Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

The helmet thread

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.
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

Old 03-18-13, 02:50 PM
  #4851  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,012

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,568 Times in 1,062 Posts
Originally Posted by mconlonx
USA CPSC standard (I've not read it. If you're looking for some kind of "gotcha!" scenario, here's your chance...)
The "gotcha!" scenario is simple; there is nothing in the "certification" standard that refers to what effectiveness the "certified" helmet might have for specifically reducing bicyclist risk or head injuries; or how passing the tests in any way "certifies" bicyclist protection with "less than serious head injuries, direct impact"; or why a certified helmet is more effective at reducing cyclist risk than a non certified helmet.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 02:51 PM
  #4852  
cowboy, steel horse, etc
 
LesterOfPuppets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 45,096

Bikes: everywhere

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12928 Post(s)
Liked 7,843 Times in 4,167 Posts
I crashed my bike again today. No helmet, didnt get hospitalized, won't be recorded by
statisticians.
LesterOfPuppets is online now  
Old 03-18-13, 02:53 PM
  #4853  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,012

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,568 Times in 1,062 Posts
Originally Posted by Brennan
Yeah, it took me this long to finally watch it (it's streaming on Netflix). Laserdisc, yes! The original videophile format.
Ya mean the bulky and heavy Laser Disk players and disks? The DVD format is better in every way. I have both but only use the Laser Disk player for the few titles that I own but haven't been able to easily find on DVD.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 03:23 PM
  #4854  
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
Where there has been opposition (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec) the proposed legislation was defeated.
I don't disagree with everything else you said, either. A judge who will not consider studies which run counter to their wishes is a poor, ignorant judge.

What I quoted above, though, is the most important part of your post and something I've advocated for in the past. Show up to public hearings and argue your point. Write to officials. It does not have to be an organization; it could be just individuals. If you feel the need to have an organization, create one and recruit.

Too many times MHLs pass because there is no, zero, none, no-one showing up to oppose them when they have the opportunity to do so.
mconlonx is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 03:24 PM
  #4855  
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
Well, that would be in any store that sells bicycle helmets.

The director of Europes largest test facility for all helmets has written, The tests cycle helmets go through mean they could offer similar protection to pedestrians who trip and fall to the ground
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
The "gotcha!" scenario is simple; there is nothing in the "certification" standard that refers to what effectiveness the "certified" helmet might have for specifically reducing bicyclist risk or head injuries; or how passing the tests in any way "certifies" bicyclist protection with "less than serious head injuries, direct impact"; or why a certified helmet is more effective at reducing cyclist risk than a non certified helmet.
Which is it, guys...? Can't have it both ways.
mconlonx is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 03:24 PM
  #4856  
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
The "gotcha!" scenario is simple; there is nothing in the "certification" standard that refers to what effectiveness the "certified" helmet might have for specifically reducing bicyclist risk or head injuries; or how passing the tests in any way "certifies" bicyclist protection with "less than serious head injuries, direct impact"; or why a certified helmet is more effective at reducing cyclist risk than a non certified helmet.
You read it? Did you check out the Common European standards as well?
mconlonx is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 04:04 PM
  #4857  
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 25 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by mconlonx
Which is it, guys...? Can't have it both ways.
Actually, you can. No substantiated reduction in injury that can be accredited to helmet use is very similar to nothing in the certification standard that refers to what effectiveness the certified helmet might have, except of course for the money made by selling the gullible what they don't need.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 05:23 PM
  #4858  
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
Originally Posted by rydabent
six

Are you saying that people in 1885 were stupid for not driving places in a car? Good helmets were not generally available before approx 1980.
Substantial bicycle helmets have been in use by motorpaced racers for at least 100 years. And relatively light "beanie" motorcycle helmets have been available for many decades as well. IOW, protection has always been available; but few saw the need for it.
Six jours is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 05:35 PM
  #4859  
Senior Member
 
Brennan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 697

Bikes: Surly X√, Trek Earl

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Ya mean the bulky and heavy Laser Disk players and disks? The DVD format is better in every way.
Indeed. But in its day, the playback quality of laserdiscs was vastly superior to the predominant VHS format, which was truly craptastic. Even DVDs are a bit of an anachronism these days. Just indulging in a bit of nostalgia, like the pre-BMX bikes in the video with the ape hangers and banana seats.

