"Helmet could have killed me"

Response to Tony Raven:

Quoted message said:

its good to know that in Wales there is at least
one hospital in which at least one paramedic is informed about at least
one aspect of helmets.

YMYA - remember the old story whose punchline is "In Scotland there is
at least one sheep, at least one of whose sides is black."? When I
first heard it I shrugged and said "Ye-e-e-s? And?"

BTW, did you know that someone's attaching a blurry monochrome picture
of Michael Eavis to your posts?

--
Mark, UK
"Two and two continue to make four, in spite of the whine of the amateur
for three, or the cry of the critic for five."

Response to Tony Raven:

Quoted message said:

its good to know that in Wales there is at least
one hospital in which at least one paramedic is informed about at least
one aspect of helmets.

YMYA - remember the old story whose punchline is "In Scotland there is
at least one sheep, at least one of whose sides is black."? When I
first heard it I shrugged and said "Ye-e-e-s? And?"

BTW, did you know that someone's attaching a blurry monochrome picture
of Michael Eavis to your posts?

--
Mark, UK
"Two and two continue to make four, in spite of the whine of the amateur
for three, or the cry of the critic for five."

Mark McNeill said:

Response to Tony Raven:

Quoted message said:

its good to know that in Wales there is at least
one hospital in which at least one paramedic is informed about at least
one aspect of helmets.

Could you get your piano tuner friend to write to a couple
of national newspapers about his experience.

Quoted message said:

YMYA - remember the old story whose punchline is "In Scotland there is
at least one sheep, at least one of whose sides is black."? When I
first heard it I shrugged and said "Ye-e-e-s? And?"

I'm sure there must be some suitable proverb here e.g.
"How do you convert people?" "One at a time".

Quoted message said:

BTW, did you know that someone's attaching a blurry monochrome picture
of Michael Eavis to your posts?

that comes from the x-face header line.

--
Martin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_men_make_a_tiger
http://cyclehelmets.org/

Tony Raven said:

Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his son
in Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself unconscious.
After he'd come round in true cyclist style he got back on his bike
and they cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get himself checked
out.

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a helmet?"
to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and was stunned to
get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one there's a good chance
you would have broken your neck"

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

--

Nigel

Nigel Randell said:

Tony Raven wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a helmet?"
to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and was stunned to
get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one there's a good chance
you would have broken your neck"

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

Perhaps like me, he has an A level in physics.

Martin.

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his son
in Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself unconscious.
After he'd come round in true cyclist style he got back on his bike
and they cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get himself checked
out.

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a helmet?"
to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and was stunned to
get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one there's a good chance
you would have broken your neck"

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

By reading the evidence?

burtthebike said:

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his
son in Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself
unconscious. After he'd come round in true cyclist style he got
back on his bike and they cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get
himself checked out.

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a
helmet?" to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and
was stunned to get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one
there's a good chance you would have broken your neck"

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

By reading the evidence?

I would imagine that he has read something to that end. And I'm all for
dispelling the "magic hat" syndrome which can do more harm than good. I am
a little concerned, however if the said paramedic is of the opinion that all
helmet wearing gives a "good chance" of a broken neck. I suppose that it
does a little to balance out the wide held view in certain parts of the
medical profession that a helmet is a universal panacea to all cycling
injuries. I think that it would be a better policy that no comment was made
either way about the use or non-use of any PPE in the A&E department.

At the end of the day the debate should be about compulsion and the freedom
of the individual to choose for themselves whether to wear the thing or
not - regardless of the benefits or drawbacks conferred by wearing, and
nothing else. And that extends to the expectation of being treated by the
NHS without being "educated", in either direction, about equipment
selection.

--

Nigel

Martin Dann said:

Nigel Randell said:

Tony Raven wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a
helmet?" to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and
was stunned to get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one
there's a good chance you would have broken your neck"

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

Perhaps like me, he has an A level in physics.

Martin.

Maybe he does. Although I don't remember impact dynamics and injury
mechanisms being on the syllabus when I did mine. That came much, much
later......

--

Nigel

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

burtthebike said:

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven wrote:
> Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his
> son in Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself
> unconscious. After he'd come round in true cyclist style he got
> back on his bike and they cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get
> himself checked out.
>
> The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a
> helmet?" to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and
> was stunned to get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one
> there's a good chance you would have broken your neck"
>

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

By reading the evidence?

