350htrr

Yes my simple brain can grasp the fact that helmets can only do so much, but just because they cant/don't protect a person from everything, doesn't mean it is better not to wear one... And no, my "test" would show you (if you did it) that when your head bounces off the pavement with a helmet on, it would be "better" than without a helmet... Come in Mikey, just do it... And come back to us with some real unbiased "test" numbers that you agree with...

Dux_Helm

I have friend of other permanent brain injury.
His foot slipped on some leaves, fell sideways, temple made contact with the edge of the curb.

Both the police and the surgeon were in concensus - helmet would have prevented the injury, or at the very least diminished it's severity to no more than light concussion.

I have never needed a seatbelt while driving, but wear one anyways

'better to have and not need than need and not have'

That said, I am not in favor of mandatory helmet law.
Although my friend happened to be on a bicycle, same injury could have happened to a pedestrian.
I see no need for leisure riders out riding in the park at controlled speeds to wear helmets.

Commuters, performance riders on the other hand would be silly not to wear one.
Riders exposed to higher speeds and road traffic cannot loose by wearing one, only benefit.
I don't believe in the 'false security' argument.
I would have to see some data proving it.


One more thing to add would be that in professional racing since official implementation of mandatory helmets mandatory (2003?) there hasn't been any kind of dramatic drop in fatalities.

The accidents they are involved in usually happen at such speeds that often not much can be done.

An 80kmh frontal impact in a car can sometimes be fatal..flesh clad in lycra and a helmet stand little chance.

350htrr

I don't think there should be mandatory helmet laws either... But some education of what good a helmet CAN do along with it's limitations could go a long way for people to make an INFORMED decision whether to wear a helmet or not... JMO

skye

You have yet to demonstrate that you have any grounds whatsoever for making an informed opinion. You insist on the deplorable intellectual dishonesty of equating a head-first fish flop from a standing position with a bicycle crash. You ignore or declare incompetence when faced with any form of data which conflicts with your myopic beliefs and then, from your podium of ignorance, you have the brass to ejaculate that anyone who disagrees with your malformed, stillborn experiment is stupid.

Good god in heaven. Trying to have an intelligent discussion with you is like trying to play chess with a pigeon. All you do is knock the pieces over, **** on the board, and then strut around, declaring yourself the victor.

skye

Not much, really. My quote came from the analysis of another study; one of the subsequent criticisms was in fact yours, that the authors of the original article virtually designed out any quality comparison with an unhelmeted rider. Out of context, I agree, the argument is a little floppy. My copy pasta was only a part of the critique; I was trying to make a small point to 350hurrdurr, and I didn't want to confuse him with extraneous material. He's having a tough enough time with the basics.

TL;DR Good point, Imma just gonna shrug my shoulders.

skye

You never answered my question, 350hurrdurr. Do you wear a helmet in the shower? If not, try this test: stand in the tub with the shower on, buck nekkid, slip on a piece of soap and fall backwards. Go ahead, try it. Report back to us, and then think to yourself "Why *wouldn't* I wear a helmet in the shower?"

corvuscorvax

Skye, you're a dick, and pretty much everything you say is wrong, but man, that was beautiful. Hat's off.

Edit: Ah, sorry. I should have checked the Urban Dictionary. Derivative and unoriginal. My mistake.

350htrr

Didn't answer that, and some of your other Q because they were a straw-man kind of Q... And why didn't you do my test? Afraid that I may have a point and a helmet may actually help when the old head hits the pavement? And I agree I do not have a degree in scientific testing, tabulating results,... But I do believe that I do have a point/a valid reason to not believe all these so called proofs that a helmet is actually bad overall... Sorry if my un-edumakatedness bugs you...

skye

I won't fight you on the dick part, but please tell me what it is that I've said that is wrong? I can back up every argument I've made on this board with research and analysis.

Yeah, I'm blunt and yeah, I come across as an arrogant putz, but I'm pretty sure that what really bothers you is actually that I'm right.

I'm also pretty sure you can put together a marginally coherent argument for helmet usage -- I know, because I've done it myself, partly to see if my own conclusions hold water. But the pro-helmet argument is so contorted and so full of holes that it collapses on its own weight.

Trust me, were the research to demonstrate to any degree of reliability that helmets afforded me protection over and above the damage they do to my safety otherwise; or that cycling is more dangerous than things we do daily and accept as routine risks, I would slap that baby on my head. After all, I wore a helmet for 20+ years, I'm sure I could figure out how to put one on.

