None at all, just like her response. Your "understanding "of risk is just another instance of uninformed conversation on "perception" versus reality.

Perhaps the reason you see/perceive this issue everywhere you look is based on what you want/choose to see/perceive in order to validate your own issues with "perception" versus reality.

meh whatever... moving on to other rabbit holes

Does putting on a helmet before cycling make the cyclist feel safer? I believe that for some, cycling looks dangerous to a degree and maybe partly because they see cyclists wearing helmets - but if they wear a helmet when they ride, does this cancel out their perception of added danger?

I see seat belts and airbags in motor vehicles as an "admission of guilt". Operating a motor vehicle, to me, is the most dangerous activity I ever engage in - especially at highway speeds. Everything around me is out of my control except the vehicle I am operating, and there are lots of knuckleheads "flying in formation" wing to wing with me much of the time. I am not petrified behind the wheel but I do make very certain that I am wide awake, perhaps hitting some caffeine to sharpen my focus, keep the vehicle in good repair, and often will not even let my wife or other passengers speak to me if the situation demands total concentration. In other words, when I drive a motor vehicle I take it SERIOUSLY because that activity is so potentially deadly. Lives are changed in fractions of seconds every day, often to people doing everything right.

This is particularly rich, apparently riding a bicycle without a helmet is as stupid as skydiving without a parachute:

24 Compelling Bicycle Helmet Statistics | HRF

Almost every one of his "compelling statistics" were misinterpreted, refuted, or just plain wrong. Disputing anything at all from that article is almost like a straw-man, since it appears to be a compilation of the worst arguments. Though probably unintentionally so.

They should be embarrassed to have this on their website. 2 of the statements are identical (15 an 24) and 11 and 13 essentially say the same thing one says urban centers one says NYC. By my count only 6 of the statements relate to bicycle accidents and some are just statistics like more happen to men or people of a certain age. I'm not sure helmets would change that. Statement 13 says "something like" pretty sure that was pulled directly out of someone's butt. The list advocates riding on sidewalks which is illegal in many areas and in my opinion dangerous in its own ways. Statement 8 would suggest that only 780 people died in bike accidents in 2012 where statement 4 suggests that 1000 people die each year, which is it?

This list is not helping win me over

Another helmet manufacturer responding to educated helmet consumer calls for safer helmets.

IB14: 6D BRINGS REVOLUTIONARY OMNI DIRECTIONAL SUSPENSION TECHNOLOGY TO MTB HELMETS
posted by Saris Mercanti - September 16, 2014



In recent years, it has become increasingly apparent that concussions can cause irreparable damage to the brain. So in order to help mitigate the potential damage from head impacts, helmet manufacturer 6D has developed a new patent pending technology that uses an in-helmet suspension system to help limit angular acceleration....

That doesn't really strike me as a groundbreaking advancement in technology as much as an advertising gimmick. Definitely wouldn't make me feel a whole lot safer.

I'm really not hardcore on this issue either way, I would likely wear a helmet at least sometimes if I had one. It hasn't been a priority of mine to find one that "fits" as my head is very large and there is a shortage of 62cm+ bicycle helmets that are reasonably priced. I've only had one minor accident on my bike which involved hitting a corner a bit too fast on a wet morning. It didn't make me feel I "needed" a helmet. It did however make me more cautious of taking corners, wet and dry and prompted me to start wearing gloves. I could deal with the scrapes on my elbows and knees, but my wrist and knuckles were the biggest pain to deal with for a while.

I think you would be surprised how many of us are with you on that. As a natural born Libertarian, I support whatever decision any adult makes regarding their own safety (or illusion of safety as some would say). I do not feel compelled to make anyone do much of anything to please me.

As I have posted on this very thread before (a few times): I am a hat wearer. I like my head protected from sun, cold, bugs, whatever. After some experimentation I have found that certain bike helmet designs are cooler (or warmer) than any hat (including my expensive Tilly), do a reasonable job of keeping sun off my scalp and face (visor on helmet), and STAY on my head at 30 mph. IF there are any safety benefits beyond keeping my skin out of the dermatologist's trash can - that's just gravy.

carinus

You can sky dive without a parachute too. Once!!!!!

IMO cycling is not that dangerous at all. There are many things you can do that is more dangerous than cycling.

I guess it is the Boy Scout in me that says always be prepared. That is why I alway wear a helmet.

The statistics also contain the ever popular 85% percentage that's the hallmark of badly researched pro-helmet drivel. My issue was more with the hysteric fear-mongering, that compare cycling without a helmet with engaging in extremely risky activities that will most likely result in death. This is an extreme example, but the general idea is fairly common. Most commonly in the form of references to the natural selection F.E. the ever popular Darwin Awards.

No helmets required for MTB races in Hatgal, Mongolia. Must not be UCI sanctioned.

I suspect they have far fewer lawyers per capita than we do here in the USA.

Probably also far less helmet salesmen (paid or the starry-eyed kind).

Bikerumor reporting that Lazer will have a $70 MIPS-equipped helmet out this year. The Beam is the white helmet on the right; the orange helmet with MIPS system is their Helium model at $200+:

ICEdot adds user-activated Trigger to its emergency communications line

A helmet with sensors, that sends a wireless message, if there is a crash.

Or that sends an unintended message when accidentally dropped lol . . .

I keep it simple - if I put on the lycra I'll put on the helmet. If not, nope. I rode around the city with a coworker the other day and he was surprised I left the helmet back at the office. He questioned my trusting of the local motorists. Which for the most part, I do. I'm cognizant of what is happening around me, and for a mile or two, I really don't think there is too much risk.
Anyway, that is my take on it.

What a perfectly dooshy way to shut down a sane, informational thread that had nothing to do with the same old helmet arguments which have been argued in this thread again and again.

And not to steal I-Like-to-Bike's thunder, but do you have any figures on how much better off a person is for having taken a League safe cycling class than they are buying a helmet? Rhetorical question because not even the League can quantify such a query.

A safe cycling class will not protect you while riding.

I won't weigh in on Skye's post one way or another, but I still think it's a shame the mods are so quick to shut down any discussion containing the word "helmet".

Or get's way beyond stupidity.

That's the thing: the thread was into day three of existence outside the Helmet Thread ghetto with most refraining from any of the contentious issues which get constantly rehashed here. Before some dooshy bare-header sabotaged it with unsupportable claims, an outright lie, and the same kind of old, tired argument for which there is already this thread.

I know why helmet threads get moved here or locked and I understand that moderators will not waste time on this issue deleting individual posts or specially moderating one single thread. But it is sad that some ignorant partisan can instigate a move to Helmet Thread or get a thread locked with just one post. I don't blame the mods at all, but rather jerks like Skye who know exactly what they are doing and what the result will be. Congrats to them for using unoriginal tactics to further their extremist, unilateral, partisan ends.

I will.

The only "safety claims" sillier than some of the over-the-top risk reduction claims of the helmet proselytizers are the over-the-top claims of risk reduction for participants in a "League safe cycling class" or any other vehicular cycling oriented safety course.

↑↑↑ This ↑↑↑ Helmet debate is controversial enough, with so much emotion, that if we did not monitor closely and move discussions here we would eventually have to rename "BikeForums" to "HelmetForums" lol. The question of helmet use elicits a lot of emotion.