impact, that is just physics. We've even had a split helmet on a macretro ride in the Pentlands where it certainly made the difference between mild concussion and an ambulance call.

Marketing has little to do with it to me - one of my small helmet collection is a £7.99 Lidl helmet, it will work well enough should it be called into use.

Generally I wear a helmet if I'm mucking about off-road or riding on the road, mainly as drivers are far more aggressive/less polite than they were 20-30 years ago. If I'm on pootle about on cycle paths I tend not to.

 

[Cavalier]

The thing that bothers me most about the argument for whether or not a cyclist should wear a helmet is the blame transfer that's often involved. Those who advocate most strongly for a cyclist to wear a helmet are often those who are most likely to injure a cyclist, namely, the car lobby. By taking up the cause of compulsory helmet wearing certain people are merely justifying the unnecessary killing of law abiding cyclists.

 

[FluffyChicken]

The thing that bothers me most about the argument for whether or not a cyclist should wear a helmet is the blame transfer that's often involved. Those who advocate most strongly for a cyclist to wear a helmet are often those who are most likely to injure a cyclist, namely, the car lobby. By taking up the cause of compulsory helmet wearing certain people are merely justifying the unnecessary killing of law abiding cyclists.

It's compulsary for seatbelts to be warn, helmets on motorbikes etc. Even compulsary I think for new cars to have loads and loads of padding and protection systems around the people inside the box and little protection directed towards protecting the pedestrian. I do havet o say however that the big bad ugly 4x4 people talk about (like a nice range rover or dicovery) are thing I would muc rather hit than the old solid steel jobs and low ramed cars.

These modern things bend when flech and bones hit them... as tested by myself.

My helemt I would say in that instance protected me for'ed and may have protected the rear of my head. I really don't think I would have been walking easily with no scrapes to my head or big bumps etc. Helmet is toast though and to people who say 'if it cracked it failed' no it didn't, reached it's limit at that particular point, it did not 'fail'

And I still say the only reason I wear a helmet is to stop branches and simple head bangs from trees and low branches and things to let me keep riding not in pain. That's it main purpose for me, anything extra that is hard to quantify is a bonus.
It also makes me look cool, has a nice peak to keep the sun and rain of my eyes.
That's coming from a person who rearly used to wear one apart from in races as I didn't like them (Giro Air Attack user). these modern things are so much nicer to wear.

Back then I used to get head cuts, bumps and quality headaches from entertaining riding. Now these little things don't happen.


It's like wearing good gloves and shoes, protect you at the bits you like to use a lot. But none are going to stop a lorry from not seeing you and flattening you.

 

[Gaddmeister]

Re:

I certainly don't want to injure a cyclist as I am a cyclist, I just remember flying over a bonnet and landing on my head! The car drove off, I got up, helmet cracked,looked at my bent wheel and bars. I picked my bike up and walked back to my student diggs whilst my knee and shoulder were bleeding. The cops weren't interested.
I don't care who does what, just offering some friendly experience. Would I have seriously walked away from that after hitting tarmac?

 

[jimi911]

Wear'm if you want.

Naysayers may want to take a look at the new lids available for commuting. My wife just got a new Bern ... That thing is solid. Untested and I hope she keeps it that way. Like the new bikes, these are not your old foam plate helmets.

Here's my new lid. Arrived today in some funky 90s-like packaging. I won't brake this out for the old metal, but it'll be on the melon when I ride the fast bike.

 

[Ollie]

I always wear a helmet whatever bike I'm riding, one for road and one for mountain, replaced every three years without fail.

I can't believe some people, one guy on Facebook said that he didn't wear a helmet as cuts and bruises heal... I've never heard of internal bleeding, comas, cracked skulls and brain damage just healing over have you?

Just say to people who don't wear them:
What's the height your heads at whilst riding at? 7ft.
How high's that drop you're on? 3ft.
Now go and headbutt the ground at 10ft without a helmet and see how it feels!

 

[xerxes]

Re:

I can't believe some people, one guy on Facebook said that he didn't wear a helmet as cuts and bruises heal... I've never heard of internal bleeding, comas, cracked skulls and brain damage just healing over have you?

The issue is, that bicycle helmets, such as they are, are unlikely to offer much protection when the forces are high enough to crack skulls or break necks. They "may" protect you from cuts and bruises that result from fairly minor impacts, things that would likely heal anyway, but just aren't substantial enough to protect you from more serious impacts and if they were, they would likely be too bulky and heavy to be practical.

Bouncing down a rooty trail with low branches, they my be useful, up against a car or van travelling at 30mph+, they're probably no more effective than a paper hat.

There's lots of stuff here: http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1209.html

 

[Ollie]

I agree with you certainly won't stop you against a car and a lorry, I'd tather have the peace of mind and light protection that a helmet offers though.

 

[lumos2000]

not sure if this has been posted before, im not looking through 5 pages of drivel from the helmet brigade to find out

https://www.facebook.com/RideUKBMX/vide ... nref=story