Thorn Cycles Forum
Community => Non-Thorn Related => Topic started by: bikerwaser on January 09, 2015, 07:48:36 pm
-
Sorry if seen before but i think it's soooo good :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY
-
I've not seen that presentation before, but it fits really well with my own thoughts on cycling and helmets!! Pressure from my wife and neighbours (especially as I often take their sons of 10 and 12 on bike rides) means I do use a helmet most of the time, but I don't believe it serves any real purpose. Wearing helmets in cars has always seemed to me to be a much more relevant idea, and statistically of much greater potential benefit!! Cycle helmets scream the message "cycling is unsafe!" when it is far more likely to prolong your life than shorten it!!
-
I've not seen that presentation before, but it fits really well with my own thoughts on cycling and helmets!! Pressure from my wife and neighbours (especially as I often take their sons of 10 and 12 on bike rides) means I do use a helmet most of the time, but I don't believe it serves any real purpose. Wearing helmets in cars has always seemed to me to be a much more relevant idea, and statistically of much greater potential benefit!! Cycle helmets scream the message "cycling is unsafe!" when it is far more likely to prolong your life than shorten it!!
You have obviously never come off and whacked your head? I have, with a helmet split asunder! It hurts but I'm alive.
In my own opinion, anyone who eschews helmets is a bit silly really.
Regards,
John
-
I've not seen that presentation before, but it fits really well with my own thoughts on cycling and helmets!! Pressure from my wife and neighbours (especially as I often take their sons of 10 and 12 on bike rides) means I do use a helmet most of the time, but I don't believe it serves any real purpose. Wearing helmets in cars has always seemed to me to be a much more relevant idea, and statistically of much greater potential benefit!! Cycle helmets scream the message "cycling is unsafe!" when it is far more likely to prolong your life than shorten it!!
Yes , you only have to watch the presentation and know about the factual data on it to agree. As it says, you're as or more likely to have a head injury as a pedestrian or gardening and driving is a lot more dangerous.
Well, there's a choice to wear one or not.
By choice i will never wear one.
Bikerwaser
-
Daughter in law worked in hospital and saw, amongst other things, bicycle heads with and without helmets. She always wears a helmet when cycling. QED
I of course only wear one 'cos it makes me look cool :D
-
I'd prefer not to wear one as I love the freedom of wind in my hair.
However I'm with John on this one as I have fallen and seen friends fall where the helmet has saved a much worse injury. First thing Paramedic asks "were you wearing a helmet"?
It should be personal choice.
My choice is I'll wear a helmet.
Ride safe out there......
Steve
-
I'm extremely lightskinned and so need to wear a hat when I leave the house anyway. So I wear a bicycle helmet.
But I would wear it anyway, on this logic: Both my little fingers have been broken in headers, but my face has in each instance been saved from road rash, disfigurement or plastic surgery by the helmet; my spectacles have never been broken cycling precisely because I wear a helmet with a visor.
I've put a statistical evaluation of the comparative dangers of cycling and the reasons for wearing a helmet into another thread at http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=10441.0 (http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=10441.0)
-
Hmmm. My wife use to ride without a helmet until I inisisted she ride with a helmet or I wouldn't ride with her anymore. Shortly thereafter when we were on a ride in Vermont (USA) she was hit by car and dumped onto the road - with her head hitting the ground first. The helmet took the brunt of the crash - cracked in half. Some road rash but no head injuries because of the helmet.
If someone wants to ride without a helmet that is okay with me - it is a personal choice, but don't expect to ride with me as I don't want to assume responsibility for any head injuries that may occur if you aren't wearing a helmet and we are in the middle of nowhere.
-
I do agree that there shouldn't be "another" law for something, ie wearing a helmet. But if it's your fault, and you're hurt or killed, stiff bickies if you want any form of payout. Too many people sue someone else, for that 'big' payout.
We as humans need to start taking responsibility for our own actions/stupidity/bad luck.
Hypothetically, you as a driver have an unforeseen accident with a cyclist and he gets seriously injured on the head? Wouldn't it be fairer to you (mentally and financially) if he'd been wearing a helmet. The risks would've been a lot lower. Remember its not always the motorists fault. Kinda like motorists having to wear a seat belt.
I now work in an industry where safety is well over board, to the point where I as a tradesman, need to be verified that I'm able to safely operate an battery powered drill. If and when I hurt myself using the drill, would my own when it comes to any form of compensation. Because lets face it, we all take risks, and sometimes injure ourselves.
I initially hated being told by the Australian government I had to wear a helmet, but now would never get on my bike, and cycle amongst traffic without. The times I've come off the bike and hit my head (while wearing a helmet) am grateful to have been wearing one.
Remember its not just you that'll suffer. Your family members may be the ones spoon feeding you, or in pain from your unnecessary death.
