closetbiker

Some of the things I hear makes me wondeer if the money some grads have spent on degrees could have been better spent elsewhere.

You can take the boy out of_____, but you can't take_____ out of the boy.

crtreedude 

When they say that a human is defined as a reasoning animal, makes you wonder how many humans there really are - hmmm?

europa

I gain the impression that the whole point behind this thread is to insult people, so, could you please consider yourself insulted?

Richard

crtreedude 

Regarding the comment that someone who makes a good salary and has a degree must obviously be correct unlike us poor devils who don't wear a helmet.

By that reasoning, if I make a lot more than you (I do given your comment) and know a lot more than you (I am considered an expert in two unrelated fields - both highly technical), then the fact I don't wear a helmet should be taken as proof positive that you shouldn't either.

Your reasoning is flawed. Something is not true because of who believes it - it is true because of what are the facts. I am not so arrogant to think that because I am superior to you in both money and education that therefore you are stupid for not agreeing with me. It shouldn't matter what my qualifications are, it should only matter what facts I bring to the table.

It seems to me that I detect more than a little educational bigotry here.

just my dos colones

crtreedude 

In all honesty, I really don't care if someone wants to wear a helmet, your money and your head. But, I do take exception when people think I am stupid because I decide to do something different from them. When you have to resort to name calling to make your point, you have lost the arguement. After all, facts speak a lot louder than name calling to rational people.

Zeuser

You missed the point. When Stats Canada were gathering data they noticed that there's a trend where people with high levels of education and above average incomes, and especially their kids, had a tendency to wear bike helmets more.

It's just a stat. Nothing more.

If you somehow feel insulted by that... that's your problem.

Zeuser

When's the last time you checked the differences in currency?

crtreedude 

I tend to be insulted when people say that I am stupid for not wearing a helmet.

Those who are have higher education usually have more disposable income. Therefore, selling based on fear tends to work better on them. After all, when you have a 100 bucks just sitting around, sure, you will use it for your kid even if you aren't convinced it will help. But, if you don't, I doubt you will take food away from your kids to buy a helmet for them.

Zeuser

If you can afford it and don't want to wear one... yes... you're being quite stupid. Think about it for a second: Is your skull, skin and hair going to protect you more than a helmet? You going to take that chance? What if the pro-helmet people were right all along? I said it before and I'll say it again: IT'S BETTER TO ERR ON THE SAFE SIDE!

It's a really simple concept.

And as I guy who's had a Motorcycle helmet and a Football helmet save his life more than once, I can tell you that I'm glad I had one.

So bike helmets are not very effective by their design? That may be true. I have my doubts as well. Then it's a question of design and not a question of the act of wearing a helmet. I'll repeat: IT'S BETTER TO ERR ON THE SAFE SIDE!

You think it's fear selling these things? No... it's just common sense. Helmets are all over the place when it comes to sports. Baseball, hockey, football, skateboarding and so on. It's just common sense, use one whenever possible.

Now... if you can't afford a helmet, that's a whole different story. And that is what I also said before: Stats Can noticed a trend where people with higher incomes and higher education levels seem to wear helmets more than others. And that trend is especially true when it comes to kids.

Little_T

I have a right to my oppinion, as you have a right to yours. I do realize that if you're riding at 50 km/h and crash the helmet won't help. I also realize that the helmet isn't a force-field that'll protect you from everyting. The idea of the helmet is to absorb and distribute the force of impact.

I'm referring to statistics, as you probably read in my previous post; no helmet wearing biker in Finland, that had an accident, has ever died of brain injury even though the head was impacted and the helmet cracked. I know there's controversy about the usefullness of helmet-use. I've even read that it may be harmful to wear a bicycle-helmet in certain situations. However most studies (I'm sure you can google some) conclude that using a bicycle helmet will reduce the risk of brain damage if the impact is directed to the skull. As someone had in their signature: "I'd rather look like a mushroom, than be a vegetable".

It's obvious that wearing a helmet is a problem for many and I agree that the protective features of the helmet are somewhat exaggerated. No, that's not the right word, misunderstood is better. Commonly people think a helmet will protect them from everything related to brain damage, which, of course simply is not true. However, as I already stated, it will reduce the risk of brain damage.

It doesn't really bother me that adults don't use helmets, they're grown-up and are responsible of their own actions. I'm more concerned about children. They don't cycle that fast, and their small stature makes the fall alot smaller so eventual head-injury would effectively be prevented by a helmet.

As a disclaimer, I base my opinions on what I've read. I've tried to gather many different perspectives on bicycle helmet use. Be that as it may, You may have other sources about the protective qualities of the helmet and I would happily familiarize myself with them if you would post a link.

EDIT: I just like to clarify; I have nothing against people who ride without helmets. But I do believe that if you have no good reason for not wearing a helmet, you are ignorant. If I get intoduced to studies that indicate that helmet use is more harmful than useful my opinion may change. If you can't afford a helmet, fine. If you're not really biking that much, fine, don't use a helmet. But don't bicycle without a helmet because you think it looks silly. This world is superficial enough already.

crtreedude 

I expect to see you in bubble wrap on the road - after all, it is safer (and I have the scars to prove it)

Zeuser

Don't be silly, Bubble wrap would suffocate you before you got a mile from your house. That's not exactly SAFE.

But if you can find a fabric that won't make me sweat like a pig, will be safer and doesn't impede my ability to ride I'll wear it.

After all, when I had my motorcycle, I was wearing a full suit and it worked just fine. I wouldn't want to pedal a bike in that thing though. But if you can figure something else out... I'll gladly put it on.

closetbiker

I think the point is not to insult people but to discredit the others argument.

