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

Helmets cramp my style

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.

Helmets cramp my style

Old 04-30-07, 10:31 AM
  #1351  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
I think people are well served by informing them and letting them make up their own minds. The vast majority use this information and go without helmets because (I believe they come to the conclusions that) cycling is a relatively safe activity and helmets are no match for the forces in those rare instances when cyclists die.

Tout your qualifications all you want (and I'm not denying them) but far more qualified (and far more objective) individuals contest your points and their points directly describe exactly what the last 10 years in BC have shown to be true.

Last edited by closetbiker; 04-30-07 at 10:42 AM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 04-30-07, 11:37 AM
  #1352  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Just another article from an independant, objective source that has little to gain from pushing helmets.

from The Western Standard

The safety value of bicycle helmets seems a no-brainer, but guess again

John Luik - January 29, 2007

The bicycle helmet debate was back on the front pages this fall, given a British study that showed wearing helmets is more dangerous than going without. Compulsory helmet-law advocates have since been on the defensive, and that's good, not simply because helmets fail to do their jobs--saving lives and reducing injuries--but also because they have some unexpected consequences.

Proponents of compulsory helmet laws seem to suggest that Canada is suffering an epidemic of cycling injuries and deaths. Yet Transport Canada statistics have remained constant at roughly 78 cycling deaths yearly since 1991; given about 18 million Canadian cyclists, this yields a fatality rate of roughly one in 231,000. There were almost 200 fatalities back in 1975, but the decline from the 1970s to the 1990s started well before helmet laws were widespread. Pedestrian deaths also dropped over that period, suggesting that factors like improved trauma care were the real contributors.

The same is true in other countries. Although helmet use has increased in the U.S., there is no reliable evidence that this has reduced head injuries or fatalities. G.B. Rodgers looked at 8 million cases over 15 years (Journal of Products Liability) and found "no evidence that hard shell helmets have reduced the head injury and fatality rates." Indeed, "the bicycle-related fatality rate is positively and significantly correlated with increased helmet use." The New York Times reported 73,750 head injuries from cycling in 2000, compared with 66,820 in 1991. And children's head injuries have returned to 1991 levels, though fewer kids now ride bikes.

Australian data, comparing fatalities from 1988 and 1994, shows cyclist and pedestrian fatalities declining at the same rate. But the introduction of helmet laws brought about a 25 per cent decline in cycling, so the apparent drop in cycling fatalities may represent a proportionate increase. So Dorothy Robinson of the University of New England concluded that Australian helmet-wearing caused no statistically significant decline in head injuries.

Perhaps this is why countries like the Netherlands, with one of the world's highest cycling rates--25 per cent of all trips--has one of the lowest rates of helmet use.

Why do the figures suggest that helmeted cyclists are not safer, but may be at even greater risk? First, the real issue is preventing cyclist deaths. Virtually all their deaths and most of their acute brain injuries are caused by collisions with cars, where helmets are virtually useless. John Franklin, with the U.K. government task force on cycle training standards, notes that current standards require helmets to provide protection at an impact velocity of only 20 kilometres per hour, offering little protection against autos. Helmets are tested only on their ability to resist linear force, not rotational forces, though most brain injuries result from rotational forces. And U.K. Consumers Association research indicates that most helmets fail even these minimal standards. A 1998 study found that 14 out of 24 helmets tested failed the shock absorption standard; and only two of the 24 met the more rigourous "Snell absorption standard."

But a further reason why helmets don't work is found in what Queen's University psychologist Gerry Wilde calls "safety compensation." The introduction of a safety feature actually encourages, rather than reduces, risk-taking, because individuals feel safer. Bringing in anti-lock brakes during the 1990s, intended to reduce accidents, resulted in more accidents, since drivers trusted that their brakes would be "safer." Similarly, studies of helmet-wearing children have found them suffering more crashes than unprotected children. Even adults seem to ride faster and take greater risks when wearing helmets. And the risk compensation factor appears to govern the behaviour of motorists in relation to cyclists--as shown by the U.K. study setting off the latest round of debate. It found that British drivers allowed more room when passing cyclists without helmets, compared to cyclists with them.

