Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Fifty Plus (50+) Share the victories, challenges, successes and special concerns of bicyclists 50 and older. Especially useful for those entering or reentering bicycling.

User Tag List

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-13-11, 10:00 AM   #1
TomD77
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
TomD77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida Panhandle
Bikes:
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Negative health effects from mandatory helmet laws

Found this while reading a Wikipedia entry on unintended consequences (link).

In 1990, the Australian state of Victoria made safety helmets mandatory for all bicycle riders. While there was a reduction in the number of head injuries, there was also an unintended reduction in the number of juvenile cyclists—fewer cyclists obviously leads to fewer injuries, all else being equal. Research by Vulcan et al. found that the reduction in juvenile cyclists was because the youths considered wearing a bicycle helmet unfashionable.[22] A health benefit model developed at Macquarie University in Sydney suggests that, while helmet use reduces "the risk of head or brain injury by approximately two-thirds or more", the decrease in exercise caused by reduced cycling as a result of helmets laws is counterproductive in terms of net health.[23]
TomD77 is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 10:04 AM   #2
Phil85207
Century bound
 
Phil85207's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Mesa Arizona
Bikes: Felt AR4 and Cannondale hybrid
Posts: 2,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Bolderdash. Hogwash. There is alway someone willing to put a spin on something.
Phil85207 is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 10:05 AM   #3
michaelnel
Macaws Rock!
 
michaelnel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Bikes: 2005 Soma Doublecross
Posts: 1,513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Great, we needed a new helmet thread.
__________________
---

San Francisco, California
michaelnel is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 10:11 AM   #4
bigbadwullf
Senior Member
 
bigbadwullf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: West, Tn.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,763
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
How can you say that is "bolderdash". If the number decreased because of not wanting to wear a helmet, then it decreased by not wanting to wear a helmet. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
bigbadwullf is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 10:30 AM   #5
Phil85207
Century bound
 
Phil85207's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Mesa Arizona
Bikes: Felt AR4 and Cannondale hybrid
Posts: 2,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Continue to read the last sentence. The one about putting a spin on things. Don't be gullible enough to believe everything you read as gospel.
Phil85207 is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 11:11 AM   #6
bruce19
Senior Member
 
bruce19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lebanon (Liberty Hill), CT
Bikes: MASI Gran Criterium S, Colnago World Cup CX & Guru steel
Posts: 4,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 49 Post(s)
As with motorcycles, I would not ride without a helmet but would not support a helmet law. However, if you do not wear a helmet and sustain a serious injury do not expect me to pay for your medical cost and long term TBI care.
bruce19 is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 11:13 AM   #7
TomD77
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
TomD77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Florida Panhandle
Bikes:
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil85207 View Post
Bolderdash. Hogwash. There is alway someone willing to put a spin on something.
Come now, the article states two things as facts and then quotes a conclusion based on some model. The facts quoted are (1) the use of a helmet reduces probability of brain injury by 2/3rds and (2) juveniles are less likely to cycle in the presence of helmet laws. Do you dispute either of the assertions?

One step further: there are health consequences with lessened exercise levels in juveniles, well everybody for that matter. So far I think we're far below the threshold for "bolderdash (sic) and hogwash".

Concluding with certainty that the relative negative health consequences of helmet laws exceed the positive utility could approach "spin". And that's ignoring the possibility that the juvenile energy doesn't just find another outlet, like gang violence (joke!!!).

As far as I'm concerned the quote has one important part, that about helmet use decreasing brain injuries by 2/3rds but I'm not real concerned with appearing trendy nor am I particularly susceptible to peer pressure.
TomD77 is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 11:35 AM   #8
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 19,767
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
OP is in Florida, so my cold ears and neck , that I avoid while wearing my warm hat and putting
the Hood of my parka over it, and securing both under my chin, helmet wont fit.

Has no Importance to them.. it's not cold enough there..

they don't let the Pilots get in their airplanes at the Pensacola NAS base ... without a helmet.

