True...I made the point earlier that those people should wear helmets too.

Really, everyone should wear a helmet all the time. Just in case. Cycling is a vast minority of TBI compared to other activities. Like sex -- head pounding into the headboard sans helmet is never a good thing... except when it is.

My safe word is "helmet."

Reason I brought it up, walking to lunch today we saw a guy stumble on the sidewalk (not fall) and I mentioned that it was the most common cause of traumatic brain injury. Then I wondered a) if I remembered that right (I thought 50% so I was only part right) and b) if it was general knowledge among the Helmet Thread gang. I had the same thought as you did, maybe the guy should be wearing a helmet.

My safe word is "mconlonx." It's especially effective since whomever I'm with has to stop and say, "What did you say?"

But the main point is------------------any injury a helmet prevents is a good thing.

Worldwide, "lead poisoning" would be a good guess.

Since about 1982, automobiles have been, essentially, helmets. When you enter one of these latter-day wonders, your brain & other lesser parts will be protected against many and even most opportunities for other, lesser objects to cause you cranial harm. The reason your car has a rounded & somewhat padded interior is to reduce peak loading on your brain (such as it may be). The main reason for seat belts & shoulder straps is to keep you from hitting the front of your car & to keep you inside where the padded interior might limit how badly you are hurt. --- The main purpose of air bags is to protect those who don't attach their seat belts.

Joe

Ooooh! Oooooh! I know!! Republicans and Democrats!

I lost an 'online' friend earlier this year. When he was driving and he was hit by another vehicle. He survived the initial crash enough to tell me via Facebook. I told him to get his posterior to the ER ASAP!! He went into neurosurgery almost immediately. The OR nurse told me at one point, that he had the same condition as a result of the accident.:( Which I have had all my life. The next message from the OR nurse was that he did not make it out of surgery.:cry: The fact that he was in a car, a helmet may have kept him from getting a TBI. It may have also help keep him alive, at least to a certain extent.

I wear a seatbelt every time because I have read through all the statistics and am convinced that they make a significant difference. I also am aware that there are many, many variables which are out of my control when I am driving. So seat belts make sense for me. But I am against mandatory seatbelt laws simply because I think people should have complete freedom to do what they want as long as it doesn't do harm to others.

I generally don't wear a helmet while riding because I read through all the statistics and am convinced that bicycle helmets are of very little value. Also, on the bicycle, I am generally able to control most of the variables - if I fall it will almost certainly be my own fault and I will take my lumps if/when it happens. So bicycle helmets generally don't make sense for me. And I am against mandatory bicycle helmet laws for exactly the same reason I am against mandatory seat belt laws.

And yet 30,000 people die every year in car accidents just in the United States. So it kind of looks like cars don't make very good helmets. If a car driver wants good head protection, there is a vast selection of effective motorsports helmets. For some reason though, even the most passionate of the helmeteers scoff when driving helmets are mentioned. That's actually pretty damning, when you think it through.

As for the notion that airbags are for people who don't wear seatbelts, the NHTSA notes that seatbelt wearers are 26% less likely to die in a car crash when they also have airbags, and that of the several hundred people killed BY airbags, most were unbelted.

I'm fixing to go shop for a helmet this afternoon. Not because I'm scared of falling and hurting myself, but because the government has, again, created laws that restrict my individual freedoms. One of the bike trails that we enjoy riding has a helmet ordinance in place. It's only for the city limits of that city, but it's a place that I have to go through if I ride that trail along the famous Natchez Trace Parkway. And we all know that the government knows what's best for all of us! (last line typed extreme sarcasm)

What "government" has this helmet ordinance in place that restricts your freedom, and what does the helmet ordinance require? Reference?

Well, here we go again. Not that I have anything new to say, it just feels wrong to fail to contribtue to a helmet thread having posted so often in its predecessors.

