Helmets ..... a- f*****g-gain

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Pk, Sep 20, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Stephen \

    Stephen \ Guest

    snip
    >
    > Car drivers should wear them as well, since they are subject to serious head injuries in crashes.
    > After all, Formula 1 and rally drivers wear them...
    >
    > --
    And if they want to they can.
     


  2. Peter Fox

    Peter Fox Guest

    Following on from PK's message. . .
    >Just out of interest,
    >
    >how many of the regulars here *never* wear a helmet?
    >
    >pk
    >

    I never wear a helmet...

    ...But I always wear one _hat_ or another which is attention grabbing. So my policy is to prevent
    trouble which works fine if you are assertive and don't hide in the dark corners of the road or let
    cars behind you at junctions along side to obscure other's view of you.

    Everyone round here knows the man with the silly hat. (Usually a fish when on the bike.)

    --
    PETER FOX Not the same since the statuette business went bust

    Witham Cycling Campaign www.eminent.demon.co.uk/wcc.htm East Anglian Pub cycle rides
    www.eminent.demon.co.uk/rides
     
  3. Jt

    Jt Guest

    "Stephen (aka steford)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Simon Mason wrote:
    > > "[Not Responding]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:<[email protected]>...
    > >> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:26:40 +0000 (UTC), "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> Just out of interest,
    > >>>
    > >>> how many of the regulars here *never* wear a helmet?
    > >
    > > I have never worn one, I think they foster a feeling of false security.I'd much prefer to avoid
    > > a collision in the first place than to rely on a helmet to bail me out.
    > > --
    > At the risk of inflaming this thread into the usual arguments do you
    really
    > think that I go looking to crash into cars as I am wearing a helmet? Your statement is absurd if
    > you think about it.

    Risk compensation is a recognised cause of situations which may well result in injury.

    "Thinking about it" rather than relying on facts are what brought on this whole helmet foolishness
    to start with.
     
  4. Tina Eager

    Tina Eager Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 17:55:40 UTC, "Stephen \(aka steford\)"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > snip
    > >
    > > Car drivers should wear them as well, since they are subject to serious head injuries in
    > > crashes. After all, Formula 1 and rally drivers wear them...
    > >
    > > --
    > And if they want to they can.
    >
    >

    Or they can hope their air bags save them.
    --
    Tina Eager
     
  5. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 06:49:32 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be Dene Wilby <[email protected]>
    wrote this:-

    >They said that if Andrei Kivilev (sp?) would have probably survived if he was wearing a lid, that's
    >enough for me.

    Let's assume that is true. Now what do you think about the two helmet wearing racing cyclists who
    dies at much the same time in North America?

    Anyway, what have sporting cyclists to do with people going to the library, or down the shops?

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  6. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:33:23 +0100 someone who may be "Rod Jenkins" <[email protected]>
    wrote this:-

    >since we chose to wear helmets for the commute, my company has made it compulsory for any one
    >cycling on its premises to wear a helmet (and issues them free).

    Is it also compulsory for pedestrians and motorists to wear a helmet while travelling on the
    premises? If not, why not?

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  7. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 10:31:14 +0100 someone who may be Richard Bates
    <[email protected]> wrote this:-

    >However, as a nurse currently working in paediatric trauma and orthopaedics in Birmingham, over the
    >summer holiday only one injured cyclist came through the door (and s/he was helmetless and off-road
    >at the time of accident).

    How many helmetless injured youngsters came in during this time who were 1) car passengers and 2)
    pedestrians?

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  8. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    "Richard Goodman" <[email protected]> writes:

    > "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > The hemlet design parameters are for impacts of up to 12 miles per hour. Above that, they offer
    > > little safety. But at the same time they increase your effective head size, so you're more
    > > likely (both because of increased area and because of increased leverage) to suffer a blow which
    > > causes a rotational injury. So in impacts aboce 12mph a bike helmet probably makes things worse,
    > > not better; and on a fast downhill I'm exceeding its design capacity by at least 300%.
    >
    > Ah, but what would you say is the design capacity of your head?