Helmet use fails to reduce cycling deaths or injuries, but succeeds in making cyclists feel safer and take more risks. It also makes cycling much less attractive for many, so its net health benefits are significantly reduced. Rather than worrying whether cyclists wear helmets, perhaps the nanny state should provide more cycle paths.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 04-30-07, 12:01 PM
  #1353  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
...and an editorial written a little more recently in response to Saskatoons proposed helmet by-law (that was defeated) that brings up similar points

New helmet law not best way to secure safety
The StarPhoenix
Published: Wednesday, April 04, 2007


The city will be putting the cart before the horse if council proceeds with a bylaw that will make it mandatory for every bicyclist, roller skater, skateboarder and scooter rider on public or private property to don a safety helmet or risk a $25 fine.

However noble the civic administration and finance committee's intention to protect citizens from themselves, the city is starting at the wrong end of the safety equation by proceeding to mandate the use of helmets, particularly for bicycle riders.

Despite the exhortations of proponents of such a bylaw, their claims about reductions in head injuries and fatalities from the use of helmets are far from clear-cut -- a fact that becomes apparent the moment one begins to look at the debate taking place in forums such as the British Medical Journal.

For instance, points out senior statistician D. L. Robinson, in an analysis entitled No clear evidence from countries that have enforced the wearing of helmets, after Halifax, N.S., introduced a helmet bylaw, their use among riders rose to 80 per cent by 1998-99 from below 40 per cent five years earlier. However, there was no significant reduction in the percentage of head injuries. Similar findings have been reported in other jurisdictions such as Australia and New Zealand.

The most serious injuries to riders come from collisions with motor vehicles, but current helmets standards -- downgraded in weight and style because people don't like bulky lids that make their heads sweat and ruin their hair-dos -- are no match for the forces involved in such crashes. As well, some research link traumatic brain damage that causes permanent intellectual damage to a form of torsional force injuries that cannot be prevented by wearing a helmet.

The very factors that have led to the redesign of bike helmets to make them thinner and provide more vents, also leave more of the head exposed in the back. While it's rare for a cyclist to suffer a blow to this region from a fall, that's not the case for skateboarders and rollerbladers. Those who want to include the latter in a helmet law need to be cognizant of the enforcement problems this creates in ascertaining what is considered an "approved helmet" under the bylaw.

And at a time when childhood obesity is becoming a huge problem in our society, the experience of some jurisdictions that have enacted helmet laws is less than encouraging. In Australia, for instance, the frequency of riding slowed for more than one-third of bare-headed cyclists after the mandated helmet law. As well, there are concerns about helmets making riders more prone to risk-taking and motorists treating helmeted riders differently, by giving them less clearance when passing.

What's clear, however, from jurisdictions such as Denmark and the Netherlands, which have low rates of helmet use but noteworthy safety records, is the effectiveness of working to improve the riding skills of bicyclists, providing education on bike maintenance and most important of all, separation of bicyclists from motorized vehicle traffic on roadways. Their extensive network of bicycle paths often is separated physically not only from motorized traffic but from pedestrian sidewalks.

If Saskatoon city council truly is interested in looking after the health and safety of bike riders, it needs to begin by designating more bicycle routes across the city and incorporating bike lanes into new street construction, not taking the easy way out by passing a bylaw to mandate helmet use.

The danger of the helmet law is that council then will be content to wash its hands of the issue instead of doing what it really takes to ensure Saskatoon becomes a bicycle-friendly city.

If keeping our children safe is the objective, civic authorities and those in the health region, who are willing to hand out 3,000 free helmets to poor children, should be co-ordinating their efforts with the city's school divisions to improve the riding skills of youngsters and teaching them the basics needed to keep their bikes in safe working order.

In our cash-obsessed North American society, it may seem like an effective move to encourage compliance by handing out $25 tickets to unhelmeted scofflaws, but it's effect is likely to be worse than the intended cure.

Realists will concede that it won't be white, middle-class children in Saskatoon who are likely to be nabbed for non-compliance with the helmet law.

A letter sent home to parents of a first-time offender might work in their case, but not for the too many children left to their own devices in the city's core at all hours. To try to ticket their parents for a subsequent failure to ensure their child's compliance only will create more work for the legal system and to no discernible gain. It may even add helmets to the veritable epidemic of bike thefts that now plagues the city.