-
"Hypothetically, you as a driver have an unforeseen accident with a cyclist and he gets seriously injured on the head? Wouldn't it be fairer to you (mentally and financially) if he'd been wearing a helmet. The risks would've been a lot lower. Remember its not always the motorists fault. Kinda like motorists having to wear a seat belt."
Got to think of the poor old motorist :D Fairer still if all those cyclists would get out of the way.
Choosing to use 2000kg of steel to move 100kg of human is a failure at any level if a systems thinking approach is adopted.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_thinking
-
Using Denmark as a guide they use their bikes roughly twice as much on a regular basis as us in the UK and yet in the chart below it shows that their cyclist fatalities are a 1/4 of ours which in real terms is an 1/8 of ours.
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1258.html
http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/facts-about-cycling-in-denmark/statistics/
http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/ctc-cycling-statistics
So what is the main difference between us and them ? better drivers which give respect to cyclists ?, better infrastructure so we don't have to share our journeys with cars ? or something else ?
It certainly isn't helmets as they ( like us ) don't have the helmet law.
Aside from this i'm surprised how many people are just simply falling off their bikes. I've been cycling for almost 40 years and, apart from once when i was MTB'ing and acting like a total dingbat, i've never fallen off my bike(touch wood). maybe stabilizers should be issued to all wobbly cyclists too. it would make it all so much safer ! Lol !
-
Like Andre, I wear a helmet, because I'd be wearing a hat anyway - not enough hair on top to prevent the tiger stripe tan! :D
But I am aware that compulsory helmet laws dissuade people from cycling, and even the Australian Heart Foundation has recommended they be abolished in the interests of increased public health. There are no such rules in the most cycle friendly places like Copenhagen and Amsterdam, and the statistics simply do not bear out the anecdotal evidence presented here. Helmets may prevent some injuries, but not even all head injuries, and there is some evidence they can actually aggravate some trauma.
Whilst all Australian jurisdictions now require the wearing of helmets, I am seeing an increasing trend of ignoring the rule, especially amongst the young "urban" cyclists, who are probably the fastest growing group.
Note that this group exhibits far riskier behaviour that not wearing helmets. A young girl rode past my house this morning upright on a step through bike with a long pretty dress (beating against the rear wheel and spokes) , no helmet, phone in one hand and texting as she rode. I think the dress and phone is going to get her into more trouble than the lack of helmet! :o
-
The Danes and the Dutch don't need mandatory helmet laws because they have a bicycle culture. "I never saw the cyclist standing at the stop sign," in the automobile-centred jurisdictions will get the motorist who killed or maimed a cyclist off with commisserations from the magistrate for his sleepless nights; in The Netherlands he'll be facing a manslaughter charge and have to prove he took every precaution not to run over a cyclist. It's a fundamental shift in the onus of proof that translates to wideranging differences in road behavior.
In the jurisdictions with a bicycle culture they cycle slower anyway than eg Americans do; Americans who commute are the inheritors of a road-racing culture that started with the Peugeot 10-speed in the 1970, and one often finds American commuters making ludicrous statements about a cyclist's "duty" of keeping up with traffic, meaning automobile traffic. The British commuting ethos, such as it is, too derives from road racing, and aims at fast transits. The Dutch commute at 15kph, a recent study found. Add that difference to the cycling culture enforced on automobilists (who are very likely in other parts of their lives to be cyclist too), and the requirement for a helmet appears in a totally different perspective. It would very likely be counterproductive to force the Dutch to wear cycling helmets, as the inconvenience to routine bicycle users of carrying a helmet into their daily affairs could drive many of them onto other forms of transport. (This is the same argument as the one for not forcing people riding metro rental bikes to wear helmets.)
That just scratches the differences, but I can't resist adding that according to a Dutch friend with 7 or 8 bikes I wish he would send me (just saying!), the Dutch anyway wear helmets already whenever the occasion calls for it, which he defines as being on his road bike, especially training at night, or riding offroad in icy conditions; his photographs show that his mates do the same.
***
I'm not at all impressed by claims that mandatory helmet laws keep anyone from cycling. Those who want to commute will find a way to deal with the helmet. Those who will benefit most from the helmet, the casual cyclists, will either cycle or they won't, and the helmet has very little to do with it. As for putting kids off cycling by a helmet requirement, so what? If they won't wear the helmet, it is better for them not to be on a bike on the streets. The only place where there is a sound argument against helmets, is in pick-up-here-leave-there metro rental bike, where you really can't expect people to lug around a helmet on the offchance of wanting to rent a bike, and the hygiene implications of publicly shared helmets are shudder-making.
The question really isn't whether mandatory cycling laws will keep anyone from cycling (if they won't wear the seatbelt, we don't want them driving because they're likely to do it in an antisocial manner; the argument for helmets is the same), but whether they're necessary and/or where they are necessary.