Last edited by Brennan; 03-18-13 at 05:41 PM.
Brennan is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 07:28 PM
  #4860  
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
The "gotcha!" scenario is simple; there is nothing in the "certification" standard that refers to what effectiveness the "certified" helmet might have for specifically reducing bicyclist risk or head injuries; or how passing the tests in any way "certifies" bicyclist protection with "less than serious head injuries, direct impact"; or why a certified helmet is more effective at reducing cyclist risk than a non certified helmet.
Huh. Well. If you trust that impact attenuation testing is relevant to potential head injury, then certification indicates some kind of minimum protection standard.

The standard doesn't claim or try to prove that helmets reduce risk. Not the point, not within the scope of the standard, unsure why you bring it up.

The certification indicates that the helmet passed the impact test. Again, assuming as above that the impact test has some relevance to injury mitigation, it offers cyclists some minimum standard of protection in the unlikely event of a crash involving potential bead injury.

"Less than serious head injury..." because I accept findings of studies showing no real change in serious head injury rates where helmets are required; figures indicating that forces which usually result in serious head injury far exceed the minimum standards; but since there are no studies regarding less than serious head injuries, which might include impacts of such force where standards testing indicates effectiveness, there's no indication they don't work to minimum standards.

"...direct impact." because that's the physics of the test.

Non-certified helmets may indeed provide better protection. A motorcycle helmet comes to mind... More to the point, the POC Backcountry MIPS. But the test is a minimum standard, no telling how many helmets far exceed the standards.

I'm more concerned about two other aspects of the CPSC doc:

- Bicycle helmets are defined by how they're marketed. Wuuuuuuuuut?!?

- Manufacturers certify that their helmets meet CSPC requirements. That just doesn't seem right, a stone's throw away from self-policing.

-but-

No mention of abrasion and laceration protective capabilities. Are such protective characteristics attributed to helmets in dispute?

Last edited by mconlonx; 03-18-13 at 07:32 PM.
mconlonx is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 08:16 PM
  #4861  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,849

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1024 Post(s)
Liked 57 Times in 49 Posts
The "problem" here is "minimum" standards, as I see it... JMO. Just because a helmet and helmet standards was/were designed to meed "minimum" standards to keeping heads/brains in working order at say... 20MPH impact (a made up number) ... It doesn't mean it's useless at 20 MPH or less or even a bit faster. So if it's not capable at keeping the brain case/and brain safe above 20 MPH + it doesn't mean the helmet is completely useless for the average bicycler falling and hitting their head on the pavement when they crash... JMO as I see it.

Last edited by 350htrr; 03-18-13 at 08:35 PM.
350htrr is offline  
Old 03-18-13, 09:27 PM
  #4862  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,012

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,568 Times in 1,062 Posts
Originally Posted by mconlonx
The standard doesn't claim or try to prove that helmets reduce risk. Not the point, not within the scope of the standard, unsure why you bring it up.

The certification indicates that the helmet passed the impact test. Again, assuming as above that the impact test has some relevance to injury mitigation, it offers cyclists some minimum standard of protection in the unlikely event of a crash involving potential bead injury.
The reason is that you have posted more than once that the reason bicycle helmets make sense for bicycling is because they are "certified" for that activity, while the same helmets do not make sense for other activities such as walking, skiing, ice skating, because they are not "certified" for those activities.

The impact attenuation is the same for all the activities; the "certification" provides no more assurance of risk reduction for bicyclists than it does for any other relatively low speed activity. The bicycle helmet is just as worthwhile, or just as worthless for risk reduction for all these activities.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 10:45 AM
  #4863  
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
The reason is that you have posted more than once that the reason bicycle helmets make sense for bicycling is because they are "certified" for that activity, while the same helmets do not make sense for other activities such as walking, skiing, ice skating, because they are not "certified" for those activities.