The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon) 2007
closetbiker is offline  
Old 04-30-07, 01:09 PM
  #1354  
lima_bean
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 714

Bikes: Jamis Nova

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
I think people are well served by informing them and letting them make up their own minds. The vast majority use this information and go without helmets because (I believe they come to the conclusions that) cycling is a relatively safe activity and helmets are no match for the forces in those rare instances when cyclists die.

Good information, thanks for posting it, seems worthwhile. Seemed to be common sense that people should know. Not sure why it would convince most not to wear a helmet, didn't see anything in there that was really anti-helmet or countered the reasons I wear one, but I would recommend the reading to people I knew who found them financially or otherwise burdensome and that was preventing them from riding..
lima_bean is offline  
Old 04-30-07, 04:01 PM
  #1355  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
I'm glad that you found it worthwhile.

It's not anti-helmet, just a realistic assessment from an objective point of view.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-01-07, 07:48 PM
  #1356  
ekitel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Brooklyn USA
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm not going to read this whole thread, but anyway if you see somebody without a helmet that's none of your god damn business! why even bother to have an opinion about it...
ekitel is offline  
Old 05-02-07, 06:57 AM
  #1357  
Speedo
Senior Member
 
Speedo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston Area
Posts: 1,998

Bikes: Univega Gran Turismo, Guerciotti, Bridgestone MB2, Bike Friday New World Tourist, Serotta Ti

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ekitel
I'm not going to read this whole thread, but anyway if you see somebody without a helmet that's none of your god damn business! why even bother to have an opinion about it...
As much as I hate to admit it, this is probably the single biggest issue that bikers should have an opinion on.

There always seem to be moves afoot to legislate helmet usage, and various clubs insist on helmet usage. Unfortunately so much of what is driving that is the "conventional wisdom", which, depending on your point of view, can vary from questionable to just plain wrong.

I like to make fun of this thread, but I keep coming back to it. There is a lot of good stuff here. I find it helpful to have read the arguments in advance when having a discussion about this topic with other bikers.

If you are so passionate about helmet usage being nobody elses business, then you you owe it to yourself to read through the thread.

Speedo
Speedo is offline  
Old 05-05-07, 06:13 AM
  #1358  
miamijim
Senior Member
 
miamijim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 14,034
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 383 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 46 Times in 40 Posts
Wear your helmets!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncyqkJGVefA
miamijim is offline  
Old 05-05-07, 10:06 AM
  #1359  
ekitel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Brooklyn USA
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Speedo
As much as I hate to admit it, this is probably the single biggest issue that bikers should have an opinion on.
I certainly have an opinion about public policy regarding helmet use, I'm just saying that it's small-minded, all-American, busy body-ness to worry about whether or not any other cyclist you see on the street/road is wearing a helmet or not
ekitel is offline  
Old 05-05-07, 10:08 AM
  #1360  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by miamijim
just the kind of thing you'd expect from some people.

that clip sure looks like something from AFHVs' where they have a policy of showing only clips that result in no injuries to those taped.

from page 48 of this thread (and the link is still active)

Fell upon this video that was pretty good from a CBC TV show.

A rant by an older person about over protective parents.


https://www.cbc.ca/22minutes/video.html

Open the link for February 27, 2007, "Fitness Break"

Some selected dialog:

"These days, parents are so over protective, kids need a helmet to eat breakfast"

"Kids need to get the occasional cut and scrape, otherwise they grow up to be the kind of adult who trips and skins their knee and tries to sue the sidewalk..."

"Go ahead and wrap the kids in bubble wrap, just don't be suprised when they grow up to be adults who need warning labels on coffee to tell them hot beverages are hot!"

and put things in perspective



according to a report by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, falls were the leading cause of hospital injury admissions, seniors accounted for over half of these hospitalizations, falls were responsible for 80% of head injury hospitalizations in seniors and cycling accounts for only 2% of hospital head injury admissions

Last edited by closetbiker; 05-05-07 at 10:23 AM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-05-07, 10:25 AM
  #1361  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by ekitel
I certainly have an opinion about public policy regarding helmet use, I'm just saying that it's small-minded, all-American, busy body-ness to worry about whether or not any other cyclist you see on the street/road is wearing a helmet or not
I also kinda think it has a lot to do with ignorance.