***
In fact, mandatory helmet laws are altogether a distraction, a bodge. The true question is whether any particular society wants to be an automobile culture or a bicycle culture, or, more practically in most, whether it wants bicycles on its roads at all, and how it proposes to share the space.
-
I nearly always wear a helmet. The one I have is comfy and at a shallow level it was expensive so I want some use out of it. In town I also always were a hi-viz vest as in some places it seems like people actually try to pull in and cut me up or pull out with no knowledge of me.
Is it a bit of a faff? We'll a little bit but I I've come from riding a motorbike where you wear armoured gloves, armoured boots, armoured jacket, armoured trousers and a helmet and you pay hundred of pounds per year to insure your vehicle. So in comparison it's pretty free and easy. The freedom of a bicycle, the silence of operation, the wind between your toes and riding at a speed where you are really immersed in the world around are all big draws to cycling for me.
Safe journeys.
-
There is a good case for making cyclists wear motorcycle leathers as well, I'm sure, but basically if one is that aware of ones possible mortality, maybe it's time to join the safe side and drive a car. Oh ... wait a minute?? Don't cars kill more people than anything else? Dang. How about some bubble wrap and stay inside watching tv and drinking beer. I do believe in helmets after six or more beers, however. Helps with the wife especially.
But personally, the day after they make helmets on bicycles mandatory ... my bikes will go up for sale, no maybe or second thoughts about it.
-
I carry 67 years of memories in a container which is easily damaged so I protect it as best I can.
Like all insurance policies you just hope & pray that when you need it - it works !
QED
-
I carry 67 years of memories in a container which is easily damaged so I protect it as best I can.
QED
2 Years behind you Im doing the same. After a couple of falls in my life I know Helmets make sense.
Regards,
John
-
I'm on my 4th ;)most if not all clubs wont allow u to ride with them if u don't ware a helmit proper order.
-
Your logic is flawed. You are using a form of false logic that takes two coincidental items and states one is because of the other. Statistically your are not very likely to have a head injury on a bike. Even examples given here show that. For example Andre says hes broken fingers in 2 crashes, logic would dictate then that he should be wearing armoured gloves... We attribute an affect to helmets that we cannot realistically prove. The helmet saved my life, well maybe, maybe not. We do not know what would have happened without the helmet as you didn't crash without one. We can go on stats though and these show that helmets make very little difference at a population level.
Statistically there are as many head injuries to pedestrians than to cyclists. Do you wear pedestrian helmets? What about car passenger helmets? Bathroom helmets? To insist on helmets on one of these activities and not on the other shows a disconnect between statistics and "common sense".
Saying all that, it's all a red herring.the highest cause of bicycle accidents are motor vehicles. If you want to reduce bicycle accidents segregate traffic not force a 200g lump of polystyrene on the innocent victim.
-
Hawthorn thorn through my baseball cap circa 1995. Cycle helmet worn since then. Period.
-
And if it went through your shoulder would you be wearing American football shoulder armour?
-
[Admin. Note:]
Hi All!
Although there's been nothing untoward to this point, I'll be watching this topic carefully for civility.
At present (in this thread and others), both sides have already made well-reasoned arguments for and against both personal and legislated helmet use. There isn't much to add on the costs and benefits at a personal and societal level and with regard to the healthcare and legal systems. Everyone can relate compelling personal evidence on each side, and numbers can be scaled and analyzed to do the same on a larger level.
Probably no topic in all cycling raises a more visceral response than the Helmet Issue. It reaches so deep and so divisively, it is increasingly banned on other Fora because it takes so much Administrator time and effort to monitor, to the exclusion of all other topics. Those are lessons worth noting, and I don't mind being proactive to preserve the supportive atmosphere that marks this Forum.
So please, avoid "the helmet issue" if possible unless you can add something truly new. Going forward, if you do feel compelled to add or respond, do so with utmost civility. If things go Bad, it will become a topic beyond bounds here as on other Fora.
Best,
Dan.
Thorn Cycling Forums Administrator
-
Thanks, Dan. Oil on troubled waters, everyone take a deep breath, now exhale, and think nice thoughts about our fellow cyclists. I find the intensity of feeling about helmet-wearing hard to fathom, but that's probably my problem. No matter.