The impact attenuation is the same for all the activities; the "certification" provides no more assurance of risk reduction for bicyclists than it does for any other relatively low speed activity. The bicycle helmet is just as worthwhile, or just as worthless for risk reduction for all these activities.
Pedantry: Ah, but the standard is for helmets marketed as "bicycle helmets." Is there a certification standard for "walking helmets"? It might be exactly the same test, and after looking the impact attenuation test requirements over, they might actually be more appropriate for such a classification.

You can wear a bicycle helmet for any of those other activities, but they are only certified regarding their marketed use, in this case bicycling.
mconlonx is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 11:11 AM
  #4864  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,849

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1024 Post(s)
Liked 57 Times in 49 Posts
My son just got a $30 ticket for not wearing a helmet and a $100 ticket for no lights... He bought a light, but still won't wear a helmet.
350htrr is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 11:36 AM
  #4865  
Bicikli Huszár
 
sudo bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,116

Bikes: '95 Novara Randonee

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mconlonx
Let me know where to pick up a helmet certified regarding walking falls which result in head-strikes and I will consider it...

Looks like you haven't been alpine skiing or skateboarding lately. Plenty of people wearing helmets for both these activities, out of choice.
Actually, now that I think about it, I've never seen a skateboarder not doing tricks wearing a helmet. This area of town is fairly walkable, plus I'm on campus a lot, so I see a lot of skateboarders (and longboarders) that are mostly just going from place to place. I never thought about it until now... the only time I see lids is when I pass the skatepark.

Same goes for skiing actually, though I've only been a few times. Unless it was a particularly difficult slope (I'd imagine... never been on one myself ), I didn't see any helmets. Only a lot of stocking caps.

I don't know if that really means anything, but it just crossed my mind and I thought it was interesting.

Last edited by sudo bike; 03-19-13 at 11:41 AM.
sudo bike is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 12:55 PM
  #4866  
Senior Member
 
rekmeyata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NE Indiana
Posts: 8,690

Bikes: 2020 Masi Giramondo 700c; 2013 Lynskey Peloton; 1992 Giant Rincon; 1989 Dawes needs parts; 1985 Trek 660; 1985 Fuji Club; 1984 Schwinn Voyager; 1984 Miyata 612; 1977 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1128 Post(s)
Liked 257 Times in 207 Posts
I've seen mental patients wearing a bicycle helmet walking around due to something is wrong with the skull and could kill them should something hit them.
rekmeyata is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 02:23 PM
  #4867  
Transportation Cyclist
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Here are the things that have gotten me to my seventh decade of relying on a bicycle as my primary means of transportation:
  • Be predictable. Follow the rules of the road. Hold a steady line. Position yourself according to destination at intersections. Communicate your intentions to other drivers.
  • Be visible. Not just passive visibility (lights/reflectors/hi-viz clothing/etc.) but also active visibility, positioning yourself on the road so that you appear on other drivers’ radar. Be where they’re looking.
  • Be vigilant. Leave the earbuds at home and use all your senses to continuously keep track of what’s going on around you in all directions. A cyclist has too much skin in the game to be an obliviot.
  • Be defensive. Assume other drivers won’t do what they SHOULD do but will do what they COULD do, and know what your evasive action is before you need it. Allow some space between you and the edge of the road. Expect the doors of parked cars to open. Accept 100% ownership for your own survival, no matter who screws up.
  • Be courteous. Take the lane when safety demands, but don’t be a self-centered ass about it when it doesn’t.

Wear the Styrofoam hat if it if you must. But just remember that the most important piece of safety gear you own is the one you carry around between your ears.

Last edited by High Roller; 03-20-13 at 05:51 AM.
High Roller is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 02:28 PM
  #4868  
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
Originally Posted by High Roller
Here are the things that have gotten me to my seventh decade of relying on a bicycle as my primary means of transportation:
  • Be predictable. Follow the rules of the road. Hold a steady line. Position yourself according to destination at intersections. Communicate your intentions to other drivers.
  • Be visible. Not just passive visibility (lights/reflectors/hi-viz clothing/etc.) but also active visibility, positioning yourself on the road so that you appear on other drivers’ radar. Be where they’re looking.
  • Be vigilant. Leave the ear pods at home and use all your senses to continuously keep track of what’s going on around you in all directions. A cyclist has too much skin in the game to be an obliviot.
  • Be defensive. Assume other drivers won’t do what they SHOULD do but will do what they COULD do, and know what your evasive action is before you need it. Allow some space between you and the edge of the road. Expect the doors of parked cars to open. Accept 100% ownership for your own survival, no matter who screws up.
  • Be courteous. Take the lane when safety demands, but don’t be a self-centered ass about it when it doesn’t.

