mr_bill

So that's adding in hypothesis c,d, and e. All of which I agree with are plausible hypothesis.

Reflexes and osteoporosis? Not so much.

-mr. bill

rydabent

Six

I do admit that a helmet will not prevent an ankle sprain.

ZmanKC

If you step on it, it can cause an ankle sprain.

Six jours

Jesus Christ on a popsicle stick. Where the @#$! did that come from?

howsteepisit

No point to bring religion into this

3alarmer 

...you kiss your mother with that mouth ?

Six jours

Mine's dead.

Yours was pretty lively, though.

And thanks for asking!

digitalmouse

Very much so the case. It's been shown in various ways in Denmark and Netherlands that cycling 'en masse' is far safer than individually, regardless of wearing a helmet or not. Motor vehicle drivers tend to be more aware of the 'school of fish' presence. Living in Denmark for the past 7 years, I've noticed that the majority of hospital-needed cycling injuries in Copenhagen are due to drivers hitting cyclists because the drivers are not paying attention at cycle crossings, driveways, etc. - ie, not using their mirrors effectively, or not even bothering to turn their heads and look. And the injured contain a fair mix of helmeted and non-helmeted cyclists. Wearing a helmet or not is *not* going to prevent that sort of accident. Sorry, but my money is on the multi-ton vehicle versus the styrofoam/plastic helmet.

Correction: my money is on the cyclist who is aware of their surroundings and does not put themselves into that situation in the first place. And you need brains for that, not rely on the helmet to do your thinking for you.

I don't wear a helmet because I ride a velomobile - effectively a suit of armor compared to bicycle helmets. Does not mean it should be mandatory, when it is clearly a safer, faster, and more comfortable means of cycling transportation? Of course not.

Personally, the important issue is governmental enforcement of helmet use. I do not agree that it is their job to do that. Helmet use, as stated here ad-nauseum by both 'sides', really comes down to a personal preference. Some think it helps, some think it does not. There is a fair amount of anecdotes and information available on either side to support helmet use or not. There is ample common sense to support helmet use or not. Let the people decide what is best for them, not the government.

Otherwise this entire thread is little more than soap-box grandstanding that tastes more like politics than actual debate.

rekmeyata

Wake me up when America becomes a "school of fish" cycling mecca.

How stupid is this: "Correction: my money is on the cyclist who is aware of their surroundings and does not put themselves into that situation in the first place. And you need brains for that, not rely on the helmet to do your thinking for you." Of course a person needs to ride defensively, but the way it's worded I would take it to mean you never wear a seatbelt in your car and disarm your air bags because your the best defensive driver in the world and thus invincible! Good luck with that. Just because you're a good rider, which I don't doubt you are, doesn't mean not to wear a helmet just as it doesn't mean you drive without seatbelts and airbags on.

elcruxio

Defensive riding is potentially much easier than defensive driving depending on the infrastructure. Also slower speeds.

LesterOfPuppets

Good drivers drive without airbags all the time. Airbags must be removed for many race series. They usually need seat belt upgrades (harness) also. They usually don't wear a helmet for their commute, however.

LesterOfPuppets

Good drivers drive without airbags all the time. Airbags must be removed for many race series. They usually need seat belt upgrades (harness) also. They usually don't wear a helmet for their commute, however.

njkayaker

???
Suggesting that normal drivers should remove safety equipment so strange.
Saying that "good drivers" don't need airbags when they are using 5-point harnesses (and helmets! ) is silly.

njkayaker

???

You seem to think that people are talking about helmets in place of defensive riding.

No one has ever said that.

Many Europeans ride at a slow pace. That mighbe safer. Are you suggesting that people in the US be required to ride slow?

LesterOfPuppets

You know what's silly? Helmet use for ALL cycling styles and conditions.

Normal drivers vs auto racers

and

Normal cyclists vs bicycle racers

are interesting comparisons to me.

Also full face helmet usage is interesting to me.

All interesting PPE stuff.

LesterOfPuppets

I think the lower speeds mentioned in the post you quote is in the auto DD vs bicycle DD comparison.

Some MUPS here have speed limits primarily aimed at cyclists.

rydabent

But still it remains no matter how great your bike handling skills and how defensively you ride, schidt happens and down you go.

njkayaker

DD? Dunkin Donuts?

He could have been talking about car speeds. Where the car speeds are slower are often congested urban areas.

In southern Germany, major roads (not highways were cyclists can't ride) are narrow with wide trucks driving at high speeds (though, often, there's a sidepath).

And a lot of Europeans ride slow. I suspect that many people here often ride faster and much farther than the majority of "safer" Europeans (that is, people here often think that groups of cyclists and environments that are different are exactly the same).

The only way US riders can be as "safe" as Europeans is by moving to Europe and riding like Europeans (unless they are living in a US city that is like a cyclng-friendly European one. Then, they would only need to ride slow.)

(I'm not arguing for MHLs. No one here is. )

LesterOfPuppets

DD = defensive driving

I think the other poster is saying speeds of defensive cycling make it potentially easier than defensive driving.

Some in this thread are fast. My average commute speed over a year was 12mph. Yes, you're right. Generalization is bad. Defining groups is bad. Everyone should choose their own PPE levels unless engaging in a race or other organized ride that may require certain equipment.

Six jours

As I understand it, by far the largest portion of bicyclist fatalities involve cars. I personally think it's idiotic to believe that a few ounces of foam protect you when struck by a car, but whatever. A better point of debate, IMO, is why fewer European cyclists appear to be getting struck by cars compared with American cyclists. If we can figure that out we might actually get someplace - but I suspect the "answer" will be the usual foolishness about how American drivers are evil greedy Republicans who hate the environment.

rekmeyata

Wrong, try again; that's just a lame excuse to justify your agenda against the use of helmets. Again I don't care if you don't use a helmet just as I don't care if you use seat belts or turn off the airbags, just don't come up with lame excuses not to wear them.

rekmeyata

correct, but we're not talking about racing, we're talking about everyday riding, and I was making a comparison to cars safety with using seatbelts and air bags vs bikes with helmet use...safety items found on each mode of transportation that can be used.

In most cases it's safer to race a car on the track then it is to drive on the street.

LesterOfPuppets

Most bikes don't come with helmets. In the USA most don't come with lights or audible warning devices either, yet automobiles do.

And yes, racing automobiles or road bikes on closed courses is safer than the alternative. Auto Racing on open roads is quite rare. Road bike racing on open roads happens several times a year and races on partially closed roads happening ALL the time.

I think SOME of my everyday riding warrants helmet use, definitely not ALL.

I would think those that rationalize everyday helmet use with "anything could happen" have too little in the way of personal protection. If anything could happen I'd really want a full face helmet and some kinda knee/elbow protection.

3alarmer 

...did she make you wear a helment ? She was always nagging me about it.

rekmeyata

Again no point made here about helmets. The law requires seat belts for example and require us to wear them but we don't have too, thus we don't have to buy helmets or wear them. Eventually the law will come around and require us to buy and use helmets while riding, we just have to wait for our nanny state to get there.

I hate to repeat myself but here I go, I don't care if you or someone else does or doesn't want to wear helmet, just like I don't care if you or someone else does or doesn't want to wear a seat belt. For me it's more about our personal rights, if I choose not to wear a helmet or a seat belt that's my right just as it is to wear either, my safety is my concern and my responsibility not the government's, the government should have more important things to do then watch us like hawks to make sure we wear seat belts or helmets. By the way, I chose to wear a helmet and seat belt, if I didn't want want to wear them I wouldn't regardless what the law said! I wear this stuff based on studies that show they work, but again I should have the right to chose.