To me, it's simply a question of risk management. I'll be delighted when Ontario/Ottawa makes a serious investment in cycling infrastructure, and will applaud when car/SUV/etc drivers do not regularly (that is, daily) try to kill me when I'm on one of my two-wheelers -- but I doubt I'll live to see either of these happy conditions. In the meantime, wot to do--particularly, what can I control?--to limit risk while I ride my beloved 2-wheelers? There's the usual counsel--stay off arterial roads, use a mirror, learn to anticipate dodgy situations, assume that car drivers (especially young guys in high-end German cars) really are out to get you and/or do not see you and/or do not care about what they hit/brush/etc., wear hi-viz gear just in case they are looking for cyclists. Me, I add "wear a helmet" to this list. (I also wear a skullcap under mine, being follicly challenged and having Scots/irish/RodLaveresque colouring.) The reason I do is hard experience: nearly 50 years ago, I came off my motorcycle at low speed, maybe 25-30 kmh, when my front wheel slid out as I dodged a kid on a bike on a gravel country road. I did a three-point landing over the bars, head-shoulder-elbow, sorta-tucked-roll. I wasn't badly hurt, just a bit of skin off my bare elbow (how dumb can you be??) but my helmet was a writeoff, with a deep gouge just above my temple. I was glad at the time, and since, 'cos I've been mostly happy in my life and I think my family (all post-helmeted-spill) share my retrospective view of that day.
My daughter, returning to Canada and resettling in Toronto after five years in Berlin, surrounded by Real Cycling Infrastructure and an advanced cycling culture, now faces the helmet question. With a low-key nudge/plea from me, she's decided to wear one: she doesn't like it, and she knows that it won't help her if a GMC Suburban clouts her at an intersection, but it does offer a measure of protection to her head if she comes off her bike in an urban setting which lacks the supports of Berlin's cycling ecology. I said to her, "Why even take the risk?" and she had already figured it out. (She's usually a step or two ahead of her dad on most matters...)
-
This hooks into the vast subject of how to make cycling safer, more enjoyable, and more practical. And the even vaster subject of how to build infrastructure and legal systems and cultural systems that promote the health of the human population and the ecological systems to which that population is inextricably intertwined.
A big controversy around here is the fate of the Catskill Mountain Railroad. The tracks run about a mile from our apartment, so it is a topic of great interest to me! Between our apartment and the City of Kingston, there is a dreadful mash-up of highway intersections, car dealerships, etc. Horrible for cyclists and pedestrians alike. Across the road from us is a basic motel where folks down on their luck are housed, by the county I presume. So actually there are a remarkable number of pedestrians struggling to get through the traffic tangle, to get to the grocery store or whatever other services. The path of the railroad would be a wonderful alternative. It already has a tunnel under the interstate highway and a bridge over the Esopus Creek. I don't hear too much talk about turning that section into a rail trail, unfortunately. Too practical! The focus of the debate is on the more scenic section to the west.
It's tricky, though. That railroad could actually be practical some day, if/when fuel gets expensive enough that the present arrangement becomes impractical. There are already lots of nice hiking trails and back roads for delightful cycling. Why pull up those rails that might in say twenty years be exactly the infrastructure that saves us... if only we don't hurry to destroy it? Certainly the railroad is an absurd toy in the present. But things can change so quickly!
http://catskillmountainrailtrail.org/
http://catskillmtrailroad.com/
-
Thanks, Jim. Interesting information. As you probably know, there's a N-S rail trail which runs from Croton into NYC, just east of where our friends live in Ossining across the Hudson from you. There was an interesting thread on crazyguy on the subject earlier this year, from Australia: https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/forum/board/message/?o=Sh&thread_id=623464&page=1&nested=0&v=N#623743
What strikes me is how often these initiatives (build a rail trail/preserve or rehab a railway) are posed as alternatives. Travelling in SW Sweden last September, I was delighted to see that the Swedes, clever folk that they are, had torn up the old rails closest to the sea on the main Gotebörg-Malmø line and replaced the railbed with a nice paved bike path; and then you know what they did? They built a new rail line as well!
(Can't recall what proportion of cyclists I saw on that trip with/without helmets -- think I was too gobsmacked by the evidence of Unbridled Lateral Thinking on the question of railtrails & such.)
-
Thanks for that CrazyGuy link, John!
I don't know the routes down around Ossining much, though I see references occasionally. Westchester County is a bit of a mad house - little twisty roads with far too much traffic. Riding on the roads down there is a whole other thing that up here, where on lots of roads it's more like a car every ten or twenty minutes!
Between here and there, one notable rail trail starts near New Paltz, crosses the Hudson via the new Walkway park, and runs all the way to Hopewell Junction in southern Dutchess County. I have ridden only a little bit of that. One of the rides I am dreaming about is a simple three day ride, camping at Fahnestock Park after riding that rail trail route, then back over the Hudson across the Newburgh-Beacon bridge for night 2 at Berentsen's campground, which is on the ACA Atlantic Coast route so I bet it is a fun place, then back up along that Atlantic Coast route to New Paltz and home. Ought to be like 50 miles on each side of the triangle. Now, to find three days!
