Wear your helmet...??
- Thread starter poolio
- Start date
gibbleking
Old School Grand Master
cheers for that mate ...thanks..so far this year i have taught over 800 kids just on the subject of road safety alone,,plus a few hundred on cycling too..
I think a simple test is required 
We need :
One car with driver.
One helmet wearing test dummy (retrobiker 1)
One non helmet wearing test dummy (retrobiker 2)
One private road.
Test method :
Drive at 30 mph with retrobiker 1 in passenger seat.
Open passenger door.
Carefully place retrobikers 1 head on road for five seconds.
Return retrobiker 1 to seated position.
Stop car.
Repeat with retrobiker 2.
Once test is completed, retreat to safe place (pub) to analise the results. Remember to drop retrobiker 2 at the hospital on the way.
Any volunteers for retrobiker 2 ?
WD
We need :
One car with driver.
One helmet wearing test dummy (retrobiker 1
)One non helmet wearing test dummy (retrobiker 2
)One private road.
Test method :
Drive at 30 mph with retrobiker 1 in passenger seat.
Open passenger door.
Carefully place retrobikers 1 head on road for five seconds.
Return retrobiker 1 to seated position.
Stop car.
Repeat with retrobiker 2.
Once test is completed, retreat to safe place (pub) to analise the results. Remember to drop retrobiker 2 at the hospital on the way.
Any volunteers for retrobiker 2 ?
WD
technodup":1l5t92xm said:
Another good point..but generically foot pedestrians would only get hit by a driver if they were"under the influence of drink or drugs" or the car had careered because of failure or driver had passed out at the wheel.
I can only say myself after being the victim of another road users lack of driving ability/bad driving i would recommend the use of one..after saying that one member on here did mention that if he had been wearing a helmet in his case he could have been wheel chair bound.I also did read wear a helmet caused the death of a rider because on impact the adjuster system of the helmet snapped on impact and pierced the base of the brain. :shock: {if some has heard that please feel free to verify.}
I only assume that in the number crunching days we live in statistics say that if you are involved in a RTC you have better chance of survival if you wear a helmet.
Ernie
Wow... what a can of worms... some rather feisty (intentionally inflammatory?) comments in there...
I don't think that highlighting that the courts might view the absence of a helmet as legally unfavourable means that I belong to the "helmet mafia"... seems the most fervent voices belong to an "anti-helmet" movement, didn't think such a thing could exist!!
To echo a few of the previous sentiments and those of Dan Le Sac VS Scroobius Pip (The Magician's Assistant)...
But as you said before, this just affects you.
It's your life, your body, so you can choose what you do.
And if one day you can't rein it in,
and of your last breath you are the only witness,
then so be it, cause it's your last breath,
and it's nobody else's business.
Chat on... it's good to talk n'est ce pas... we all learn.
JP
I don't think that highlighting that the courts might view the absence of a helmet as legally unfavourable means that I belong to the "helmet mafia"... seems the most fervent voices belong to an "anti-helmet" movement, didn't think such a thing could exist!!
To echo a few of the previous sentiments and those of Dan Le Sac VS Scroobius Pip (The Magician's Assistant)...
But as you said before, this just affects you.
It's your life, your body, so you can choose what you do.
And if one day you can't rein it in,
and of your last breath you are the only witness,
then so be it, cause it's your last breath,
and it's nobody else's business.
Chat on... it's good to talk n'est ce pas... we all learn.
JP
technodup
Senior Retro Guru
Does the reason matter? If your head gets hit I don't think it matters much if the driver was drunk or he just clipped you by not looking. (Obviously afterwards drunkenness would become more of an issue).ernie":1q99g55u said:
Some stats on pedestrians...
- Pedestrian fatalities account for 11 percent of motor vehicle fatalities.
- Over 180,000 pedestrians have been killed in motor vehicle accidents between 1975 and 2005.
- Pedestrians comprise the second largest category of motor vehicle accident deaths following occupant deaths.
- On average, a pedestrian is injured in a traffic accident every 8 minutes.
- On average, a pedestrian is killed in a traffic accident every 111 minutes.
- In 2005 a total of 4,881 pedestrian were killed in motor vehicle accidents.
- In 2005, the per capita pedestrian death rate was 1.6 per 100,000 people.
Is there a helmets for pedestrians lobby? I want to join up. Why stop there though? Body armour? Ban walking altogether?
Anyone who wears a helmet cycling but not when walking is a bit confused imo.
doctor-bond
Feature Bike
This topic has been aired so many times, each time with respondents displaying such muddled thinking. Which is probably why it's so tempting to reply with a long Goldfish-baffling diatribe.
The reason people routinely employ a safety device like a helmet or a seatbelt is to mitigate the risk of something bad happening. Risk is a tricky concept. It's a mixture of likelihood -- "how likely is it that something bad will happen?" -- and consequence: "if it does happen, what's the outcome?"
So, people who live in a city and regularly walk to the shops often wear shoes and clothes but don't routinely employ an armed entourage and body armour. Why? Because common sense tells them that it is very unlikely (even in Hackney) to get shot on the way to the shops. Going without shoes, though, would very likely expose them to cold and dirty feet and a feeling that they look like a complete tool (even in Hackney). So for urban shopping, no special safety measures are, rightly, the norm.
Let's try the other extreme. F1 Drivers wear alot of safety apparatus including full face helmets and neck braces. Why? Because experience has shown that many racing drivers who don't utilise such devices will die. In F1, the likelihood of a crash is high; the consequence is high.
