Never! Sleep with it, shower with it, everything!

Or I just find my skull the most convenient and logical place to keep a helmet while I'm riding a bike. Hanging it from the bars serves no purpose and makes no sense. But that just me.

That's not really an aero helmet. Aero helmets tend to have fewer vents than that.

Aero TT helmet.

http://www.rouesartisanales.com/uplo...lzabriskie.jpg

Aero road helmet:

http://cdn.velonews.competitor.com/f...12-658x440.jpg

you guys just aren't happy about what is presented, you boo hoo blogs, you boo hoo helmet testing, you boo hoo government statistics and facts, all this boo hooing makes for a lot of cry babies here that can't accept anything being said that support helmets to even the slightest degree.

It does have a purpose, one which is very similar to the purpose of wearing one!

Look at it this way. You wear the helmet because of the potential that you might fall and hit something with your head. Really, no other purpose than that, right? I know that I'm stating the obvious, but bear with me. You wear the hat for the potential of the hit.

Now hanging it on the bars, there is still the same potential - or probability (P)- that you'll fall and hit your head. It's on the bars because sometimes you'll wear it, and sometimes you'll have it off. Otherwise you'd just leave it at home. That's another potential, or probability (W) that you'll have it on. You have the same potential (P) of hitting your head either way. So what's the difference, since either way there is a potential of falling with your helmet on and an associated probability. They are both there for the potential of the hit. The only difference is in the second case the potential is P*W and in the first case it's just P. The chances of hitting your head without a helmet is of course (1-W)*P

The decision governing our choice of (W) depends largely on the size of P. If P is large, and if the severity of the event is subjectively significant, then naturally you want W to be large, close to 1. In other words, wearing it most of the time. But if P is actually a very small value, then any probability times P is also a small value so it wouldn't make much difference how large or small W is. Because (1-W)*P, the chances you'll hit without the helmet, will also be very small. It still represents a potential for when you might need it, just like wearing it, but a small probability in either case means a small difference in how safe you actually are.

Anyhow, that's the purpose of hanging it on the bars. The same as actually wearing it, but one conditional probability away from it.

No I object to opinions being presented as facts, which they may or may not be true. I have said it before, I sometimes wear a helmet sometimes not. But my chance of being protected by one is less then my chance of being in a head striking accident, which is quite small.
I also object to being grouped in some vague "you guys boo-hooing crybabies" demographic, but thats about par for your intellectual abilities.

I think the cause of most angst on this thread is the difficulty in making the distinction between:

"A helmet lessens the severity of a head injury in a crash where I hit my head",

and

"I am probably never going to hit my head falling off of my bicycle".

Obviously a helmet is just dead weight (or perhaps a shade-providing hat with a chin strap) that will have absolutely no health benefits for a cyclist who never hits their head. Even the pros who crash all the time wouldn't wear helmets without the race sanctions. So it becomes a dead horse trying to sell helmet safety to people who are never going to hit their heads.

wow.... so many words, but still doesn't apply. I know people ride with helmets on their bars, I don't get it. I have a helmet with me, and it is designed to conveniently mount to my head, so that is where mine helmet goes. I do use my bars to hold my helmet when I'm at the bar holding a beer.... but that a whole different story.

The chance that I fall and hit my head are small, I get that. But the chance that I will crash my car are small, yet, I won't drive without a seat belt. Moreover, falling and breaking my arm would suck, but it will heal readily from most injuries. However, if you have ever known a person to go through a TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury), you would take every opportunity to minimize your chances of ending up there, even if it is a minor risk.

I have never hit my head falling off my bike. However, I ride on roads with cars and there are too many variables beyond my control to assume I will never have a collision and hit my head (also reference TBI comment above).

And what's with the weight-weenie attitude? Honestly, none of my bikes are ultra-light carbon and I normally ride with a Chrome bag on my back, etc. So a 290 gr helmet is really that big of deal? You're talking about roughly .3% of the total weight of my daily commuting set-up (and I'm a light-weight).

BTW - pros wear helmets on training rides too, but that's likely because the helmet companies are paying them as sponsors.

I always end these post by sayin' "your head, your choice". I've simply never heard a solid reason to go without a helmet; the risk (TBI) seriously overshadow any benefit.

No, I just take issue with the fact that you completely misrepresented the article, which is typical of your posts.

I miss the old helmet thread title. "Helmets cramp my Style."

In fewer words then, it's there for when you potentially need it. Just like it's on your head for when you potentially need it. Not that much difference between the two.

So, given that your chances of suffering TBI during a car accident are roughly the same as suffering TBI during a bike accident* then do you wear your bicycle helmet every time you drive? Or, like most reasonable people, do you judge that risk to be too small for the precaution?

*I cited the source somewhere back in the thread.

I've seen these stats; and like most stats, it doesn't tell the whole story. Just like anti-helmet people say ER stats are not good stats to judge the effectiveness of a bike helmet. The car stats aren't telling the whole story either. Head injuries in cars typically occur when the head impacts the door frame or window in a side-impact. However, my cars (& most new cars) come with side curtain airbags for just this reason. Therefore, with a seat belt and side-impact airbags, I feel I have my bases covered. (I spent 10 years working with auto safety engineers - I'm not one myself, but I learned A TON).

Mind you I hit my head in my house - low ceiling on my basement stair, knocked me to my knees last month (again). Or my brother got a concussion in his office, hitting his head on a shelf. So to your point, we should wear a helmet 24/7/365. But that's taking things to the extreme ... and well, that's signals a poor argument in my mind.