I would imagine that he has read something to that end. And I'm all for
dispelling the "magic hat" syndrome which can do more harm than good. I am
a little concerned, however if the said paramedic is of the opinion that all
helmet wearing gives a "good chance" of a broken neck. I suppose that it
does a little to balance out the wide held view in certain parts of the
medical profession that a helmet is a universal panacea to all cycling
injuries. I think that it would be a better policy that no comment was made
either way about the use or non-use of any PPE in the A&E department.

As I said we don't know why he said it - you could be correct that he
had read the evidence and reached that general conclusion or it could
have been some specific aspect of the accident that led him to that
conclusion.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

"burtthebike" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his son
in Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself unconscious.
After he'd come round in true cyclist style he got back on his bike
and they cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get himself checked
out.

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a helmet?"
to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and was stunned to
get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one there's a good chance
you would have broken your neck"

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

By reading the evidence?

Any links?

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his son in
Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself unconscious. After
he'd come round in true cyclist style he got back on his bike and they
cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get himself checked out.

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a helmet?"
to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and was stunned to
get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one there's a good chance you
would have broken your neck"

He was totally unaware of the great helmet debate and was telling us
because of his great surprise that wearing one could possibly be
harmful. Because of this unfortunately he didn't ask further about why
and whether it was some specific aspect of how he fell on his head that
led to the remark but its good to know that in Wales there is at least
one hospital in which at least one paramedic is informed about at least
one aspect of helmets.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

I just pondered whether it is preferable to suffer brain injury by not
wearing
a top or alternatively evaluate lucidly why a broken neck is a better
option.
Personally, I dislike wearing my hat mainly due to wind noise and straps
chafing
and enjoying the freedom, but thereby also adding much to the worry my wife
expresses.
She still believes that a hat will be the next best thing to St.
Christopher.
Fred

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

"Tony Raven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Our piano tuner is a keen cyclist and was on a long trip with his son in
Wales when he came off his bike and knocked himself unconscious. After
he'd come round in true cyclist style he got back on his bike and they
cycled 10 miles to the nearest A&E to get himself checked out.

The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a helmet?"
to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and was stunned to
get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one there's a good chance you
would have broken your neck"

He was totally unaware of the great helmet debate and was telling us
because of his great surprise that wearing one could possibly be
harmful. Because of this unfortunately he didn't ask further about why
and whether it was some specific aspect of how he fell on his head that
led to the remark but its good to know that in Wales there is at least
one hospital in which at least one paramedic is informed about at least
one aspect of helmets.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

I just pondered whether it is preferable to suffer brain injury by not
wearing
a top or alternatively evaluate lucidly why a broken neck is a better
option.

The chances of brain injury are the same whether you wear one or not and
if that is what you and your wife are worried about you should start by
wearing a helmet at home, when out walking and when in the car. The
probability of a brain injury accident is far greater from those than it
is from cycling.

As for neck injuries, if you loose all motor control below the neck as
Christopher Reeve did, then life becomes very difficult and often short.

You might like to read Wardlaw
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/321/7276/1582

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

Nigel Randell said:

... I am
a little concerned, however if the said paramedic is of the opinion that all
helmet wearing gives a "good chance" of a broken neck. ...

Seems more likely to me that the comment was specific to the incident
in question. If we assume that the paramedic is in possession of Clue
(I'd *really* like to think that they generally are, so please don't
disabuse me if this is not the case :-), then this could well be a
comment on the nature of this incident, rather than a general swing at
helmets: perhaps the cyclist came off at speed and suffered head
abrasions consistant with a high speed slide, for example.

Quoted message said:

... I think that it would be a better policy that no comment was made
either way about the use or non-use of any PPE in the A&E department.

That probably is the official policy, if there is one at all, I doubt
that hospital staff are encouraged to preach to their patients on
issues where debate is ongoing.

Cheers,
W.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

... I think that it would be a better policy that no comment was made
either way about the use or non-use of any PPE in the A&E department.

That probably is the official policy, if there is one at all, I doubt
that hospital staff are encouraged to preach to their patients on
issues where debate is ongoing.

If it is they seem to be awfully bad at following policy, usually with
"Should have worn a helmet" lectures from anecdotes I hear. The police
seem to also make it a feature of their comments on bicycling injuries.

--
Tony

" I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong."
Bertrand Russell

In article <[email hidden]>, fred2
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

She still believes that a hat will be the next best thing to St.
Christopher.

St. Christopher is just as effective. :-)

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Martin Dann said:

Nigel Randell said:

Tony Raven wrote:

Quoted message said:

> The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a
> helmet?" to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and
> was stunned to get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one
> there's a good chance you would have broken your neck"
>

Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

Perhaps like me, he has an A level in physics.