People don't have a grasp on the issue and have some warped ideas about it.

Education is needed
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-05-07, 11:28 AM
  #1362  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
"there is no point getting into a panic about the risks of life until you have compared the risks that worry you, with the risks that do not"

- Lord Rothschild - 1978
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-05-07, 01:38 PM
  #1363  
ekitel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Brooklyn USA
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
I also kinda think it has a lot to do with ignorance.
yeah a lot of Americans are very ignorant on purpose!
ekitel is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 11:04 AM
  #1364  
daveIT
F*** Corporate Beer
 
daveIT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Anchorage
Posts: 328

Bikes: On-OneIROOlympiaYetiLeMondZanella

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
My first summer in Anchorage, I came upon a scene of a gentlemen who tried to jump off some stairs on a BMX bike landed on the tarmac head first. I was second on the scene and called 911. His face was swollen and his skull was cracked open and you could see his brain pulsing. He was still breathing, but in shock. We covered him up and waited for the ambulance. A doctor was the third to arrive on scene (on his bike) and said there wasn't a whole lot we could do.

The ambulance showed up and took him off. I called the police to try to find out if he lived or not, but they wouldn't tell me. A couple days later I saw an article in the paper. He passed away at the hospital...leaving behind three kids.

I don't do anything crazy like jump steps now that I'm older and wiser, but ever since that day I've wore a helmet on every ride.
daveIT is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 11:40 AM
  #1365  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 28,621

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked 623 Times in 409 Posts
Originally Posted by daveIT
...but ever since that day I've wore a helmet on every ride.
Lesson learned. I will continue to choose to not ride my bike down steps.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 12:13 PM
  #1366  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
...no kidding.

I'll place a big bet that far more people fall down stairs on foot than on bicycle.

Sheesh
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 01:29 PM
  #1367  
charles vail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
steps

I've never ridden down steps on a bike, since I don't want to wreck my expensive wheels but if I did do a header over the bars and hit my head, I would rather be wearing my chinzy styrofoam helmet than not. I know if I get hit by an automobile however, I probably won't survive, regardless of having a helmet or not. It just nags me, that every time a cyclist is hit, the news media comments on the fact that the rider was or was not, wearing a helmet. Interestingly, the last two incidents I have seen, both cyclists were unfortunately killed. One had on a helmet and the other didn't!
charles vail is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 02:34 PM
  #1368  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by charles vail
... It just nags me, that every time a cyclist is hit, the news media comments on the fact that the rider was or was not, wearing a helmet. Interestingly, the last two incidents I have seen, both cyclists were unfortunately killed. One had on a helmet and the other didn't!
A while ago there was a thread about riding in NYC where it was mentioned that something like in 90% of the deaths of cyclists no helmets were worn. Well guess what? 90% of the cyclists there do not wear helmets.

In New Zealand where they have a MHL and 80% of the people wear helmets, 80% of the deaths occurred to cyclists wearing helmets.

No big suprise. Same thing happens here in BC, where twice as many cyclists wear helmets as don't and twice as many helmeted cyclists as non-helmeted cyclists die.

It's one thing to try to prevent a minor injury another to try to prevent a death and in over 90% of cycling deaths, a motor vehicle is involved, and helmets are no match for a motor vehicle.

The press is focusing on a red herring and isn't helping any level of understanding that could lead to better safety, but their job is to sell papers or airtime, not to be responsible.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 02:46 PM
  #1369  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
...no kidding.

I'll place a big bet that far more people fall down stairs on foot than on bicycle.

Sheesh
Yup, quick google gets this (the first page picked at random)

https://www.nsc.org/issues/ifalls/falquiz.htm

Guard Against Slips & Trips with this Fall Prevention Quiz


1) In 2002, how many people died as a result of a fall?

Answer: c. According to the National Safety Council, only motor-vehicle crashes and poisoning cause more unintentional injury (accidental) deaths. One in five visitors to a hospital emergency room for an injury is there because of a fall.

4) What accounts for the most falls that result in death?