Wear the Styrofoam hat if it if you must. But just remember that the most important piece of safety gear you own is the one you carry around between your ears.
Welcome.
chasm54 is offline  
Old 03-19-13, 02:52 PM
  #4869  
Senior Member
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,558
Mentioned: 47 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7148 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 92 Posts
Originally Posted by High Roller
Here are the things that have gotten me to my seventh decade of relying on a bicycle as my primary means of transportation:
  • Be predictable. Follow the rules of the road. Hold a steady line. Position yourself according to destination at intersections. Communicate your intentions to other drivers.
  • Be visible. Not just passive visibility (lights/reflectors/hi-viz clothing/etc.) but also active visibility, positioning yourself on the road so that you appear on other drivers’ radar. Be where they’re looking.
  • Be vigilant. Leave the ear pods at home and use all your senses to continuously keep track of what’s going on around you in all directions. A cyclist has too much skin in the game to be an obliviot.
  • Be defensive. Assume other drivers won’t do what they SHOULD do but will do what they COULD do, and know what your evasive action is before you need it. Allow some space between you and the edge of the road. Expect the doors of parked cars to open. Accept 100% ownership for your own survival, no matter who screws up.
  • Be courteous. Take the lane when safety demands, but don’t be a self-centered ass about it when it doesn’t.

Wear the Styrofoam hat if it if you must. But just remember that the most important piece of safety gear you own is the one you carry around between your ears.
Ride a lot. In all conditions. Experienced riders are safer riders.
mconlonx is offline  
Old 03-21-13, 07:21 AM
  #4870  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times in 635 Posts
350htrr

See-------------it is just as I said. B'crats dont give a damn about safety they just pass ignorant MHLs to collect money for them to blow.
rydabent is offline  
Old 03-21-13, 07:24 AM
  #4871  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times in 635 Posts
With all these posts pro and con, the simple fact remains---------If a helmet prevents even the slightest injury it is a good thing. It is really kind of dumb to argue against that fact.
rydabent is offline  
Old 03-21-13, 08:37 AM
  #4872  
cowboy, steel horse, etc
 
LesterOfPuppets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 45,096

Bikes: everywhere

Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12928 Post(s)
Liked 7,843 Times in 4,167 Posts
Yep. Helmets for everyone, 24/7. It's only sensible.
LesterOfPuppets is online now  
Old 03-21-13, 09:01 AM
  #4873  
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 30,012

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,568 Times in 1,062 Posts
Originally Posted by LesterOfPuppets
Yep. Helmets for everyone, 24/7. It's only sensible.
Of course, "it is a good thing"! "There is always the slightest possibility that such action might prevent the slightest injury", sometime, somewhere; maybe.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 03-21-13, 02:56 PM
  #4874  
Senior Member
 
curbtender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SF Bay Area, East bay
Posts: 7,736

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: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1628 Post(s)
Liked 2,708 Times in 1,261 Posts
I've got a choice to wear a tight short brim Cinelli hat or my helmet. I'm riding through a congested city area then out to some nice country roads. I like the hat and the helmet doesn't hinder my riding. I'm one who's benefited from a helmet, backpack, long pants accident in a comute situation. Sometimes I'm more worried about losing skin then breaking a skull.
curbtender is offline  
Old 03-21-13, 03:22 PM
  #4875  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,849

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1024 Post(s)
Liked 57 Times in 49 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent
350htrr

See-------------it is just as I said. B'crats dont give a damn about safety they just pass ignorant MHLs to collect money for them to blow.
Yea, This particular tax collector with a gun didn't like my sons "attitude" about the $30 non-helmet ticket and told him he was being "difficult", so then she proceeded to give him the $100 no-light ticket... It seems that being pro non-helmet can have a price other than a lump on the head or other hurts...
350htrr is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.