Oregon requires juveniles wear helmets, once older they too can choose..
until they get motorbikes.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 11:35 AM   #9
overthehillmedi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo.B.C. The We't coast of Canada
Bikes:
Posts: 1,287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:
overthehillmedi is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 11:40 AM   #10
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike,2011 CF Specialized Tarmac road bike. 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.
Posts: 3,710
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Are there no other forms of exercise than Cycling? If helmet use decreases juviniles from riding doesn't that put them on foot? They aren't able to drive if they are juviniles and cycling isn't the only way to get to the basket ball court or the track. So yes it has moved to balderdash if we aren't told what the kids moved on to. If they had to go back to walking then we need the same eggheads to study the health and safety benefits of walking. Oh never mind there is no answer to this debate continue as you were.
Mobile 155 is online now  
Old 12-13-11, 11:47 AM   #11
WC89
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Owings Mills, Maryland
Bikes: 2011 Trek 8.4 DS hybrid; 2012 Felt F-75 road bike; 1990 Specialized Stumpjumper MTB; 1992 Guerciotti road bike (inactive)
Posts: 494
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Unfashionable!!??? If true, they don't know what unfashionable is! Would someone please show them how helmets looked (except for the old leather "hairnets" the racers wore) prior to 1987! They were quite geeky, nerdy, lame, heavy, unsleek, non-aerodynamic looking!! The Bell V1-Pro came close to looking cool (I bought one in 1983). PLEASE!!!! Today's helmets look no different than the cool ones worn by pro racers!
WC89 is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 11:50 AM   #12
billydonn
Council of the Elders
 
billydonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Omaha, NE
Bikes: 1990 Schwinn Crosscut, 5 Lemonds
Posts: 3,761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Another vote for "not balderdash". The article is just one reason to not favor helmet laws but not a major and conclusive blow for such a justification IMO. I always wear a helmet myself though.... they are cool looking anyway.

Maybe a media campaign to convince the youth that "helmets are cool babe magnets" is in order???
billydonn is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 12:08 PM   #13
Dudelsack 
A might bewildered...
 
Dudelsack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Loovul
Bikes: Bacchetta Giro ATT 26; Lemond Buenos Aires
Posts: 6,345
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A&S alert!

They can take my helmet when they pry my cold dead ears off the chinstraps.
__________________
Signature line for rent.
Dudelsack is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 12:09 PM   #14
overthehillmedi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Nanaimo.B.C. The We't coast of Canada
Bikes:
Posts: 1,287
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We just need a picture of the lastest teenage heart throb band/singer riding a bike and wearing a helmet to appear, then all the young wolf pups will want to do the same in order to look cool and attract the sweet young ladies. Problem solved.
overthehillmedi is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 12:25 PM   #15
CraigB
Starting over
 
CraigB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indianapolis
Bikes: 1990 Trek 1500; 2006 Gary Fisher Marlin; 2011 Cannondale Synapse Alloy 105; 2012 Catrike Trail
Posts: 4,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelnel View Post
Great, we needed a new helmet thread.
Not just another helmet thread, another helmet law thread.
CraigB is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 12:34 PM   #16
donheff
Senior Member
 
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Capitol Hill, Washington, DC
Bikes: Specialized Tricross Comp
Posts: 1,314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Wearing helmets is good, helmet laws, bad. I always wear a helmet when I am out on my own bike but rarely wear a helmet when I ride a CABI (Capital Bike Share) around town. Public bike share programs will not succeed anywhere helmet use is mandatory. I would much rather see robust bike use than robust helmet use - witness Amsterdam.
donheff is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 12:41 PM   #17
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So Cal
Bikes: 72-76 Peugeot, 89 Klein Quantum Road Bike,2011 CF Specialized Tarmac road bike. 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.
Posts: 3,710
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 245 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
Wearing helmets is good, helmet laws, bad. I always wear a helmet when I am out on my own bike but rarely wear a helmet when I ride a CABI (Capital Bike Share) around town. Public bike share programs will not succeed anywhere helmet use is mandatory. I would much rather see robust bike use than robust helmet use - witness Amsterdam.
In our state it is only manditory for kids. The study talked about juviniles and reduction of riding. Are you opposed to those laws as well?
Mobile 155 is online now  
Old 12-13-11, 12:59 PM   #18
velocycling
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 439
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That is all the more important as an adult you set the standard by wearing your helmet around children. The pros have had a rule since Paris Nice in 2003. This report was in the 1990s. Kids are learning from their eviroment. If you looked at the adults in AU in the 1990, you can bet not one was wearing a helmet. Kids will be monkey see monkey do... So the report is not valid in today's society.

Last edited by velocycling; 12-13-11 at 01:08 PM.
velocycling is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 01:00 PM   #19
HawkOwl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 2,635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomD77 View Post
Found this while reading a Wikipedia entry on unintended consequences (link).