So, tell me why everything I say is wrong? Everything I've said thus far is research- and logic- based.

(Yeah, the pigeon argument isn't mine, but damn, it was a perfect opportunity to use it, don't you agree?)

commodorefork

I have followed this thread for the last 60 pages.

I have patiently read all the studies, charts, graphs, and other data provided here by intelligent forum members that ALL prove that bike helmets are an inadequate source of protection and are possibly harmful. The charts, graphs, and diagrams have all shown that riding without a helmet is the safest option available for cyclists.

The bike helmet ZEALOTS cannot be reasoned with. Their arguments are consistently emotional and illogical. They can never be persuaded to give up their unhealthy fixation on wearing bike helmets. At this stage, continuing this discussion is a fruitless task.

I propose that WE (the non-helmet-wearing-cyclists) gather up our charts, diagrams, graphs, and statistics, and establish a NEW better bike forum where we can discuss cycling in peace without the continual MIND NUMBING bike helmet wearing lies being propagated day after day. The bike-helmet-wearing crowd should obviously be automatically banned from our forum.

That is the outline of my plan to solve the "helmet problem" once and for all. All intelligent non-bike-helmet-wearing-cyclists please PM me if you're interested in my suggestion.

curbtender

No, another thread is not needed.

rekmeyata

And I've been banned in the past for X number of days for a lot less than this! It makes me wonder if there are favorites, or perhaps non favorites here.

mconlonx

Because you consistently misrepresent data and quote studies out of context...?

Yes, you quote useful studies and abstracts -- and that's actually helpful -- but you tend to way overstate relevant findings, if they actually have anything to do with what's being discussed or the study you quote from.

You engage in the same tactics and techniques you hold against those who don't share your view.

But don't worry -- you're not alone...

350htrr

WOW, I sure seemed to have stirred up a hornet nest in here just by saying I don't believe in the so called facts/studies conclusions that wearing a helmet is worse than not wearing a helmet... And just because my "test" is so simple doesn't mean it's worthless... And just to be clear I never said helmets should be mandatory, I am just saying and trying to show that a little common sense can/maybe show that a helmet can be useful in a crash even tho it has it's limitations for sure...

corvuscorvax

Will it have blackjack and hookers?

commodorefork

As long as said hookers and blackjack players/dealers do NOT wear helmets. Otherwise they'd be subject to the automatic ban.

Other than that, anything goes.

mconlonx

How many of the 16% of bare-headers here at BF do you think you'll drag over to your little no-helmet ghetto? Answer: not many. Site is doomed to failure before it's even up...

commodorefork

Oh, a little no-helmet ghetto? I prefer to call it a culturally enriched urban center, thank you very much.

rekmeyata

wow, this discussion just keeps getting more and more bizarre as time goes on.

Dux_Helm

Holly Mother of God!

I'm out of this one. lol

Daves_Not_Here

Wow -- still going strong. It's been months since I read or posted to this thread and I must say that you guys have advanced the discussion approximately zero feet. If treading water was an Olympic sport, you guys would medal.

You may have already seen this, but here's a link https://bhsi.org/negativs.htm to a page that is helpful to both sides of the helmet debate. BHSI is pro-helment. The top part of the page consists of pro-helmet rebuttals to the most common anti-helmet arguments (increased rotational forces, why not wear helmet in shower or car, reduced ridership, etc.). However, the bottom of the page consists of a number of links to the best and most persuasive anti-helmet sites I've seen.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled argument, which is currently in progress.

mconlonx

I dunno. Couple of pages back, there was some rational discussion between helmeteer and bare-header factions. Kind of narrowed things down toward a center we can all disagree on from the extreme fringes of opinion on the topic. Then someone called everyone a jerk...

Like that bhsi resource, thanks for the link!

Monster Pete

The usual cycle seems to roughly be: Someone posts an opinion, people post counter-opinions. Both sides go looking for data to back up their opinions, which somehow seem to support both sides' views. A bit of mud-throwing goes on, repeat. Sometimes Rydabent chimes in with his usual 'anti-helmet cult' drivel, or someone new pops in, posts a 'my helmet saved my life' anecdote (sometimes with a grisly picture or two) then vanishes.

Occasionally some reasoned debate does occur, but after 154 pages, all the points of view have clearly been made several times over.

rekmeyata

I gave that link myself here early on but it was booed hooed away. Now it's your turn to be ridiculed.

SlackerInc

Saw this and couldn't help thinking of some of the posters ITT:

https://breanieswordvomit.tumblr.com/...tation-devices