    That kind of misses the point. If you have a low-speed accident and land on your head, a cycle
    helmet is going to help. No-one disputes that. If you have a low speed accident and don't land on
    your head, a helmet isn't going to greatly increase your risk of injury, because the forces floating
    about aren't high.

    If you have a high speed accident and land on your head, a polystyrene helmet isn't going to make
    any difference at all: you're toast, or, rather, porrage. If you have a high speed accident and
    don't land on your head, but in the slide the edge, front or back of the helmet catches on
    something, you'll suffer a rotational injury in which all your grey matter gets torn around inside
    it's bag, and you will suffer serious cognitive injury.

    In other words, at the speeds at which I used to wear a helmet, I'm now persuaded that a helmet
    would do nothing to reduce my risk of injury, but would, on the contrary, substantially increase the
    risk of the sort of injury I personally would hate most.

    Your milage (or judgement) may vary - I know my partner's certainly does.

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    'You cannot put "The Internet" into the Recycle Bin.'
     
  9. On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 22:35:32 +0100, David Hansen <[email protected]> in
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >How many helmetless injured youngsters came in during this time who were 1) car passengers and 2)
    >pedestrians?

    none and one respectively.

    There may of course have been other injured people who were discharged from A&E, or went to another
    ward or intensive care.

    My observations are not statistically watertight.
    --
    A hippy goes up to a burger bar and asks the vendor, "Make me one with everything"

    Stop sleeping to email me.
     
  10. Andymorris

    Andymorris Guest

    PK wrote:
    > Just out of interest,
    >
    > how many of the regulars here *never* wear a helmet?
    >
    > pk

    I wear one, but just to stop her indoors nattering me.

    Except in the winter when it forms part of my thermal protection system :)

    --
    Andy Morris

    AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

    Love this: Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
    http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
     
  11. Ian

    Ian Guest

    Simon Brooke must be edykated coz e writed:

    >
    > The hemlet design parameters are for impacts of up to 12 miles per hour. Above that, they offer
    > little safety. But at the same time they increase your effective head size, so you're more likely
    > (both because of increased area and because of increased leverage) to suffer a blow which causes a
    > rotational injury. So in impacts aboce 12mph a bike helmet probably makes things worse, not
    > better; and on a fast downhill I'm exceeding its design capacity by at least 300%.
    >
    > It's still a matter of personal judgement.

    20 years ago my best friend died after a down hill spill in which his head was bashed in, he
    wasn't wearing a helmet, I cannot say that a helmet would have saved him but I also cannot say
    that it would not have saved him, as he died in the accident my thoughts are that he would maybe
    have survived if he was wearing a helmet, therefore I choose to wear one and advocate the
    wearing of them.

    --
    Ian

    http://www.catrike.co.uk
     
  12. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    "Stephen (aka steford)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > At the risk of inflaming this thread into the usual arguments do you
    really
    > think that I go looking to crash into cars as I am wearing a helmet? Your statement is absurd if
    > you think about it.

    As has been said before, nobody believes in risk compensation - that's why it happens.

    --
    Guy
    ===

    WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
    http://www.chapmancentral.com
     
  13. In article <[email protected]>, spam.trap100 @btinternet.com says...
    > Just out of interest,
    >
    > how many of the regulars here *never* wear a helmet?

    I usually never wear one on the road, commuting.

    I occasionally do wear one if the conditions suggest I might fall off--- of course I should have
    worn one the time I was too drunk to get on the bike, never mind fall off it, it might have
    prevented that broken rib.

    I always do wear one when I have to, ie if the organisers of the competition tell me I have to to
    take part.

    Colin
     
  14. Cupra

    Cupra Guest

    Tony W wrote:
    >> "PK" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >>> Just out of interest,
    >>>
    >>> how many of the regulars here *never* wear a helmet?
    >>
    >> On road & flat, even tracks (e.g. towpaths & Sustrans) -- very, vary rarely.
    >>
    >> Off road -- (i.e. 'proper' OR through trees, down hills or other stupid things) -- mostly.
    >>
    >> T

    Agree with you there - eg round Rutland yesterday, No, round Coed-y-Brenin, Yes!

