I-Like-To-Bike

I am well aware of the incorrect assumptions about helmets' place in cycling risk reduction and "incorrect" reasons for wearing a helmet.

What did you decide are the "correct" reasons for wearing your helmet?

MMACH 5

Wow! I don't think we're actually debating here and if we are, I don't think we're on opposing sides of an issue. I am, however reminded of my advanced writing class, in high school and the berating we would get from our teacher for missed punctuation and typos.

I'm going to try to reconstruct how we ended up here:
This lead to rek's reply:
And mconlonx's reply:
And rek:
And mconlonx:
In an effort to clarify rek's point for mconlonx, I then offered:
I think mconlonx understood my point and replied, (apparently in too sarcastic a tone for your taste):
And then we devolved into your critique of my writing skills. So, let me try and explain your most recent questions.

In comparing helmets to seatbelts, their effectiveness to prevent injury is diverse enough that this is not a fair or competent comparison. The "very specific situation" that they are similar and makes comparing them reasonable is that neither one effects how the wearer operates their equipment.

By lumping helmet use into the list of top 10 things that keep cycling safe, Chris Boardman did.

Then you jumped back several posts to me stating:
"They are all there to reduce injury when something goes wrong. Whether they are effective is irrelevant."
I won't disagree that I wasn't as clear as I would have liked. However, you followed that with my clarification from a newer post, so I know you saw me explain what I meant by "effective" and that being effective in protecting the wearer.

Again, the "specific situation" is their not effecting safe user operation. Rather than the situation of protecting the wearer.

Thank you Mrs. Schliemer. I'll try to be less vague in the future.
But, again, the Boardman story we were discussing did lump helmets into a list of top 10 things that keep cycling safe.

I'll reiterate here, I don't think we had a debate about anything here, but, holy hell, I'm tired now.

3alarmer 

...you had Mrs Schliemer in high school, too ? Wow, small world.

mconlonx

In a bicycle crash which results in headstrike, possible injury mitigation in cases where less than serious head injury would have been sustained or might still be sustained.

Before helmet thread, I never would have included so many qualifications...

Also, helmets are way cool and I am happy to have a socially acceptable reason to wear one in public.

njkayaker

He didn't quite do that. He said it "wasn't even in the top 10" (and 9 of the top 10 is apparently some sort of secret).

And "safe" here doesn't mean just "safe user operation".

Many of the secret "top 10" don't actually pertain to "user operation" (what the user does) directly. So, that isn't the "specific situation" at all.

A bicycle side path doesn't "effect user operation". (It's affect, anyway.) The direct purpose of a bike path is to "protect" the cyclist from cars.

3alarmer 

mconlonx

Indeed.

MMACH 5

Haha! I was afraid I'd mess that one up, at some point. (I think I used "affect" correctly in an earlier post.)

And, yes, I'm choosing to ignore the rest of our ramblings. I realize this will affect my final grade, Mrs. Schleimer.

I-Like-To-Bike

If you are in accident, and if you strike your head in that accident, the helmet might reduce a less than serious injury to even a lesser injury. Got it.

Your second reason is almost as good a reason to wear a helmet as your first from a risk reduction standpoint.

Six jours

If there is a lesson to be taken from the helmet thread (other than the obvious one about wrestling in the mud with pigs) it's that helmets do not make you safe. Helmets can mitigate minor to moderate injuries in certain kinds of crashes, and almost certainly do save lives in rare circumstances, but if a cyclist is putting his life in serious jeopardy by riding a bicycle he really needs to evaluate the circumstances and take appropriate mitigating action.

The problem, essentially, is the modern idea that cycling is necessarily a life-threatening activity and that a bicycle helmet largely mitigates that threat. Both of those ideas are nonsense and pointing that out is a worthwhile effort.

mconlonx

Don't you hate when someone has their gig down so tight and expressed so concisely and is so essentially correct that this is the best you can do?

rydabent

3alaramer

You say you crashed and were not hurt even tho you were not wearing a helmet. Please elaborate.

Apparently you were not "riding safe" as most of the anti helmet people insist they are doing.

I still maintain that anyone anywhere anytime may be involved in an unexpected accident, and a helmet may reduce the seriousness of the accident.

njkayaker

This is BS.

mconlonx

Which helmets are most effective and why?

3alarmer 

.................#seriously

rydabent

3alarmer

Yes seriously.

njkayaker

No.

wphamilton

That's similar to one of my biggest reasons to wear one while commuting. I don't actually wear it in public (except while riding), but I carry it in with me. Being known as the bike commuter is fine with me, plus it keeps people in the office from potentially badgering me about it.

The bigger reason is that it holds my mp3 player and earbuds. Keeping the cables out of the way is a big risk reduction IMO.

3alarmer 

se·ri·ous·ly
ˈsi(ə)rēəslē/
adverb

• 1.
  in a solemn or considered manner.
  "the doctor looked seriously at him"
  [TABLE="class: vk_tbl vk_gy"]
  [TR]
  [TD="class: lr_dct_nyms_ttl"]synonyms:[/TD]
  [TD]solemnly, earnestly, gravely, soberly, somberly, sternly, grimly, dourly,humorlessly
  
  
  
  [/TD]
  [/TR]
  [/TABLE]
  
  
  
  
• 2.
  with earnest intent; not lightly or superficially.
  "I seriously considered canceling my subscription"
  
  

.....and I'm seriously considering cancelling my subscription.

curbtender

Ha, I wouldn't be caught "dead" in a helmet....

Six jours

Without posts from people like you and and Ryda, this thread would be only so much pointless noise.

Six jours

fify.

I-Like-To-Bike

Seems as legitimate a reason for wearing a bicycle helmet as most of the other oh-so-serious reasons posited by the usual suspects on this list.

mconlonx

OK, I'll start: POC Receptor Backcountry MIPS



Hard dual shell, rounded shape.
Designed anti-penetration protection.
Multiple impact EPP liner.
MIPS system, designed for oblique impact anti-rotation properties.

One of the few companies actually building helmets for safety rather than just meeting safety minimums. It is, however, hideously expensive, $250 retail.

mconlonx

(omg... )

Hmm. Very well, I hold out the olive branch of compromise:



I wear a helmet because on the off-chance that I do crash my bicycle, and in the even rarer chance that during that crash I strike my head, but only in a way which would not result in a serious head injury, it might possibly mitigate some damage which could have or could still result in a less than serious head injury, maybe.

Yep. That is seriously, technically why I wear a helmet.