To summarize: please feel free to wear a helmet if you wish. If you're a mountainbiker tackling technical or challenging trails, definitely wear a full-face helmet. But if you're a roadie and expect the helmet to make a material difference in the event of a collision that might otherwise kill you, you're almost certainly mistaken.

I guess it is about time I mention an "authority" on cycling safety John Forester. In his book he states that simple falling covers around 80% of cycling accidents. If that is true, then it follows that a helmet is far more effective than the anti helmet crowd is willing to admit.

I wear my helmet even on my trike, altho I really cant fall since I am already down.

Don't pretend to be stupid. Of course it doesn't "follow". Before you could make such an assertion you would need to know the proportion of simple falls that gave rise to head injuries, the severity of those injuries, the efficacy of helmets in mitigating those effects, and so on and so on.

Classic! Rydabent paraphrasing John Forester brand so-called accident statistics and drawing a John Forester type specious conclusion.

They've made great strides in depression treatment, these days...

Local government! What's the issue with you not understanding that city laws/ordinances are government? Do you not have local speed limits set forth by a specific city? Other rules set for by a city? A city is the "local government" that is creating laws that over-ride your beliefs that you know what's better for you than your government does. And that is the freedom that I'm talking about. If you believe that you are safe enough riding without a helmet, but your local government thinks that you will be more safe riding the way they think, then they have taken a freedom away and imposed restrictions on you. Socialism in a form that many don't pay attention to, until it hits them with something they don't agree with. You may be one that won't mount an indoor exercise bike without a helmet, therefore you won't think this is a freedom restricting law, but if your local government stated that you couldn't ride your bike without a full geared football uniform, training wheels on your bike, and that you can't ride faster than 5 MPH, you'd be hollering "damned government!".

And here is the ordinance:
ORDINANCE OF'THE MAYOR
AND BOARD OF'ALDERMEN OX'

THE CITY
OF RIDGELAND, MISSISSIPPI TO REQUIRE ALL PERSONS

TO WEAR PROTECTIVE HELMETS
\ryHEN RIDING A BICYCLE,

EITHER
AS AN OPERATOR OR A PASSENGER

V/HEREAS, the
Mayor and Boa¡d of Aldermen of the City of Ridgeland are

charged
with the obligation to protect and preserve public health, safety, and welfare;

ffid,

WHEREAS,
research has determined that two-thirds (2/3) of the deaths from

bicycle/vehicle
crashes are from traumatic brain injury; and,

WHEREAS,
one in eight cyclist with reported injuries had a brain injury; and,

WHEREAS,
an estimated 45o/o to 88% of cyclist brain injuries can be prevented

by
a helmet; and,

WHEREAS,
the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the City of Ridgeland,

Mississippi find
that it would be in the best interest of its citizens that all operators and

passengers
of bicycles within the-public areas of the City of Ridgeland should wear

protective
helmets as a means to protect and preserve the public health, safety and

welfa¡e
of its citizens and visitors.

NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen

of
the City of Ridgeland, Mississippi as follows, to-wit:

Section
l.

It
shall be unlawful for any person to operate, ride, or be a passenger upon a

bicycle on
any highway, street, road, sidewalk, bikeway, trial, or other public property,

unless
that person wears a protective helmet that is properly fitted and fastened. This

requirement shall apply
to a passenger who rides upon a bicycle while in a restraining

seat
which is attached to the bicycle or in a trailer towed by the bicycle.

I guess I can assume chasm and i like dont like Forester since he doesnt agree with them.

Only if I was a raving lunatic.

Whereas this sounds like a hot air proclamation made to the PTA during a speech, and not any legal code or requirement for anybody to do anything. What penalty is invoked by this evil government to violators of this so-called helmet ordinance?

The ordinance is here http://www.ridgelandms.org/wp-conten...ds/HELMET1.pdf, but since the posted copy is unsigned and undated its not clear if it was ever signed into law. Fine for violation is in section 3 Section $25 to $75

According to Municode its been adopted but not yet codified, whatever that means. Wonder if its ever enforced?