    Interestingly, I have fallen off a few times at speed on tricky off road downhills but have never
    hit my (helmeted) head on anything. Indeed, the only time I have hit my head while carrying out a
    sporting activity was while snowboarding..... but it *was* pitch black and I think the tequila may
    have influenced my fall!
     
  15. Ouch

    Ouch Guest

    On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 23:26:40 +0000 (UTC), "PK" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Just out of interest,
    >
    >how many of the regulars here *never* wear a helmet?
    >
    >pk

    I pretty much always wear one when I go off road. I was was with a CTC group near Horsley on the NDW
    yesterday and hit my head (helmet) on a low-lying branch. I was concentrating on the rocky terrain
    and didn't see the branch at all! It was a hard enough knock to try to push my helmet back and I
    think I would have scraped some skin off my head if I hadn't been wearing one but today I live to
    tell another tale.
     
  16. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 15:52:57 +0100 someone who may be Zog The Undeniable <[email protected]> wrote this:-

    >FWIW, I don't see why motorcyclists should be made to wear them either, even though theirs are
    >probably a lot more effective

    They would be, if motorcyclists travelled at the same speed as cyclists. As it is they are, like
    cycle helmets, simply a way of officials ticking a box to say that they have done something.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  17. W K

    W K Guest

    "Tina Eager" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 12:26:45 UTC, "Simonb" <sbennettatwiderworlddotcodotuk> wrote:
    >
    > > Tina Eager wrote:
    > >
    > > > In fact the only time I really needed to be wearing a helmet (crashed into a wall) I wasn't
    > > > wearing one - but then I was playing squash! Spent a long time in Casualty though getting
    > > > X-rays and so on.
    > >
    > > Do you now wear a helmet to play squash?
    > >
    > > Simonb
    > >
    > >
    > No, actually. I suppose, on the evidence that it's a dangerous game, I should, but I wasn't
    > travelling very fast - I just failed to stop.
    >

    If you wear a helmet you could play it like a loony.

    Perhaps you could wear an ice hockey helmet, could make squash a far more exciting game.
     
  18. W K

    W K Guest

    "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...

    > If you have a high speed accident and land on your head, a polystyrene helmet isn't going to make
    > any difference at all: you're toast, or, rather, porrage.

    Well thats bollocks as the TdF proved. (forget who, but the "Lance cyclo-cross" incident) [Admitedly
    you did say "land on your head" , but thats highly improbable and if you land on your head falling
    from 2 feet you'll die ]

    Even in high speed accidents the speed a head hits the ground might be moderate.

    > If you have a high speed accident and don't land on your head, but in the slide the edge, front or
    > back of the helmet catches on something, you'll suffer a rotational injury in which all your grey
    > matter gets torn around inside it's bag, and you will suffer serious cognitive injury.

    An odd theory (one of the oddest). I'd rather risk sliding a rather smooth helmet on the road than
    have an extra inch of spare space to slide my head down the road.

    Which do you think has a higher torque? unhelmeted head on road (wider, lower friction) vs helmeted
    head (slightly narrower but rather higher friction).

    BTW - how do you slide? you'd have to have nice smooth knee, hip and shoulder pads (or full biker's
    leathers), because all of these extremities will be slowing you down a hell of a lot, very quickly.
     
  19. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 23:18:27 +0100 someone who may be Richard Bates
    <[email protected]> wrote this:-

    >My observations are not statistically watertight.

    It is good that you recognise this. Not all do.

    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
    keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  20. rigsby@degsy

    [email protected] New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    I ALWAYS wear a helmet.

    A friend of mine cycles to work every day
    (10 miles each way)...

    He has been knocked off a couple of times in the last year or so
    & he OWES HIS LIFE TO A HELMET......

    Both times he landed with his helmet hitting the concrete
    & BOTH times the helmet had large indentations ...

    This would have been his head....

    He would either be dead or at best be a cabbage now..

    Obviously the choice is the riders.....

    If there were less vehicles on the road, then the need to wear
    a helmet might decrease...but at present ....
    I ALWAYS wear one....So does my friend aswell.

    Del.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...