View Poll Results: Helmet wearing habits?
I've never worn a bike helmet
178
10.66%
I used to wear a helmet, but have stopped
94
5.63%
I've always worn a helmet
648
38.80%
I didn't wear a helmet, but now do
408
24.43%
I sometimes wear a helmet depending on the conditions
342
20.48%
Voters: 1670. You may not vote on this poll
The helmet thread
#5126
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SF Bay Area, East bay
Posts: 7,648
Bikes: Miyata 618 GT, Marinoni, Kestral 200 2002 Trek 5200, KHS Flite, Koga Miyata, Schwinn Spitfire 5, Mondia Special, Univega Alpina, Miyata team Ti, Santa Cruz Highball
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1606 Post(s)
Liked 2,570 Times
in
1,218 Posts
Don't get run over and you won't have to consider a helmet. But it happens and what is out there helps. I'd guess anyone who was asking here is new to the sport... probably when most of your accidents will happen.
#5127
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Finland
Posts: 93
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
That bike helmets seem to cause more neck injuries is in line with what we know of rotational injuries. So, we've got both correllation (even if somewhat uncertain), as well as causation.
Further: Neck injuries seem to be one of several kinds of injuries that even out the over all advantage of helmet use.
Further: Neck injuries seem to be one of several kinds of injuries that even out the over all advantage of helmet use.
In AUS vs NED study, AUS group had 3.5 times the chance to survive with only mild or non-existant "head and neck" injury, and the amount of severe "head and neck" injury was half of the NED group. Also, as mentioned, in AUS there's a very small percentage of neck injuries - head injuries are 7 times as common and severe head injuries are 14 times as common. In these studies, about 75% of aussie cyclists use helmets, when practically no NED cyclist does.
So I would say that the case for neck injuries is same as for brain rotational injuries - if there is an effect that increases rotational injuries, it doesn't seem to be big and the net effect is that you're a lot better off with a helmet.
Last edited by proileri; 04-27-13 at 04:01 PM.
#5128
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
Precisely. njkayaker looks at the chart I posted and says "well yeah, but there may have been some effect because it dropped a bit after use rates increased in the 80's". Ignoring the fact that it was, on the whole, a continuing downward trend for quite awhile, the real telling part is that coupled with that decrease which was already trending, there was an exponential increase in helmet use, with no correlating decrease in deaths. I mean, use skyrocketed. If helmets were even halfway as effective as the most virulent believers claim, there should have been more effect, and a more undeniable effect. Certainly not an arguable blip occurring during a downward trend.
Now, look at the oft-touted comparison of seatbelts, and look what we get:
Seatbelts have a distinctly more noticeable, and pretty undeniable effect. I had a harder time finding motorcycle helmet uses, but they also seem to have a better reflection than bike helmets do:
Much more of what you would expect to see from what is designed, tested, and used as a life-saving device. At the very least, this should make clear that even if helmets are effective to a degree, they are not nearly as effective as is commonly believed, and are far from a panacea (I realize not everyone or even most on here are arguing this, but it is commonly treated that way in practice, for better or worse).
Now, look at the oft-touted comparison of seatbelts, and look what we get:
Seatbelts have a distinctly more noticeable, and pretty undeniable effect. I had a harder time finding motorcycle helmet uses, but they also seem to have a better reflection than bike helmets do:
Much more of what you would expect to see from what is designed, tested, and used as a life-saving device. At the very least, this should make clear that even if helmets are effective to a degree, they are not nearly as effective as is commonly believed, and are far from a panacea (I realize not everyone or even most on here are arguing this, but it is commonly treated that way in practice, for better or worse).
Short version: I think racing is likely to produce the kind of impacts against which bicycle helmets do a reasonable job, but not too likely to produce the kinds of impacts which cause serious brain injury, against which bicycle helmets aren't very useful anyway.
#5129
----
The funny/ironic/whatever bit is that if I were to get back into racing I would want to wear a helmet - I am unamused by the current state of bike handling skill among the go-fast crowd - because for me racing tilts the risk/benefit equation into the "helmet" side of things. Even knowing that a helmet is unlikely to prevent severe brain injury, I'd still prefer to have one. Of course, I recognize that my particular equation is valid (if it is valid) for no one other than me, which seems to be a key idea missing from the helmeteer's school of thought.