Answer: b. More falling deaths result from stairs and steps, according to the CPSC. Beds rate second, while ladders are in third place.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), seniors have a 33 percent chance of falling in any year. Older adults are five times more likely to be hospitalized for a fall-related injury than for other injury-related reasons.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 02:53 PM
  #1370  
lima_bean
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 714

Bikes: Jamis Nova

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by charles vail
I know if I get hit by an automobile however, I probably won't survive, regardless of having a helmet or not.

I see somoene say this almost every day on bikeforums. I dont understand why.. I have personally seen bicyclists get hit by a car probably half a dozen times and walk away from it with zero injury..... Obviously you are talking about a high speed crash, but please qualify your statements with this, since I doubt this is the majority of car/bike accidents. Cars dont travel exclusively at 80mph, and they do take emergency manuevers to try and avoid accidents most of the time. Personally, could see a helmet helpful for reducing superficial injuries in many of these car vs bike accidents (and others not so much as you say).

Last edited by lima_bean; 05-06-07 at 03:04 PM.
lima_bean is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 05:53 PM
  #1371  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
well, it's true that the vasy majority of car/bike collisions don't result in death, but it's also true that helmeted cyclists fair no better in car/bike collision deaths than do helmetless riders.

Here In BC, there are usually about 900 collsions between cars and bikes each year and those usually result in about 5 deaths. The last couple of years there have been 6 deaths of cyclists and helmeted riders died at twice the rate of the helmetless.

Our provincial insurer commisioned a study of car/bike collisions and found the most frequent occurance (at 24%) in one of these collisions is, no injury at all. Hip to foot, and shoulder to hand, account for about 50% of all injuries. Head injury is about 8%. Collisions between bikes and cars comprise about 17% of all bicycle accidents.


No question, superficial injuies are helped by helmets, but that's just it. They're superficial injuries. Something that may be bothersome, but not life threatening or life altering.

Just how much nitpicking, nannying can people accept? Facing one "danger" while avoiding a larger one. Scrapes, bumps and bruises we can learn from. False claims of effectiveness are potentially far more dangerous.

Last edited by closetbiker; 05-06-07 at 06:43 PM.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-06-07, 09:03 PM
  #1372  
charles vail
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 987
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
yes

Originally Posted by lima_bean
I see somoene say this almost every day on bikeforums. I dont understand why.. I have personally seen bicyclists get hit by a car probably half a dozen times and walk away from it with zero injury..... Obviously you are talking about a high speed crash, but please qualify your statements with this, since I doubt this is the majority of car/bike accidents. Cars dont travel exclusively at 80mph, and they do take emergency manuevers to try and avoid accidents most of the time. Personally, could see a helmet helpful for reducing superficial injuries in many of these car vs bike accidents (and others not so much as you say).
I definately see your point and agree. In my riding area the cars travel at 60 mph but most hits are when cars turn or pull out in front of you and cut you off. Door impacts are also fairly common but I am in the country. Rear enders are fairly rare but when they do happen, its pretty fatal, as are the T-*****s and side impacts by cars. I enjoyed reading the site referenced on how to avoid being hit by automobiles. To me that information is vital to survival. Much more usefull than strapping on styrofoam and riding unaware and invisible to motorists.
charles vail is offline  
Old 05-08-07, 07:32 PM
  #1373  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by closetbiker
well, it's true that the vasy majority of car/bike collisions don't result in death, but it's also true that helmeted cyclists fair no better in car/bike collision deaths than do helmetless riders.

Here In BC, there are usually about 900 collsions between cars and bikes each year and those usually result in about 5 deaths. The last couple of years there have been 6 deaths of cyclists and helmeted riders died at twice the rate of the helmetless.

Our provincial insurer commisioned a study of car/bike collisions and found the most frequent occurance (at 24%) in one of these collisions is, no injury at all. Hip to foot, and shoulder to hand, account for about 50% of all injuries. Head injury is about 8%. Collisions between bikes and cars comprise about 17% of all bicycle accidents.


No question, superficial injuies are helped by helmets, but that's just it. They're superficial injuries. Something that may be bothersome, but not life threatening or life altering.

Just how much nitpicking, nannying can people accept? Facing one "danger" while avoiding a larger one. Scrapes, bumps and bruises we can learn from. False claims of effectiveness are potentially far more dangerous. (Emphasis added, jcr)
Closetbiker,

Look at this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...arch&DB=pubmed

1: Accid Anal Prev. 2004 Jul;36(4):561-7. Links
Bicycle-related head injury: a study of 86 cases.

