Helmets . whats the point. New study

[PSM]

I wear a helmet any time i get on a bike no matter the distance or location. Gloves not so much though.

+1

[superdx]

I've witnessed two crashes where the rider cracked the helmet hard enough that the ER doctor insisted on a CAT scan and refused to discharge until 48 hours of observation. So even on a ride on a bike path at 3AM in the morning I will wear a helmet.

If you're not going to wear a helmet, please fill out an organ donor card. Someone in dire need of a transplant will definitely be saved by your decision. Their family will have thanked whatever deity they believe in for what you have decided to do. Please, don't wait and get it done.

[xena]

I ride 10K a year. I have 2 cracked helmets. One in 2008 during a race, and one a month ago during a fast training ride.
Besides those 2 crashes in 100K kilometers, I never even touched the ground. After the 2008 crash, I could have done without a helmet for 70K and 7 years without a helmet and feel perfectly safe.

In that last crash, a guy that fell over me didn't even realize he had a crack in his helmet until some days later.
So he didn't even realize he had an impact on his head, because of his helmet!


In a car, I ride 40K a year. 3 minor accidents, in which I didn't need my seatbelt. That is more than 500K without needing a seatbelt.
So I would say from personal experience, that seatbelts are overrated, and helmets are an absolute necessity.

But never mind people who feel perfectly safe because they were lucky! I hope they keep their luck, but it would be wise if they don't bet on their luck riding sans helmet.

What's Lucky about not crashing?
I use my road savvy. I don't take stupid chances and I know my limits. I learnt the hard way , I have broken my collar bones 3 times.
Its more "unlucky" if you have a crash and its not your fault.
You could walk out tomorrow and a car mounts the pavement and hits you.
It doesn't mean your lucky because no car has never mounted the pavement and hit you does it?

I must say though if I was MTB rider I would wear a helmet. I crashed all the time when I went off road.

[sebo2000]

I'm 40y, and riding with helmet only for last 6 years. In last 5 years I had 2 crashes while racing, in both cases helmet was totally destroyed, I would probably have my brains on the road if not the helmet. I also crashed on recovery ride on the bike path going 15km/h I hit the curb I didn't see while talking to my bud, helmet was unscratched because I did full face plant. I will continue to wear my helmet. I do not have to worry about my hair I'm bold anyway. I do not agree helmets should be mandatory, it is personal choice that should absolutely NOT enforced by gov.

[sawyer]

If there was compelling evidence that helmets significantly improved safety then they should be compulsory. Why not? We do the same with seatbelts, motorcycle helmets etc etc

Though in some scenarios helmets may be useless or worse than useless, anecdotal evidence and common sense suggest they are net-net, well worth wearing. I always wear one.

[tinozee]

I see both sides of it but overall prefer helmets, especially in groups or busy roads. I have cracked helmets (they crack by design after enough force). I also ride fast long distance solo without a helmet sometimes, but I am careful and traffic and weather conditions have to be right. I always ride with helmet with other people. I trust literally noone else but myself on the bike really. I have seen the most seasoned racers lose focus, half wheel, touch, crash. You gotta have a helmet for that reason.

Most recently my team was in a long road race and I was supporting. I had to collect bikes and gear after a crash in the women's race. The front pack was way too tight going down on a fairly large roller and there was a wheel touch and a huge and fast crash. A crash that was on the shoulder of an open road with traffic! There were several bikes got boomeranged forward when riders went otb. One helmet I got from a riderwas a Catlike Mixino that had been hit in the back by a flying bike. It looked like the chain/chainring hit and caved in the back of the helmet. I can only imagine taking that in the back of the head without a helmet, ew. There was downward enough force in the crash that the same girl compress fractured 4 vertebra and is in a brace still after 2 months. I think that would have crushed her head. Who knows for sure, but that helmet was mangled.

[F45]

The point of helmets is to avoid bloviating knowitalls so you can ride in peace. I was verbally excoriated one day by a woman riding a horse......she was not wearing a helmet either. Irony.

[xena]

If there was compelling evidence that helmets significantly improved safety then they should be compulsory. Why not? We do the same with seatbelts, motorcycle helmets etc etc

Though in some scenarios helmets may be useless or worse than useless, anecdotal evidence and common sense suggest they are net-net, well worth wearing. I always wear one.

By WW's on this site . None of them seem to be able to stay on their bike.

Perhaps we should make stabilisers compulsory

[ergott]

Why is the conversation constantly being brought back up on forums.

You can continue to ride without a helmet and nothing I or anyone else can do/say will convince you do to otherwise.

Likewise, there's no evidence you can possible come up with to make me leave mine home. I've already broken a few helmets so I know I'm still alive and with all my faculties because of them.

Agree to disagree and move on already. This argument only stirs up the pot.

[rpenmanparker]

Sorry, I don't have the patience to read all the posts here, but I am moved to make this comment: what an incredibly stupid study! I don't give a damn about the effect of legislation. I care about the effect of wearing a helmet. Was every hospitalized rider asked whether he was wearing a helmet, law or no law? Some riders would have been flouting the law and not wearing a helmet in an area where there was a helmet law. Some riders (maybe most) would have been wearing a helmet even in an area without a helmet law. The study is totally worthless.

[ergott]

Xena, real mature bro.

via PM

What's your problem? It was a "new study" " new" did you read the link?
I dont' care if your wear a helmet or a paper bag your head "that's your choice"
I'm also alive and with all my faculties intact. Perhaps you should take a bit more care when your riding your bike and stop falling off.

If the thread bores you so much then why post? You have totally contradicted yourself.
Perhaps your faculties are not as good as you think.

There is nothing wrong about having a debate about any subject as the responses show. If you don't like it . Jog on.

Ray j

[xena]

Xena, real mature bro.

via PM

What's your problem? It was a "new study" " new" did you read the link?
I dont' care if your wear a helmet or a paper bag your head "that's your choice"
I'm also alive and with all my faculties intact. Perhaps you should take a bit more care when your riding your bike and stop falling off.

If the thread bores you so much then why post? You have totally contradicted yourself.
Perhaps your faculties are not as good as you think.

There is nothing wrong about having a debate about any subject as the responses show. If you don't like it . Jog on.

Ray j

Just like you. Having a dig at me every chance you get.
The fact that it was a PM and you have now posted it shows just how mature you are.
I stand by the above comments.
You moan about the subject and then you give your opinion

You only proved my point.

[Nefarious86]

Yeah ill keep wearing them. This was a gentle training ride doing hill repeats...

[F45]

Xena, real mature bro.

via PM

lol, why are you posting private communications? I see nothing there to complain about anyway.

[Derf]

http://road.cc/content/news/170525-study-finds-no-link-between-cycling-helmet-laws-and-head-injury-rates

I don't wear one , never have [ don't want to go bald and lose my huge head of hair ]
Pro riders if they had a choice would certainly not wear them going up climbs etc . They went for years without them.

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/11/e008052.full.pdf

Worth actually reading the paper (see that "open"? It's available for everyone!), especially page 10-11.

Problem with the paper is that it's epidemiological (based on census and surveys) and they don't treat their data as noisy/inconsistent/subject to errors as they should (or pay enough mention to that). Ergo, it makes a whole lot of implicit assumptions (the models they used to control for the various regions and factors) and then extrapolate based on that. That said, it's hard to argue with their conclusions as far as an infrastructure focus to improve cycling popularity and safety.

So, yes, their data doesn't show that there's a correlation between helmet laws and hospitalizations, which probably means any real effect is small, if at all. If you wish to suggest that this paper tells us helmets are either effective or ineffective, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.