Short version: I think racing is likely to produce the kind of impacts against which bicycle helmets do a reasonable job, but not too likely to produce the kinds of impacts which cause serious brain injury, against which bicycle helmets aren't very useful anyway.
Short version: I think racing is likely to produce the kind of impacts against which bicycle helmets do a reasonable job, but not too likely to produce the kinds of impacts which cause serious brain injury, against which bicycle helmets aren't very useful anyway.
That makes sense.
In fact, I think that many situations the average non-racing cyclist might encounter are the kinds of situations "likely to produce the kind of impacts against which bicycle helmets do a reasonable job". Like riding on bike paths, dirt road riding, mountain bike riding, riding on residential streets with little traffic but the possibility of pedestrian collisions, getting knocked off the bike by a dog, hitting a pothole or similar road hazard.
For example, I often commute using a heavily used bike path and as "I am unamused by the current state of bike handling skill among the" go-slow crowd on the bike path I happily don a helmet as I slalom through the chaos. Once I'm on the busy streets of Manhattan mixing it up with the body crushing trucks, buses and SUV's I've opted to keep my helmet on despite my awareness that I am being better preserved by my bike handling skills and a modicum of luck. I am also mindful of the fact that the helmet may offer some reasonable protection against what ever hazards might befall me.
Last edited by buzzman; 04-27-13 at 10:48 PM.
#5130
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: AZ
Posts: 190
Bikes: 05 Specialized Roubaix Comp
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#5131
Senior Member
Thinking of safety devices and their effectiveness ... and resistance to wearing them ... and affect in injury after their use become widespread ... Anyone have data on PFD's?
"Real" paddlers and boaters used to think it was lame to wear a PFD. They'd have one in the boat to be legal. But this mentality came from when they were all big and orange. They really could NOT be worn and still let you function normally.
In past 20 years, maybe even 15 years, PFDs have turned into an industry just like bike helmets. Now they are expensive "garments." I could see some sectors whining even harder about them now. "...And they're expensive! They're a part of fashion, no less!" But the big thing is that now they're high-tech. The makers would argue that they work wonderfully now. I'm inclined to agree. They usually have pockets for other essential safety gear or even extra goodies. They do not interfere with motion! They are light! They often include safety coloration and reflection. Dang, they're even handy! They're not ugly! They are designed for every duty area (some are camo, say, for hunters). I'd think that their use has skyrocketed. They also seem to be CLEARLY the best way to prevent drowning BY FAR. Also, today much more is known and publicized about drowning (no struggle, etc.). So what do the stats reveal? I'm hoping good news! But I could see stubbornness in statistical response here in maybe a way that relates to stubbornness of response in bike safety. That might relate to the possibility that nearly all adult accidents relate to idiocy and alcohol. These would tend to be VERY hard goalposts to move. : ) Personally, I just don't have enough nice PFDs in my house to go around or we'd all wear em all the time. As it is, I give em to my kids first. I still won't wear an orange blocky one. But they're still in the boats. The only downside I see is coolness but they're so minimal today that this is almost resolved. As regards coolness of fashion, I think they're neat enough that teens would wear 'em. The disincentive is gone now except for the expense. Anyway, seems like perhaps parallels and mutual lessons here with helmets. Indeed, I'd think PFDs might be proven to be sizably MORE effective. Not sure if there are any naysayers.
"Real" paddlers and boaters used to think it was lame to wear a PFD. They'd have one in the boat to be legal. But this mentality came from when they were all big and orange. They really could NOT be worn and still let you function normally.