I know it must be in this thread somewhere... but I'm not planning to dig through 347 pages to find it: speaking of airbags, Hövding ? Airbag for cyclists

Bolding added.

That's how I see it. If the chances of injury are very small, regardless of the activity, then the precaution is taking things to the extreme. And I agree, just citing the severity of a potential injury signals a poor argument.

I'll emphasize that I'm just talking abstractly here. I don't care whether you, or any adult, wears a helmet or not. I don't even care much whether *I* wear a helmet. In this crowd, I tend to get heated attacks from people who are actively opposed to wearing helmets, even when I'm mostly agreeing with some of their conclusions. I don't know why that is.

You and I seem to be pretty damn close in our point of view. I really have an issue with the people that want everyone to wear helmets (by law) and those that cannot understand any value in helmets at all. Between these two extremes, there is a large spectrum of very good/dependable perspectives. The debate is always good, really helps push me to think about an issue from all angles and challenge 'facts'.

Dang it hypno and hamilton, thats two posts in a row I agree with, and in the helmet thread none the less. I might add one thing I find particularly annoying, is those that claim they are against mandatory helmet laws, then go on to call those that choose not to wear helmets stupid.

But back to my reason for the post, if I find too much agreeable I will have to stop reading the hemet forum. Now get back to it!

It's a helmet day for me today. Gonna go practice riding in the sand. Crash probability is a tad over 100%. Some may occur near rocks or logs. Heck I may even hit my bike with my head.

Broke a rib by landing on my handlebar last weekend.

Still not gonna wear this for every bicycle ride.

http://funkybikes.co.uk/productimages/bodyarmoursml.jpg

I think the chest protector should be mandatory for all bikers, by law!

Oh sorry, I need to retract that last post and start a new thread, this thread is for helmets only.

Stop talking BS. we showed facts from government sources that had did studies on this stuff for years, not months, in America, and you and the others just threw it out, yet when some vague "facts" came in from another countrythat claim helmets are worthless you embraced those. So no you do not except any facts unless they agree with what you believe no matter how vague they are. So that is about on par with your intellectual abilities.

Firstly I never ever aid that helmets are worthless. I have no clue as to what US vrs foreign facts you are referring to, and if I thought any facts were acceptable I would accept them, unless you post them then I except them because to you a blog is a fact.

Say what? We've on this thread have posted the US government statistics about bicycle deaths related to helmet and non helmet wearers so many times is crazy, you need to go back and find those or google it yourself.

There is a lot to read about helmets on this site: Helmets: Bicycle Helmets
Here are the statistics: Bicycle Helmet Statistics A lot to read here too.

I'm going to repost this as only a reminder, it has nothing to do with helmets but rather how to ride and help prevent having to use your helmet in an accident and other injuries or death: http://bicyclesafe.com/ And to add to that NEVER come to a stop on either side of a large vehicle like a semi or travel trailer or motorhome etc because 9 times out of 10 they can't see you and can turn right into you or do the squeeze play on you, either stop behind the unit or far enough ahead so they can see you, I go as far as to wave at the driver so I can get an acknowledgement that they see me when I can only be slightly ahead of them, if you stay behind them and keep in a position so that you can see the driver's eyes in their mirror. I go as far as to do all the above with cars too because most drivers drive in zombie state of mind! That site also doesn't discuss getting doored by a park car, avoid this by looking through the rear window for someone sitting in a seat as you approach parked cars and then transfer to their side mirror as you get closer to see if someone is sitting, also keep enough distance (if possible) that if a door does open or a car pulls out suddenly you have enough room to ride clear.

I've been very fortunate that in the 40 years of riding as an adult including racing all the way up to Cat 3 only to have 2 potentially serious crashes and both would have or could have caused serious injury or maybe death if not for the helmets (I never had a crash while racing which is extraordinarily odd!). I hate to use the word lucky, I like to rather say I was blessed and continue to be blessed. Say what? Blessed by God of course! I had two major car crashes in my life too, one was when I was 22 at 165 mph!!! I escaped without injury, even the shoulder strap marks were faint! The car didn't fair as well and was completely destroyed beyond what I can describe here in a short time. The second accident happened just over 3 years ago with a drunk driver who ran a stop sign that T'd onto a highway where I was doing 57 mph at night, the drunk had no lights on and came out of a wooded area so the amount of warning I had was nothing until the headlights bounced off a car coming at 45 mph into my path, I T-boned him and we all all slid into a guardrail taking a good section of that out, the fire department had to use the jaws of life to tear off the roof of my car and my dash to get me out, all that accident did was screw up my lower back requiring fusion of my last disk at my bottom but I lived much to the surprise of first responders, the other guy died instantly. So yeah, I've been blessed...not sure why but I'm not complaining but rather very grateful.

When you stop attributing things to me that I never said I can continue to converse, until then I'm done. Never have I seen such misdirection, confusion and zig-zagging, except when speaking to the mentally ill.

Per your recommendation:

The Telegraph reported that London neurosurgeon Henry Marks had said that many of his patients' helmets were too flimsy to be protective. ...

Marks cited a study by Dr. Ian Walker of the University of Bath on passing clearances left by car drivers for helmeted and unhelmeted riders. That research has been thoroughly debunked by us and by a later study. Details are in our page on the Walker study.

Joey +1

The two points you make in your post is well taken. They are the bottom line in this whole debate.

About passing clearance, this study by the University of Texas is more informative.