-
in Toronto in the late 80's there was a bill introduced by a council member to make it mandatory to have bike helmets and also shin guards for both motorcycles and bicycles. Later for spine protectors on motorcycles. it did not come close to passing, if I remember right, but it's a slippery road. Mandatory insurance for sports and skiers have also been though of, but thankfully still not close to a reality.
if one supports the idea of mandatory helmets, I suspect that they like the idea of making sure others toe their line of what is their idea of safety. I can sort of see that, since it is so in line with the last 50 or so years of cultural direction, but what I am truly puzzled by is that I never hear the cry to make Helmets themselves more safe. It surely should be full face, and a bit heavier in the plastic casing, because todays headgear protects in only a very limited way - substandard completely for the purpose, if safety is the goal, I would argue.
For the record, I wear a helmet about 70 percent of the time, but will not be mandated to. I slipped while goofing off the first time I was on a wooden surface velodrome. I hit the track really hard. I landed on my shoulder, hitting the ground sideways, and the force of the fall did not have me strike the ground, but gave me kind of a whiplash. Funny thing is that it only started to bother me many years later and now if I am too stretched out my muscles on the left side of my spine go cold and then after a while my whole arm looses feeling in it. It makes it pretty much impossible to cycle on "normal" race bikes set up the "normal"way and actually Thorn and its giant forks steerers make it fun on a cycle - again after a long time. But every so often, when I have that beer cooler on my head, I get a terrible headache from it and I give the helmet a break in that case. :)
-
Thanks, Pavel. Motorcyclists deal with far greater speeds than cyclists, most of the time, to be sure, but the comparison between my Shoei full-face motorcycle helmet, and the Bell helmet which I wear on my bike--well, there's not much comparison at all. (I generate a bit more heat & sweat when I'm cycling than I do when I'm riding Hans, my airhead, so there's some serious venting required if I'm cycling with anything approaching the protection that the Shoei offers...)
There are some interesting experiments going on just now at Univ of Ottawa's bio-mechanics department, on greater impact absorption for both hockey and gridiron football helmets. They look a bit weird--puffy--but the Uni guys say they offer much greater protection against the risk of concussion. (I believe them--our son did his M.Sc. in that dep't before leaving for his doctoral work in the warmer climes of Oz, and it's a good school.) Given the incidence of concussion in both of those sports, any advance will be welcome, and might have wider application as well.
-
...but what I am truly puzzled by is that I never hear the cry to make Helmets themselves more safe ... because todays headgear protects in only a very limited way - substandard completely for the purpose, if safety is the goal, I would argue.
I'm crying in the wilderness. It is the fate of prophets.
-
Suffering and prophets is the peanut butter and jelly of life; meant to go together. The ecstasy of the agony, for the chosen. A bit like the hills of the Swiss Alps, don't ya think Andre? You know you love it! :D
-
"The ecstasy of the agony, for the chosen."
Wonderful! You'll put me out of business, Pavel...
I used to read Jobst Brandt's reports of crossing the Alps annually until he was pretty old... He really was chosen.
-
Dear All,
I’m not sure that I can add anything substantively new in terms of data but some perhaps some perspectives that I haven’t heard aired.
Last weekend my seven year old daughter was merrily cycling, safely, on newly laid smooth tarmac around our 10m radius circular grove in the same direction as four of her similarly aged neighbours with no through traffic, under constant (and as will be seen, overweening) adult supervision. Two parents of the other children (the close is close knit and friendly with the adults comprising a group of friends rather than just neighbours) told her to put on a helmet. Their tone and the sense that she was being ‘told what to do’ upset her and she took some persuading to get back into the fray.
For reasons of neighbourly harmony and a blind acceptance of the safety benefits of helmets I persuaded her to wear one, but it set me thinking.
With the caveat that I felt some seething resentment that others had the temerity to tell my child what to do firmly in place, I took to analysing why we insist on helmets for children and whether it affords them the protection we believe it does.
In this case the arguments can be confined to accidents caused by falling from the cycle or collisions with other child cyclists as motor traffic is absent from the scenario.
Of course the insistence on wearing helmets is born of parents’ instincts to protect their children. At the risk of creating a greater sense of paranoid foreboding, could it not engender a false assurance that the child is safe?
For whose benefit is the child being made to wear a helmet? Ostensibly the child’s, but much of what we do as parents is in pursuit of our own interests and prejudices (a poem by Larkin springs to mind). The child in a helmet gives us the subconsciously warm feeling of being a strong protector of our progeny.
One of the parents telling her to get lidded is a GP and, given the assurance that medicine is now firmly evidence based, presumably someone familiar with making decisions based on all the available information that can be considered credible. I would be interested to know how much they understood of the helmet use data. That is, perhaps, a cheap ad hominem jibe barely worthy of someone with my levels of intellectual integrity, but I’d imagine that were we to discuss the matter they would deploy evidence to justify their assertions.