In past 20 years, maybe even 15 years, PFDs have turned into an industry just like bike helmets. Now they are expensive "garments." I could see some sectors whining even harder about them now. "...And they're expensive! They're a part of fashion, no less!" But the big thing is that now they're high-tech. The makers would argue that they work wonderfully now. I'm inclined to agree. They usually have pockets for other essential safety gear or even extra goodies. They do not interfere with motion! They are light! They often include safety coloration and reflection. Dang, they're even handy! They're not ugly! They are designed for every duty area (some are camo, say, for hunters). I'd think that their use has skyrocketed. They also seem to be CLEARLY the best way to prevent drowning BY FAR. Also, today much more is known and publicized about drowning (no struggle, etc.). So what do the stats reveal? I'm hoping good news! But I could see stubbornness in statistical response here in maybe a way that relates to stubbornness of response in bike safety. That might relate to the possibility that nearly all adult accidents relate to idiocy and alcohol. These would tend to be VERY hard goalposts to move. : ) Personally, I just don't have enough nice PFDs in my house to go around or we'd all wear em all the time. As it is, I give em to my kids first. I still won't wear an orange blocky one. But they're still in the boats. The only downside I see is coolness but they're so minimal today that this is almost resolved. As regards coolness of fashion, I think they're neat enough that teens would wear 'em. The disincentive is gone now except for the expense. Anyway, seems like perhaps parallels and mutual lessons here with helmets. Indeed, I'd think PFDs might be proven to be sizably MORE effective. Not sure if there are any naysayers.
#5132
Senior Member
PFDs are probably the same as helmets, if you wear them they can/do help but probably not as much as most people may think... Your survival in the water is effected by many other things, like is it a calm lake or a stormy sea, how good a swimmer you are, sharks, water temps, currents, waves...
#5133
Senior Member
PFDs are probably the same as helmets, if you wear them they can/do help but probably not as much as most people may think... Your survival in the water is effected by many other things, like is it a calm lake or a stormy sea, how good a swimmer you are, sharks, water temps, currents, waves...
#5134
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
That makes sense.
In fact, I think that many situations the average non-racing cyclist might encounter are the kinds of situations "likely to produce the kind of impacts against which bicycle helmets do a reasonable job". Like riding on bike paths, dirt road riding, mountain bike riding, riding on residential streets with little traffic but the possibility of pedestrian collisions, getting knocked off the bike by a dog, hitting a pothole or similar road hazard.
#5135
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
Thinking of safety devices and their effectiveness ... and resistance to wearing them ... and affect in injury after their use become widespread ... Anyone have data on PFD's?
"Real" paddlers and boaters used to think it was lame to wear a PFD. They'd have one in the boat to be legal. But this mentality came from when they were all big and orange. They really could NOT be worn and still let you function normally.
In past 20 years, maybe even 15 years, PFDs have turned into an industry just like bike helmets. Now they are expensive "garments." I could see some sectors whining even harder about them now. "...And they're expensive! They're a part of fashion, no less!" But the big thing is that now they're high-tech. The makers would argue that they work wonderfully now. I'm inclined to agree. They usually have pockets for other essential safety gear or even extra goodies. They do not interfere with motion! They are light! They often include safety coloration and reflection. Dang, they're even handy! They're not ugly! They are designed for every duty area (some are camo, say, for hunters). I'd think that their use has skyrocketed. They also seem to be CLEARLY the best way to prevent drowning BY FAR. Also, today much more is known and publicized about drowning (no struggle, etc.). So what do the stats reveal? I'm hoping good news! But I could see stubbornness in statistical response here in maybe a way that relates to stubbornness of response in bike safety. That might relate to the possibility that nearly all adult accidents relate to idiocy and alcohol. These would tend to be VERY hard goalposts to move. : ) Personally, I just don't have enough nice PFDs in my house to go around or we'd all wear em all the time. As it is, I give em to my kids first. I still won't wear an orange blocky one. But they're still in the boats. The only downside I see is coolness but they're so minimal today that this is almost resolved. As regards coolness of fashion, I think they're neat enough that teens would wear 'em. The disincentive is gone now except for the expense. Anyway, seems like perhaps parallels and mutual lessons here with helmets. Indeed, I'd think PFDs might be proven to be sizably MORE effective. Not sure if there are any naysayers.
"Real" paddlers and boaters used to think it was lame to wear a PFD. They'd have one in the boat to be legal. But this mentality came from when they were all big and orange. They really could NOT be worn and still let you function normally.