So how does this apply to our own little cycling world? Here are three random but representative extremes.
1. Let's say you routinely commute by bike for 50 minutes each way on a busy 'A' road, in all weathers throughout the year (like the Curly-haired lady on the A1079 does). Common sense tells us that the likelihood of an incident is quite high (car, bus and lorry drivers are not all attentive angels, and there are many of them passing every cyclist each minute); and, given the speed of the traffic and the vulnerability of the human frame in contact with moving metal, it's safe to say that the consequences of an 'off' would be pretty damn high too.
In such a situation I'd say that Curly is mad to even attempt what she does. Wearing a helmet, high vis. gear and sticking a little red lollipop to her rear carrier merely seems like decorating the deckchairs of the Titanic with a smear of, er, icing. Curly-haired lady is one of my heroes, but she's taunting the risk gods. To bring her personal risk down to acceptable levels, what she needs is a strong, weatherproof exoskeleton fitted with speed and impact retardation devices: yep, a car.
2. On the other hand,
a pal of mine has been living, and riding off road, in the Peaks for many years. He likes the challenge of rock strewn, water-gouged descents, heather flats and very narrow twisty 'C' roads. BITD he had an off and spent time in hospital with a broken face and sore head. Ever since, he has worn a helmet while riding. He's even fallen off a few more times since, and says his helmet has stopped his head from hitting some rocks.
For him, the likelihood is high enough to worry about and the consequence, pretty troublesome: experience has shown him that wearing a bonce trap will stop inconvenient contact with the NHS. He's made the right decision.
3. What about me? A creature of habit, I ride solo on grassy chalk downland. High likelihood events include getting sheep shit in the eye, cattle flies in the eye, mole hill mud in the eye. I usually wear glasses while riding: I had a pair of clear MTB ones but my Favorite Pointer Bitch ate them. So I went for a ride without any glasses and got a fly in my eye going fast down a 1 in 4 grass slope. I had to stop pretty quickly (well, canti quickly) and rub my eye before continuing on my way. Low consequence. I must get some new glasses. And a crud catcher? No - that would make me look like a tool. I'll put up with the extra likelihood.
When deciding whether or not to wear a helmet, each of us has to assess the risk and make a decision based on experience. If you have no experience, err on the side of caution.
The reason people routinely employ a safety device like a helmet or a seatbelt is to mitigate the risk of something bad happening. Risk is a tricky concept. It's a mixture of likelihood -- "how likely is it that something bad will happen?" -- and consequence: "if it does happen, what's the outcome?"
So, people who live in a city and regularly walk to the shops often wear shoes and clothes but don't routinely employ an armed entourage and body armour. Why? Because common sense tells them that it is very unlikely (even in Hackney) to get shot on the way to the shops. Going without shoes, though, would very likely expose them to cold and dirty feet and a feeling that they look like a complete tool (even in Hackney). So for urban shopping, no special safety measures are, rightly, the norm.
Let's try the other extreme. F1 Drivers wear alot of safety apparatus including full face helmets and neck braces. Why? Because experience has shown that many racing drivers who don't utilise such devices will die. In F1, the likelihood of a crash is high; the consequence is high.
So how does this apply to our own little cycling world? Here are three random but representative extremes.
1. Let's say you routinely commute by bike for 50 minutes each way on a busy 'A' road, in all weathers throughout the year (like the Curly-haired lady on the A1079 does). Common sense tells us that the likelihood of an incident is quite high (car, bus and lorry drivers are not all attentive angels, and there are many of them passing every cyclist each minute); and, given the speed of the traffic and the vulnerability of the human frame in contact with moving metal, it's safe to say that the consequences of an 'off' would be pretty damn high too.
In such a situation I'd say that Curly is mad to even attempt what she does. Wearing a helmet, high vis. gear and sticking a little red lollipop to her rear carrier merely seems like decorating the deckchairs of the Titanic with a smear of, er, icing. Curly-haired lady is one of my heroes, but she's taunting the risk gods. To bring her personal risk down to acceptable levels, what she needs is a strong, weatherproof exoskeleton fitted with speed and impact retardation devices: yep, a car.
2. On the other hand,
a pal of mine has been living, and riding off road, in the Peaks for many years. He likes the challenge of rock strewn, water-gouged descents, heather flats and very narrow twisty 'C' roads. BITD he had an off and spent time in hospital with a broken face and sore head. Ever since, he has worn a helmet while riding. He's even fallen off a few more times since, and says his helmet has stopped his head from hitting some rocks.
For him, the likelihood is high enough to worry about and the consequence, pretty troublesome: experience has shown him that wearing a bonce trap will stop inconvenient contact with the NHS. He's made the right decision.
3. What about me? A creature of habit, I ride solo on grassy chalk downland. High likelihood events include getting sheep shit in the eye, cattle flies in the eye, mole hill mud in the eye. I usually wear glasses while riding: I had a pair of clear MTB ones but my Favorite Pointer Bitch ate them. So I went for a ride without any glasses and got a fly in my eye going fast down a 1 in 4 grass slope. I had to stop pretty quickly (well, canti quickly) and rub my eye before continuing on my way. Low consequence. I must get some new glasses. And a crud catcher? No - that would make me look like a tool. I'll put up with the extra likelihood.
When deciding whether or not to wear a helmet, each of us has to assess the risk and make a decision based on experience. If you have no experience, err on the side of caution.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
For Sale 17” Marin Eldridge Grade f+f, stem bars and seatpost- Latest: Janners BJJ Clunker Rider
-
-
-