During pretty much every discussion on this matter, instances where a helmet is claimed to have prevented injury are cited as having convinced someone to wear one. I wouldn’t deny that such personal experience is powerful testimony but does it trump that of my childhood spent cycling through busy streets and over countryside without sustaining a head injury?
I’d be disappointed were my child to cycle less, put off by the need to wear a helmet or due to my not having the energy for another battle of wills (I’m not too proud to admit defeat by a recalcitrant seven year old’s onslaught of attrition). If she grows to view cycling not as a transport of delight but one of inherently great danger than walking or driving I’d be horrified.
To move away from the particular circumstances of a quiet grove in one of Birmingham’s sleepier suburbs, I wonder if the UCI road rules influence the behaviours of the wider public. Are helmets are obligatory for the various tours? If so why? Has a rationale for any such rule been given? I presume it is for safety and perhaps is justified given the greater speeds attained by the participants. So the argument possibly goes, if elite riders need noggin boxes then how much more do we, who can barely flick a V let alone dish it out, need cranial cradling?
Whether I’ll ever muster sufficient confidence to ditch our lids and feel the breeze freely caressing my bald patch remains to be seen but I feel less assured of my daughter and I being safe under a helmet than I did.
Yours, James
-
I believe helmet wearing should be a matter of personal choice, and am totally against any kind of legal compulsion.
More anecdata:
I started wearing a helmet about 25 years ago, but only in town. I've always understood that helmets could provide some protection against low-speed falls, but reckoned they wouldn't help much if a car hit me at 60mph+ on a country road. During those 25 years I came off a few times, on ice, oil, and once when a taxi came out of a side street without stopping. I picked up some bruises but never hit my head. Meanwhile, one friend was killed, and another one and a cousin suffered serious head injuries falling down stairs at home.
Last year we had an unusually hot summer here, so I stopped wearing the helmet. I noticed that cars gave me more room and generally drove more considerately around me! Maybe it helps that I am a grey-haired 60-something -- a real person, who might be somebody's much-loved granny/mother/wife....
Don't forget the element of risk compensation, both on the part of motorists ('I don't need to pull out/slow down as s/he's wearing a helmet') and cyclists. From a book of hill climbs:
"....a helmet won't diminish the thrills of hillclimbing and it may even help you focus less on the danger of descending. Protect that precious cargo with a well-fitted helmet!"
[McKendrick, Hillclimbs on Scottish Lowland Roads]
I remember a poster on another forum saying that he regularly got up to 55mph on descents, but wouldn't dare do that without a helmet :o :o :o! The same poster had earlier praised his helmet for saving him from serious injury -- he had been riding on a gusty day, sitting up no hands eating a sandwich, when a side wind blew him over.....
Some people are more prone to falling awkwardly than others - my brother-in-law fractured his skull just falling over his own feet as a teenager. As I said at the beginning, it should be a matter of personal choice and governed by personal circumstances. Just remember that a helmet is not a magic hat, and cycle shops have a vested interest in making sales.
I don't mind if other people want to wear a helmet but personally I feel safer without one.
-
There will always be debates for and against the wearing of cycling helmets. But from personal experience, when I came down that kiddies slide on my RST doing a loop di loop and then landing how I did, I do believe a helmet would not have stopped the injuries I received. The physiotherapy is going wrell and thanks for all your kind wishes.
A damaged RST will be advertised for sale soon, good headset and bottom bracket. :D
Alfie
-
Dear Alfie,
Good work replicating the classic Krusty tiny bike loop da loop trick so beloved of Fat Tony.
You made two basic errors. Firstly never use a big bike and then always land on the granulated tyres scattered around active play facilitation installations to make kids bounce not break.
If I have time after showing Danny McAskill how to land the right way up after a triple pike off of a speeding train I'll post a video tutorial.
Yours, James
-
Hi Jimmer
It' s good to have a professional on the forum, and I'm looking forward to your tutorial video. I would be grateful if the audio track was clear and precise as my eyesight is still slightly fuzzy. Please give Danny my best wishes.
Alfie
-
Hi Jimmer,
I am interested in buying your (soon-to-be) damaged bike, after you have finished teaching Alfie. Please give me a call when you get out of the hospital.
Best wishes on your (future) speedy recovery,
Dave
-
David
I remember the advice you gave me, and I reckon you are a very knowledgeable guy. All the things you told me have been noted and will be put into practice at my next attempt. Looking forward to it............sort of
Alfie
-
Alfie,
All of my knowledge is theoretical at this point. If it works for you, please let me know. If it doesn't work, please keep it to yourself. (I have my professional reputation to think about.)
- Dave
-
David,
Your name and this forum will definitely not be mentioned if by any chance the second attempt is as futile as the first. But if I am successful you and all the members of this forum who have given me encouragement can share in my glory.