In past 20 years, maybe even 15 years, PFDs have turned into an industry just like bike helmets. Now they are expensive "garments." I could see some sectors whining even harder about them now. "...And they're expensive! They're a part of fashion, no less!" But the big thing is that now they're high-tech. The makers would argue that they work wonderfully now. I'm inclined to agree. They usually have pockets for other essential safety gear or even extra goodies. They do not interfere with motion! They are light! They often include safety coloration and reflection. Dang, they're even handy! They're not ugly! They are designed for every duty area (some are camo, say, for hunters). I'd think that their use has skyrocketed. They also seem to be CLEARLY the best way to prevent drowning BY FAR. Also, today much more is known and publicized about drowning (no struggle, etc.). So what do the stats reveal? I'm hoping good news! But I could see stubbornness in statistical response here in maybe a way that relates to stubbornness of response in bike safety. That might relate to the possibility that nearly all adult accidents relate to idiocy and alcohol. These would tend to be VERY hard goalposts to move. : ) Personally, I just don't have enough nice PFDs in my house to go around or we'd all wear em all the time. As it is, I give em to my kids first. I still won't wear an orange blocky one. But they're still in the boats. The only downside I see is coolness but they're so minimal today that this is almost resolved. As regards coolness of fashion, I think they're neat enough that teens would wear 'em. The disincentive is gone now except for the expense. Anyway, seems like perhaps parallels and mutual lessons here with helmets. Indeed, I'd think PFDs might be proven to be sizably MORE effective. Not sure if there are any naysayers.
#5136
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 1,832
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
While I don't completely agree that helmets seem to cause more neck injuries, we could shift the goalposts to analyzing if they "even out the advantage".
In AUS vs NED study, AUS group had 3.5 times the chance to survive with only mild or non-existant "head and neck" injury, and the amount of severe "head and neck" injury was half of the NED group. Also, as mentioned, in AUS there's a very small percentage of neck injuries - head injuries are 7 times as common and severe head injuries are 14 times as common. In these studies, about 75% of aussie cyclists use helmets, when practically no NED cyclist does.
So I would say that the case for neck injuries is same as for brain rotational injuries - if there is an effect that increases rotational injuries, it doesn't seem to be big and the net effect is that you're a lot better off with a helmet.
In AUS vs NED study, AUS group had 3.5 times the chance to survive with only mild or non-existant "head and neck" injury, and the amount of severe "head and neck" injury was half of the NED group. Also, as mentioned, in AUS there's a very small percentage of neck injuries - head injuries are 7 times as common and severe head injuries are 14 times as common. In these studies, about 75% of aussie cyclists use helmets, when practically no NED cyclist does.
So I would say that the case for neck injuries is same as for brain rotational injuries - if there is an effect that increases rotational injuries, it doesn't seem to be big and the net effect is that you're a lot better off with a helmet.
#5137
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 1,832
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Maybe. But again, the key is that the decision should be left up to the individual. I'm not qualified to judge what an "average" rider might be and I don't think anyone else is either. So if Joe Cyclist feels the risk of riding in the situations you mention justifies the benefit of the helmet (and, hopefully, understands the limitations of the helmet) then more power to him. I just hope he keeps his mouth shut about it when other people come to different conclusions.
#5138
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Finland
Posts: 93
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm not sure if a helmet campaign is a horror campaign, any more than a seatbelt campaign is. Of course it depends how realistically the campaign is presented - if it's one of those "don't inject cannabis or you'll get AIDS!" campaigns, then it's maybe not very good
Last edited by proileri; 04-28-13 at 05:23 PM.
#5139
Senior Member
Have you ever ridden a bicycle in N America? I'm fairly sure there's a difference as compared to riding a bike in Copenhagen. JMO But I suspect that dealing with N American drivers/vehicle traffic is a bit more hazardous than dealing with traffic in European countries. again JMO...
#5140
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
Have you ever ridden a bicycle in N America? I'm fairly sure there's a difference as compared to riding a bike in Copenhagen. JMO But I suspect that dealing with N American drivers/vehicle traffic is a bit more hazardous than dealing with traffic in European countries. again JMO...