Martin.

Maybe he does. Although I don't remember impact dynamics and injury
mechanisms being on the syllabus when I did mine. That came much,
much later......

No - but simple levers was in the 1972 O level physics syllabus!

Mike the unimaginative said:

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Martin Dann said:

Nigel Randell wrote:
> Tony Raven wrote:
>> The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a
>> helmet?" to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and
>> was stunned to get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one
>> there's a good chance you would have broken your neck"
>>
> Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

Perhaps like me, he has an A level in physics.

Martin.

Maybe he does. Although I don't remember impact dynamics and injury
mechanisms being on the syllabus when I did mine. That came much,
much later......

No - but simple levers was in the 1972 O level physics syllabus!

ISTR people studying medicine either have to have an A
level in physics before they start, or study physics as
part of their course.

Mike the unimaginative said:

"Nigel Randell" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Martin Dann said:

Nigel Randell wrote:
> Tony Raven wrote:

>> The paramedic asked the usual question of "Were you wearing a
>> helmet?" to which he replied "No" expecting to get a lecture and
>> was stunned to get the reply "Good, if you'd been wearing one
>> there's a good chance you would have broken your neck"
>>
>
> Did the paramedic explain how he came to that conclusion?

Perhaps like me, he has an A level in physics.

Martin.

Maybe he does. Although I don't remember impact dynamics and injury
mechanisms being on the syllabus when I did mine. That came much,
much later......

No - but simple levers was in the 1972 O level physics syllabus!

So were Newton's Laws, 1 to 3.

With the greatest of respect, if you just apply O level principles you will
get an O level understanding of what is actually a research degree level
problem.

I see some parallels between the issue of cycle helmets and some work I was
involved in back in the mid 90s. In 1993 new regulations came into force
for the roof strength of road coaches as there had been a number of rollover
accidents where the roof strength had been insufficent to prevent gross
intrusion of the structure into the passenger space, with predictably lethal
results. It was apparent that although we could now design a stronger roof
which was more likely to preserve a "survival space" for the passengers,
they were still at significant risk from being thrown around in, and ejected
from the space. The obvious solution was to fit lap belts to the seats, and
we were tasked by the European Commission to investigate the effects of
these belts in frontal impacts (wich were regarded to be more common,
although less dangerous than rollovers). Basically the research (computer
simulation and sled testing, not population studies) showed that lap belts
increased the risk of head and neck injuries - to an unacceptable level in
certain seating configurations. We were later commissioned by the (then)
Department of Transport to develop a seat which could be used with a lap
belt and would keep the injury levels down to an acceptable level for most
seat occupants.

So, where do I see the parallel? Well, it seems that in the case of cycle
helmets there are benefits to be had in certain types of head strike but on
the other hand in other scenarios there may well be additional risks. The
case for the lap belts appears on first sight to be such a no-brainer that I
have shocked and surprised a lot of people by showing them from the
simulations that wearing a lap belt CAN be a health risk. It's the same
with helmets, the general assumption amongst Joe Public and his family is
that they are a Good Thing whereas there is evidence to suggest that this
may not always be the case. Unfortunately much of the information flying
around is being thrown by those with an axe to grind, and it is most
certainly a double headed axe.

--

Nigel

Nigel Randell said:

So were Newton's Laws, 1 to 3.

And the conservation of energy and momentum, friction,
kinetic energy.

Quoted message said:

With the greatest of respect, if you just apply O level principles you will
get an O level understanding of what is actually a research degree level
problem.

I see some parallels between the issue of cycle helmets and some work I was
involved in back in the mid 90s. In 1993 new regulations came into force
for the roof strength of road coaches as there had been a number of rollover
accidents where the roof strength had been insufficent to prevent gross
intrusion of the structure into the passenger space, with predictably lethal
results.

Suppose you designed the coach seats, seat belts, and
roofs etc for a 12mph crash, yet the coach routinely goes
at 20-30mph, sometimes a lot faster. Would the seatbelts
etc have coped with the additional kinetic energy.

Would the increased deceleration have caused additional
problems that were not accounted for in the 12mph study.
e.g. catastrophic failure of the seat mounts, increased
chanced of the roof failing, or sliding under the seat belt.

With respect you comparing a coach crashing within its
design specs., against against a cyclist travelling at 2-3
times the design speed of a helmet.
This is like comparing 'O' level principles with degree
level physics.