Depreitere B,
Van Lierde C,
Maene S,
Plets C,
Vander Sloten J,
Van Audekercke R,
Van der Perre G,
Goffin J.
Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium. bart.depreitere@uz.kuleuven.ac.be
Within the framework of a bicycle helmet research program, we have set up a database of bicycle accident victims, containing both accident and clinical data. The database consists of a consecutive series of 86 victims of bicycle accidents who underwent a neurosurgical intervention in our hospital between 1990 and 2000. Data were obtained from police files, medical records, computed tomography head scans and a patient questionnaire. In only three victims, the wearing of a helmet was documented. In this study, the head injuries are analysed and the relation between the different types of head injuries and outcome is assessed. Forty-four accidents were collisions with a motor vehicle and 42 accidents were falls. Most impacts occurred at the side (57%) or at the front (27%) of the head. The most frequent injuries were skull fractures (86%) and cerebral contusions (73%). Age was negatively correlated with outcome (P = 0.0002 ) and positively correlated with the number (P = 0.00002) and volume (P = 0.00005) of contusions and the presence of subdural haematomas (P = 0.000001). The injuries with the strongest negative effect on outcome were: subarachnoid haemorrhage (P = 0.000001), multiple (P = 0.000005) or large ( P 0.0007) contusions, subdural haematoma (P = 0.001) and brain swelling (P = 0.002). A significant coexistence of these four injuries was found. We hypothesise that in many patients the contusions may have been the primary injuries of this complex and should therefore be considered as a main injury determining outcome in this study. We believe that such findings may support a rational approach to optimising pedal cyclist head protection.(emphasis added)
Another:

1: Singapore Med J. 2006 May;47(5):367-72. Links
Comment in:
Singapore Med J. 2006 May;47(5):357-8.
Helmet use and bicycle-related trauma in patients presenting to an acute hospital in Singapore.

Heng KW,
Lee AH,
Zhu S,
Tham KY,
Seow E.
Emergency Department, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore. kenneth_heng@ttsh.com.sg
INTRODUCTION: To describe the relationship between bicycle helmet use and injury pattern sustained by patients presenting to an emergency department (ED) in Singapore for bicycle-related trauma. METHODS: Data was collected from all individuals treated for bicycle-related trauma between September 1, 2004 and May 31, 2005 using a closed-ended questionnaire. RESULTS: 160 bicyclists with mean age of 34.4 years (range 10 to 89 years) were surveyed. Among them, 80 percent were male and 30.6 percent were non-residents. Helmets were worn by 10.6 percent of the patients. Alcohol was clinically detected in 11.3 percent of bicyclists. There was no difference in bicycle helmet use between Singaporeans and non-residents (p-value is 0.275). However, compared to younger bicyclists, bicyclists aged 30 years or older (p-value is less than 0.05), and compared to recreational or sport bicyclists, those who commute by bicycle, tended not to wear helmets (p-value is less than 0.01). Compared to Singaporeans (p-value is less than 0.05), non-residents and bicyclists aged 30 years or older (p-value is 0.011) believed that helmets did not protect against head injury. Comparing the helmeted group with the non-helmeted group, injury patterns by body region were: head injury 5.9 percent versus 40.0 percent (p-value is less than 0.01); facial injury 5.9 percent versus 37.1 percent (p-value is less than 0.05). Not wearing a helmet, being hit by a motor vehicle and age were significantly associated with higher injury severity scores, after adjusting for several potential confounding factors. CONCLUSION: Bicycle helmet use was low in our sample of injured patients. When worn, protection against injury was demonstrated. A campaign to promote use of bicycle helmets should be targeted at non-residents and older bicyclists. Authorities should consider compulsory helmet laws for bicyclists and expanding anti-drunk driving campaigns to target alcohol-intoxicated bicyclists. (emphasis added, jcr)
PMID: 16645684 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q..._uids=16645684
And another:

1: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):CD005401. Links
Bicycle helmet legislation for the uptake of helmet use and prevention of head injuries.