#5141
Senior Member
PFDs are probably the same as helmets, if you wear them they can/do help but probably not as much as most people may think... Your survival in the water is effected by many other things, like is it a calm lake or a stormy sea, how good a swimmer you are, sharks, water temps, currents, waves...
They kill kill like 5 people per year in the whole world.
Over the hills and far away off topic but I mean, sharks!
#5142
Senior Member
I tried to keep on topic (at least in my mind ) by equating different thing that happen when you fall in the water and why you could have fallen into the water, sharks=vehicles that buzz you, knowing how to swim=knowing how to ride, calm lake= a nice beachfront ride, stormy seas=riding in major traffic, water temps=winter riding in snow, currents=downtown riding, waves=big gusty winds...
#5143
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,259
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4245 Post(s)
Liked 1,350 Times
in
936 Posts
In fact, "rotational effects" have not been shown to have contribution to the overal statistics. In fact, it's mere speculation/hypothetical.
#5144
Senior Member
Wut?!? Most helmets are not designed to deal with severe head/brain injuries, and studies back that up. The figures you posted previously support this, where the lighter the injury, the better a job a helmet did with injury mitigation. As injury severity ratchets up, the difference between those riding without helmets and those riding with gets much less in a hurry.
#5145
Banned.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Have you ever ridden a bicycle in N America? I'm fairly sure there's a difference as compared to riding a bike in Copenhagen. JMO But I suspect that dealing with N American drivers/vehicle traffic is a bit more hazardous than dealing with traffic in European countries. again JMO...
#5146
Senior Member
But you're right: you probably don't get people angrily shouting at you to wear them or neglecting usual manners to harp on it. But if you were paddling down a rapids and quickly passed someone and they saw you didn't have one on they might loudly try to alert you. Heck, maybe you did just forget and it's in the bottom of your boat. It would be a pretty good reason to eddy-out.
I'm still curious about their effect.
Maybe it's also a bit like helmets and alpine skiers -- especially out in an icy mogul field, say. It seems like "serious" skiers are totally game for helmets. Doubt there's rudeness about it, but, again, a friend might remind or ask -- and maybe you do have one in your pack and forgot to put it on after a snack stop.
Funny thing to me about bike helmets is that I hardly mind wearing mine in a store nowadays. Their appearance is often totally benign. And if you're out riding a bike there's no social penalty for looking like a biker. Some helmets DO look weird, tho, as does much bike apparel.
#5147
Senior Member
It does seem like the heated aspect of the issue revolves mostly around the rudeness people hassling others to wear a helmet.
The educational and legislative thrusts seem somewhat different and are part of "pro and con" causes. I suppose the heat still comes from those who want to force others to wear helmets. Some folks may not yell at others but if they cause an institution to require all riders associated with it to wear helmets then it's a move to control.
The educational and legislative thrusts seem somewhat different and are part of "pro and con" causes. I suppose the heat still comes from those who want to force others to wear helmets. Some folks may not yell at others but if they cause an institution to require all riders associated with it to wear helmets then it's a move to control.
#5148
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 1,832
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Have you ever ridden a bicycle in N America? I'm fairly sure there's a difference as compared to riding a bike in Copenhagen. JMO But I suspect that dealing with N American drivers/vehicle traffic is a bit more hazardous than dealing with traffic in European countries. again JMO...
What's relevant to the thread is that helmets will probably only be really helpfull at relatively slow speed impacts. Only in rare cases will they save your life. (But we've been over that issue ad nauseam) Again and again I've been told that American cyclists ride very fast compared to Europeans. (on average, it's true, I'm sure)
Well, all in all: what's the point, then, in those campaigns?
#5149
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 1,832
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
"The risk of neck injury does not seem to be reduced by bicycle helmets. There are only four estimates of effect, but they all indicate an increased risk of injury. When the risk of injury to head, face or neck is viewed as a whole, bicycle helmets do provide a small protective effect. This effect is evident only in older studies. New studies, summarised by a random-effects model of analysis, indicate no net protective effect."