In 1990, the Australian state of Victoria made safety helmets mandatory for all bicycle riders. While there was a reduction in the number of head injuries, there was also an unintended reduction in the number of juvenile cyclists—fewer cyclists obviously leads to fewer injuries, all else being equal. Research by Vulcan et al. found that the reduction in juvenile cyclists was because the youths considered wearing a bicycle helmet unfashionable.[22] A health benefit model developed at Macquarie University in Sydney suggests that, while helmet use reduces "the risk of head or brain injury by approximately two-thirds or more", the decrease in exercise caused by reduced cycling as a result of helmets laws is counterproductive in terms of net health.[23]
From this haven't a clue what the study, assumption and paremeters were. That they say "suggests" reinforces the idea that the study was more of an academic exercise than a real attempt to find a conclusion or cause-effect recommendation.

There may be more real information in the study. But, it sure isn't presented.

Sure does get a lot of comments though. Frankly, I'm mystified about all the smoke and fire associated with helmets.
HawkOwl is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 01:04 PM   #20
Bikey Mikey
Senior Member
 
Bikey Mikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Newport News, VA USA
Bikes: Diamondback Edgewood LX; Giant Defy 1
Posts: 3,325
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Fashion!!!!

This is the helmet I wore back in the late 70s through the mid 80s when I was in college--and for a few years after--riding my old Ross steel rodie.



Talk about not fashionable. I wore it so I had protection. The helmet definitely saved my skull one Sunday morning at 7AM. A car ran me off a four lane road and there was not a single other car!

Please take anything you read on the internet and WIKI with a suspicion and a large grain of salt.
Bikey Mikey is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 01:08 PM   #21
teachme
Senior Member
 
teachme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Nederland, Texas
Bikes: 2011 Specialized Sectuer, 1988 Bianchi
Posts: 1,441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomD77 View Post
Found this while reading a Wikipedia entry on unintended consequences (link).

In 1990, the Australian state of Victoria made safety helmets mandatory for all bicycle riders. While there was a reduction in the number of head injuries, there was also an unintended reduction in the number of juvenile cyclists—fewer cyclists obviously leads to fewer injuries, all else being equal. Research by Vulcan et al. found that the reduction in juvenile cyclists was because the youths considered wearing a bicycle helmet unfashionable.[22] A health benefit model developed at Macquarie University in Sydney suggests that, while helmet use reduces "the risk of head or brain injury by approximately two-thirds or more", the decrease in exercise caused by reduced cycling as a result of helmets laws is counterproductive in terms of net health.[23]
huh?
teachme is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 01:24 PM   #22
Doohickie 
You gonna eat that?
 
Doohickie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty
Bikes: 1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS
Posts: 14,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomD77 View Post
A health benefit model developed at Macquarie University in Sydney suggests that, while helmet use reduces "the risk of head or brain injury by approximately two-thirds or more", the decrease in exercise caused by reduced cycling as a result of helmets laws is counterproductive in terms of net health.[23]
It's only a model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomD77 View Post
Come now, the article states two things as facts and then quotes a conclusion based on some model. The facts quoted are (1) the use of a helmet reduces probability of brain injury by 2/3rds and (2) juveniles are less likely to cycle in the presence of helmet laws. Do you dispute either of the assertions?
I don't, but keep reading. The alleged reduction in health was derived from a model. The assumptions in building the model may be flawed. Or worse yet, they could be selected to produce a predisposed result. For instance, in their assumptions, do they assert that kids who choose not to ride to avoid wearing a helmet subsequently do not engage in an alternate healthy activity? Is this a valid assumption to make? This model used to derive the overall health benefit of helmet use is really kind of squishy.

For the record, I wear a helmet but do not advocate helmet laws.
__________________
I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.



Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."
Doohickie is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 01:43 PM   #23
billydonn
Council of the Elders
 
billydonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Omaha, NE
Bikes: 1990 Schwinn Crosscut, 5 Lemonds
Posts: 3,761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkOwl View Post
From this haven't a clue what the study, assumption and paremeters were. That they say "suggests" reinforces the idea that the study was more of an academic exercise than a real attempt to find a conclusion or cause-effect recommendation.

There may be more real information in the study. But, it sure isn't presented.

Sure does get a lot of comments though. Frankly, I'm mystified about all the smoke and fire associated with helmets.
No. It just reflects the cautious language that scientists everywhere are trained to use.
billydonn is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 01:54 PM   #24
Doohickie 
You gonna eat that?
 
Doohickie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty
Bikes: 1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS
Posts: 14,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Suggest is one of the weaker words they might have used. It was BS. The point was not the conclusion, but that sometimes there can be unintended consequences.
__________________
I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.



Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."
Doohickie is offline  
Old 12-13-11, 03:14 PM   #25
Barry in GA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: East metro-Atlanta
Bikes:
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A mod needs to move this self immolating turkey to A&S where it can get the attention it deserves.
Barry in GA is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:05 PM.