Macpherson A,
Spinks A.
BACKGROUND: Evidence exists to suggest that bicycle helmets may reduce the risk of head injuries to cyclists, however helmets are not uniformly worn by all bicycle users. Legislation has been enacted in some countries to mandate helmet use by cyclists, however the issue remains controversial with opponents arguing that this may inhibit people from bicycle riding and thus from gaining the associated health benefits, or that other countermeasures may have been responsible for decline in head injuries. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of bicycle helmet legislation on bicycle-related head injuries and helmet use, and the occurrence of unintended adverse consequences. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL, the Cochrane Injuries Group's specialised register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, TRANSPORT and other specialist electronic databases, up to February 2006. In addition we searched government websites, handsearched selected journals and examined the reference lists of selected publications. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that reported changes in either the number of head injuries, helmet use or bicycle use post- versus pre-legislation. Only studies that included a concurrent control group and which reported on the effect of legislation implemented at either the country, state or province wide level were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality. The data were not appropriate for meta-analysis, thus the results of the included studies have been reviewed narratively. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies, all from North America, met the inclusion criteria. For each of the studies, bicycle helmet legislation had been enacted for children only. Adults were used as controls in four of the studies, whilst jurisdictions with no helmet legislation were used as controls in the fifth. Three of the studies reported on changes in head injury rates and three reported on changes in helmet use. There were no included studies reporting change in bicycle use or other adverse consequences of legislation. In two studies, statistically significant decreases in head injuries were reported following the implementation of helmet legislation compared with controls, whilst one reported a non-statistically significant decline. Bicycle helmet use increased statistically significantly post-legislation in all three of the studies reporting on helmet use. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Bicycle helmet legislation appears to be effective in increasing helmet use and decreasing head injury rates in the populations for which it is implemented. However, there are very few high quality evaluative studies that measure these outcomes, and none that reported data on an possible declines in bicycle use.
PMID: 17443588 [PubMed - in process] (Emphasis added, jcr)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum
Are you sure of what you say above?

Enjoy,

John

PS--(EDIT)the study you have so often cited above, is now being defended by the author that they criticized:

1: Accid Anal Prev. 2007 May;39(3):433-6. Epub 2006 Oct 31. Links
Bicycle helmets and brain injury.

Curnow WJ.
27 Araba Street, Aranda, ACT 2614, Australia.
This paper replies to criticism by Cummings et al. [Cummings, P., Rivara, F.P., Thompson, D.C., Thompson, R.S., 2006. Accid. Anal. Prev. 38, 636-643] of an article [Curnow, W.J., 2005. The Cochrane Collaboration and bicycle helmets. Accid. Anal. Prev. 37, 569-573] disputing a conclusion of a Cochrane Collaboration review, namely, that it establishes scientific evidence that all types of standard bicycle helmet protect against injury to the brain. In response to the conclusion of Cummings that the review's case-control studies provide such evidence, I explain that their design is inadequate to do this.
PMID: 17078914 [PubMed - in process] (Emphasis added, jcr)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum

This paper is so new that PubMed has yet to get all the information on it.

I changed one word, from "addressed" to "defended," after re-reading the abstract as Closetbiker stated below. As I recall, this paper was a review of past studies, and not of the information presented in the new studies above.

Last edited by John C. Ratliff; 05-09-07 at 07:47 AM.
John C. Ratliff is offline  
Old 05-08-07, 08:05 PM
  #1374  
closetbiker
Senior Member
 
closetbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
Closetbiker,

Are you sure of what you say above?

Enjoy,

John
Absolutely

(I would have fallen for this before I looked further than what was presented . Maybe you need to look further too)

Others change their minds too. Apparently, Chris Boardman has changed his previous stance and has written a pro-choice article for Procycling magazine.
closetbiker is offline  
Old 05-08-07, 09:41 PM
  #1375  
John C. Ratliff
Senior Member
 
John C. Ratliff's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914

Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Closetbiker,

Then how do you explain the Singapore study above?

Comparing the helmeted group with the non-helmeted group, injury patterns by body region were: head injury 5.9 percent versus 40.0 percent (p-value is less than 0.01); facial injury 5.9 percent versus 37.1 percent (p-value is less than 0.05). Not wearing a helmet, being hit by a motor vehicle and age were significantly associated with higher injury severity scores, after adjusting for several potential confounding factors.
John
John C. Ratliff is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.