Alfie
-
If there is a video, it must have happened, right?
http://v.theonion.com/avclubmedia/videos/videometa/4640/zen_mp4.mp4
-
You'll understand now why the bike is not in a saleable condition Dave. Cough, cough. Back to the OP, notice the retention of cranial integrity despite the lack of any head gear.
-
slightly OT, but I actually knew a girl, a co-worker, in about 1997, who I had a long chat with one shift. She was talking how her boyfriend was soon to pop the question. I only remember the conversation, probably, because she did not show up at work the next day. The day after that I found out that she had gone shopping to the local Food Lion (grocery store) and slipped as she was walking out. Apparently she was dead before the ambulance got there. What a freak thing. She was in her late 20's and planning her life, grumbling about her problems (he would not give her back rubs often enough) and then such a thing happens.
It left me further of the opinion that life is pretty random, and so one might as well not worry too much and meet fate head on. ( pun intended :) ) My dad used to say that everyone dies once, but the easily frightened die a thousand times. I have to admit that every once in a while cars scare me, out there on the road while I cycle. I prefer to ignore the reality of the danger, to whatever degree it does or does not exist. That helps me enjoy this sport of cycling. :)
But I would never legislate away a persons right to wear a helmet, no matter my personal preferences. That would not be right. People deserve to enjoy cycling in which ever way makes them comfortable. Don't ya think? ;)
-
How much to sacrifice present pleasure in order to increase the probability of future pleasure? That is a very nice question!
My work keeps me off my bicycle, or anyway limits my rides to what I can squeeze around work requirements. I get some compensation of course for the fuss and bother of it. In the past it was almost impossible to get health insurance around here unless through one's employer - it depended pretty much on the county where one lives. E.g. closer to New York City there were much better options, but of course the rent is lower and the riding much nicer out here in the sticks! Now, though, with the new Affordable Care Act in effect... well, I guess my options have expanded a lot!
All in all, the future looks more secure the more money I have in the bank, so that argues for work work work. On the other hand, the more I work, the less I ride.
Yeah, how many folks have I known who passed away at ages younger than I am now?! Life is a gamble, for sure!
Here's a blog post I wrote some years back: http://interdependentscience.blogspot.com/2012/05/risk.html - this is just one very simple sort of risk, and already it is so complicated!
-
There is a good case for making cyclists wear motorcycle leathers as well, I'm sure, but basically if one is that aware of ones possible mortality, maybe it's time to join the safe side and drive a car. Oh ... wait a minute?? Don't cars kill more people than anything else? Dang. How about some bubble wrap and stay inside watching tv and drinking beer. I do believe in helmets after six or more beers, however. Helps with the wife especially.
But personally, the day after they make helmets on bicycles mandatory ... my bikes will go up for sale, no maybe or second thoughts about it.
I agree !
If you want to reduce the amount of head injuries on our roads then car drivers should wear helmets and their passengers as they make up for the largest number and %.
-
If you want to reduce the amount of head injuries on our roads then car drivers should wear helmets and their passengers as they make up for the largest number and %.
Actually, seat belts are mandatory. Drivers still drive.
Airbags are now de rigeur and their cost is in the price of the car. Drivers still drive.
Crumple zones are becoming more common and their cost is in the price of the car. Drivers still drive.
Putting a small piece of plastic on your head and you won't ride? C'mon.
Now for my anecdote of how a helmet saved my life. Imagine a gorgeous, sunny morning. Blue sky all around. Early morning mist burned away as the sun rose higher in the sky. Me on my bike...concrete boardwalk still wet from that mist. Me slowing down to a crawl of 2 kms/hr...standing on the pedals to admire the scenery.
Front wheel slipped to the side on the wet concrete...me going straight down...shoulder and helmeted head going on the concrete. As I was going down I really thought that I was heading to the A&E.
Pock pock!!! Lay there stunned for a minute but picked myself up eventually. Ta-da!!!
-
Seat belts, airbags, and crumple zones are much less personally confronting than a helmet, which impinges upon a person's facial appearance and ability to have presentable hair, wear a hat, or other adornments.
[Edit for content -- Dan.]
-
Ironmac wrote: "Putting a small piece of plastic on your head and you won't ride? C'mon."
I think you need to watch the video again and check the stats on Australia when they introduced the law. cycling fell by 40%.
Again, as the video states (which is common knowledge) that heart disease is the biggest killer in this country. Less people cycling means more inactivity which is more heart disease.
Again, as the video states, places like the Netherlands and Denmark have less cycling fatalities but don't wear helmets proving that helmets are not the answer.
Even Chris Boardman is pro choice on this issue.
-
Ironmac wrote: "Putting a small piece of plastic on your head and you won't ride? C'mon."
I think you need to watch the video again and check the stats on Australia when they introduced the law. cycling fell by 40%.