I-Like-To-Bike

Don't be ignorant, of course you can wrap up. Sweating won't hurt you, it's all natural and well worth it for the additional safety, eh? Poke a couple holes in the wrap for a breathing tube or snorkel and a drinking tube so you won't dehydrate. Don't forget to wear a mouthpiece too before wrapping up. You can't be too safe, eh?

closetbiker

well then, how would you answer the testimony I posted earlier?

- Remember, eminent neurosurgeons in court testimony have said the performance of cycle helmets is much too complex a subject for a sweeping claim to state that one must be safer wearing a helmet than without, and a respected materials specialist argued that a cyclist who was brain injured from what was essentially a fall from their cycle, without any real forward momentum, would not have had their injuries reduced or prevented by a cycle helmet.

And also don't forget the area of protective coverage being less than optimal shown in the earlier description of further court testimony involving the death of a cyclist hitting his temple area at a speed of 9-12 mph and dying because helmet standards only require energy absorbsion distribution from about 1 to 2 inches above the bottom portion of the side of the helmet leaving that most vunerable portion of the skull exposed. If a rider has an impact in an accident which is below the area required to be tested by the "standards," the helmet may not provide sufficient protection to prevent an injury. "

and cheif pathologist Clive Cooke, in Coroner's Court Testimony, in Perth, Australia,

"In situations of a fall they [helmets] are next to useless because they do not protect against diffused brain damage. The damage to the brain would still have occurred because it is the rattling inside the skull that caused the damage."-

when it gets down to it and people are held accountable for what they claim, why are people who understand how these things work, testifying like this?

Six jours

It's a joke, mate. Try to lighten up a bit. Just because I don't always wear a helmet doesn't make me your enemy.

Six jours

Cite, please.

Six jours

Cite, please.

Splat-NJ

Until an old lady driver cut me off one day and sent my bike crashing into the curb and my head -ALMOST- into a tree trunk, I never wore a helmet. That night I went, bought a helmet, and now wear it every ride. Your mileage may vary.

Six jours

Quote:

IT'S BETTER TO ERR ON THE SAFE SIDE!

Again, bolded all-caps and exclamation points do not make your argument -- or, in this case, bumper-sticker sloganeering -- any more valid. In point of fact, there are folks who believe that yelling merely demonstrates a lack of cogent argument.

But whatever. The problem with the "logic" of your argument is that you shouldn't forgo even a single piece of safety gear because, of course, "it's better to err on the safe side". So then you get folks asking "where's your neck brace, elbow and knee pads, leather suit, full face helmet, bubble wrap", etc. etc.

Some of that is silly, of course, but I do think the full-face mountain bike helmet is very good case study: it's probably safer than a regular helmet, and it's only slightly more restrictive/uncomfortable. If it's better to err on the safe side, why aren't you wearing one?

Speedo

Well, you are poking at people's "conventional wisdom". Views that they hold not because they have studied or thought deeply about them, but simply because they are obvious. An initial reaction is to get upset because you don't see how obvious they are. Analysis won't come into it until they get past the idea that their obvious truth isn't so obviously true.

Speedo

Little_T

Then maybe helmet standards should be modified? I don't claim to be an expert, as I said earlier, I'm only familiar with a portion of the studies out there. I guess it all comes down to who you're gonna believe.
I agree that the temporal-area of the head is poorly protected by a helmet (depending on the helmet). The standard bicycle helmet is a compromise between safety and comfort. You could use a XC helmet, that would protect the whole head, including the face.

I don't think anyone has claimed that the helmet protects in all scenarios. We could opt for the bubblewrap idea, but as some already commented, that would be very uncomfortable. Same applies to helmets, they could be more protective, alot more, but they wouldn't be confortable anymore.

If helmets increase my chance of surviving an accident by even 1%, I'll take it.

Speedo

Independent of the bicycle helmet argument, I've read that pedestrians, and automobile drivers would benefit from wearing helmets. Do you wear a helmet when driving your car? Do you wear a helmet when walking down the street? If not, why not? After all it's better to err on the safe side!

Speedo

Zeuser

OBVIOUS TRUTH

Try this:

1 - Find old car. Some abandonned old junker or one in a junk yard.
2 - Put on bike helmet
3 - Step back 2 steps
4 - Lower upper body so you line up your head for a direct hit. You'll be looking directly at the ground.
5 - Charge into the car's door.
6 - Remove bike helmet and repeat steps 3 to 5.

Isn't that obvious? Common sense tells you what's going to happen. This "common sense" is something you've been acquiring all your life. It started when you were a kid and first smacked your head into a door, wall, whatever. It hurt, you're now careful not to do it again but you're not afraid of doors and walls are you? You're just careful.

Then came the day you put on your first helmet to play some sport. And you banged your head playing football, baseball, hockey or whatever. Then as you stood up you suddenly realized: Geeze... maybe this plastic thing on my head really does work?

The obvious truth is common sense. Everyone has it but not everyone listens to it. Want a wake up call? Try the exercise at the start of this post.

Little_T

Well, OK:
https://www.liikenneturva.fi/fi/turva...ailykypara.php
https://www.liikenneturva.fi/fi/turva...ykyparasta.php

It's in finnish, that's why I didn't place links, but you asked for them so...

This is the statement of Liikenneturva; the central organisation for Finnish traffic safety work:
"Jos Suomessa kaikki pyöräilijät käyttäisivät kypärää, kuolemat vähenisivät kahdella kolmanneksella ja loukkaantumiset yhdellä kolmanneksella."
Translation: If every finnish bicyclist would wear a helmet, [bicycling related] deaths would reduce with 2/3 and injuries with 1/3.