Amongst teenagers at the school that I taught at in 1990, the cycling numbers dropped from about 200+ to just 19, in 3 months. I counted these numbers and was stunned. Student cyclists remained at about 20-40 for at least 4-5 years, and only ever came back to about 80-100. Many other schools suffered similar declines. Mostly they just removed the bike sheds or converted them into some other purpose.
Today I teach at a school with 1500 students, and about 4 of them ride bikes to school :(
-
Today I teach at a school with 1500 students, and about 4 of them ride bikes to school :(
Hello,
What area is the School in?
What type of area do the pupils come from?
Maybe it is because the pupils are not encouraged to cycle, or maybe it is because it is a deprived area?
Or maybe you are not in an area that is safe for pupils of the age group at your School to cycle? Maybe Central City and 5 year olds?
There will be a reason.
If no real reason, I might suggest that it is the interest of yourself to encourage pupils to cycle?
Loads of ? marks on this one I think.
Getting back to cycle helmets, if you get me started the Forum will self destruct!
I ride with a helmet because I once fell off without and hurt my head.
I came off only one other time whilst wearing a helmet. I was certainly helped by the fact my head had protection because I did hit my head. I can still hear the noise and sound of the helmet impact!
Sensible people realise that just because as kids they did not wear helmet does not mean they should stick to the same ideas. Most likely helmets were not in existance years back? Another ? mark!
Best regards tio all who enjoy reading writing and riding safely,
John
-
Today I teach at a school with 1500 students, and about 4 of them ride bikes to school :(
Hello,
What area is the School in?
What type of area do the pupils come from?
Maybe it is because the pupils are not encouraged to cycle, or maybe it is because it is a deprived area?
Or maybe you are not in an area that is safe for pupils of the age group at your School to cycle? Maybe Central City and 5 year olds?
A suburban metropolitan school. An affluent, upper middle class area. Students are not encouraged to ride because of helmet laws and namby-pamby, bubble-wrapping, helicopter parents - the sort who walk their 16 year old to school (yes, I have seen this happen with some families). Local safety is quite OK, both on the street from crime, and on the roads from traffic. The only real traffic hazard is the large mob of SUV/BMW-driving parents trying to drop their kids off at the school gate. The school is a secondary school, so no 5 year olds.
There will be a reason.
If no real reason, I might suggest that it is the interest of yourself to encourage pupils to cycle?
Loads of ? marks on this one I think.
There is a reason. Too much affluence and too much 'crass meeja'-driven fear of 'the others'. I'm not going to ride against the tide and try to convince those who have no desire to be convinced. BTW, over 50% of our kids come from a Chinese background.... affluent Chinese. Not a group known for resorting to hop back on the bike their poor grandparents used to ride in the village.
Getting back to cycle helmets, if you get me started the Forum will self destruct!
I ride with a helmet because I once fell off without and hurt my head.
I came off only one other time whilst wearing a helmet. I was certainly helped by the fact my head had protection because I did hit my head. I can still hear the noise and sound of the helmet impact!
All good ideas for you - a choice. Your prerogative. Please do not try to force your choice on everyone else. That is all we are asking for here in Australia. Our sam-fool governments bought into the malingering ideas of the safety-nuts and the surgeons (not known for their interest in cycling themselves).
Sensible people realise that just because as kids they did not wear helmet does not mean they should stick to the same ideas. Most likely helmets were not in existance years back?
This is just a tad insulting. >:(
-
Hi All!
As before, I am going to lock "the helmet topic" for awhile, before feelings get personally hurt and the Forum does, indeed self-destruct as have so many others where discussion of the the topic got out of hand.
It seems helmet use -- voluntary or legislated -- raises such visceral feelings, it inevitably becomes deeply divisive, akin to "cars vs. bikes" in other venues. It doesn't take much for it to become the defining issue that poisons the larger atmosphere.
I am yet reluctant to do like the moderators of other Fora and ban such discussions outright, but things have not advanced positively since the last go-'round. All angles have been pretty well represented and covered. I am therefore going to lock the topic indefinitely and see how things do. Thankfully, the discourse has been pretty well contained; if it spreads further with similar results, then I shall indeed have to follow the lead of other administrators and make an outright ban. It is not about political correctness, but about maintaining the tone and tenor of a pleasant and supportive community where discussions can safely take place without rancor and hurt feelings expressed online and in emails to me.
If you feel strongly about the issue -- and wish to constructively affect the behavior of others -- then become a shining example of either camp, or actualize politically and try to effect change on a larger scale. Discord on a bicycle manufacturers' support forum won't accomplish much except further polarization.
Seize the day, enjoy life, and go ride a bike; there's a lot of fun to be had from atop a saddle and two wheels.
Best,
Dan.
Thorn Cycling Forums Administrator