Just how do you propose to have "more prevention"? A sudden flat, sand on the road, drivers that dont stop all contribute to UNEXPECTED accidents. No one here and that is NO ONE is a super biker that will never have an accident where they will go down. Why not wear a helmet that may prevent some injury?

helmets
 

I'd like to give my opinion on wearing helmets. I believe each individual adult should have the right to choose what safety precautions they take when it comes to cycling...I wouldn't argue making wearing helmets for children compulsory because I think children are more prone to falling off bikes. For me personally..it's makes absolutley no sense to wear a helmet..the statistics prove this....I am 57 years old and have never had a serious crash and i have ridden commuter and city bikes all my life...I would be a complete hypocrite to wear a helmet to cycle when the risk of head injury is 2 or 3 times more when I drive my car...in fact head injuries caused by cycling are only slightly higher than people just walking around on the street...most of these people wearing helmets only do it because some politician on TV that has probably never ridden a bicycle tells them to...these people conform to anything someone in a position of authority tells them to regardless if it makes any sense at all....what really grinds my gears are some of these spandex warriors who shake their head at me as they go by and won't even say hello....then they load their bikes onto the back of their vehicles ..take their helmets off...get into their car and drive off!

Seeing as I think it is worthwhile to try to protect my brain from injury, I try to imagine what my skull would look like after hitting the pavement, a tree, utility pole, rock etc at 12-30 mph, after being launched off my bike for whatever reason.
First I imagine it without a helmet, then I imagine it with a helmet.
I like my chances better with a helmet, but of course that is anecdotal, just based on imagination.

Also, I recently upgraded to a MIPS helmet for additional concussion protection, because I heard concussions are bad for the brain.

Impacting something stationary head-on at 30mph, chances are your head would look about the same, helmet or no...

Exactly. Just based on imagination.

A bicycle helmet would be immediately overwhelmed by a 30 mph impact.

Wear a helmet by all means. If you fall off at lowish speeds and bang your head it may save you some pain and superficial injury. But it is most unlikely to save your life or your faculties, it simply isn't designed to do so. Too light, too friable.

Since I've seen the discredited 85% protection claim crop up again, and it's still posted on the Bicycle Safety Institute pages, let's reiterate:

"The federal government is withdrawing its long-standing claim that bicycle helmets prevent 85% of head injuries, in response to a petition filed by WABA under the federal Data Quality Act."

Also of interest from that article,
"In 2001, a review of all published studies found that helmets reduce the risk of head injuries by 45–71%, and increase the risk of neck injuries by 0–86%. That “meta-analysis” was updated in 2011: Helmets reduce head injuries by 25–55%, but because of the increased risk in neck injuries, the combined reduction in head and neck injuries is only 2–26%."

The majority of injuries reduced or prevented are, as chasm54 mentions, the superficial cuts and contusions.

Someone posted an updated study a while back, with figures indicating that the less serious an injury is, the better helmets do with protection. While that might be stating the obvious, the numbers were interesting, and the study came to the conclusion that helmets helped mitigate injury even in half of serious injuries, a majority of moderate injuries, and most light injuries.

That said, if all a helmet helps with is superficial cuts, contusions, and abrasion injury, in the very rare instance of a crash with helmet contact, that's reason enough for me to wear one...

That is generally confirmed by the meta-studies in the reference, with their 25%-55% number. It just stands to reason that there is some mitigation of serious injuries, since a straight fall of even 3 or 4 feet is potentially fatal and bike helmets are rated to mitigate that level of impact.

Me too usually, but honestly that's more of a matter of habit. It's only in the rain or other inclement conditions, or if I'm off the pavement, or on a crowded MUP that I'll wear one for safety reasons. For me, it would be more logical to wear shoulder pads since I have been injured in that region and a head injury is unlikely for me. But I don't because the odds are so low.

I did that 3-4 foot fall at 35 mph a few decades ago. Cost me head trauma, a 5 day coma, 4 months before all the wiring was back and 7 years before I could really say it was past. I was wearing the original Bell Biker.

Suppose my injuries would have been just 25% worse had I done that head first spill without a helmet. In other words, that I suffered 80% of the damage I would have received wearing nothing. At the cost I had to live through? Seeing 25% more? No thanks! Life after was hard. Harder than most of you can imagine. Sanity was an ongoing challenge. But I came through with my life intact, most of my abilities and most of my memories. That 25% worse would probably been more memories lost, a bigger setback to my career and some more life skills and abilities lost. That alone makes a helmet look like cheap and wearing it easy.

One of my first memories after that crash was of wandering into the rooms of other brain injury patients still out and wired up and thinking I would never want to be like that. That was the recovery ward, not IC. That 5 days in a room with nothing but a bed and a wall of electronics was plenty enough for me. And the only reason I know what that room (IC) looked like is that I could walk into the IC under my own power when I went back for an evaluation with my neurosurgeon.

Ben

Ben, I'm sorry about the severity of your injuries and glad about your recovery. But we can't know that your injuries would have been 25% more severe, or 50% more severe, or no more severe, had you been bare-headed. Of course it seems natural to assume that some protection is better than none, but you were doing 35mph. Bicycle helmets are notoriously poor at protecting against concussion and do nothing to stop the rapid rotation of the head that appears to be a major cause of brain trauma. So while I completely understand your point of view, I am sceptical of your assumption that your helmet made a significant difference.

So many errors, so few words. Damning with faint praise, at least you didn't claim the helmet made things worse.

-mr. bill

+1, Helmets do help way more than some think, they also don't help as much as some think... Thus here we all are, spouting out our opinions... :innocent:

I just saw a documentary about numbers on Netflix "The CODE"... Part of it was about the "wisdom of the crowd" So I am now wondering what this recent poll and the other helmet poll is actually saying about helmet wearing? It basically said individual opinions sucked, but collective opinion usually is pretty accurate... ;)

I don't really see what's wrong with what chasm54 wrote. And apparently you don't see it either since you can't or won't elaborate and opt for vague insinuations instead.

If you want to consult the wisdom of the crowd, you should at least try to go for a random sample, and not for a highly specific group of people like "People who like polls about bicycle helmets on a forum specialized in cycling". Furthermore is you look at the big picture, it's obvious that the great majority of cyclists ride without helmets. Even in Muhrica, one of the bastions of helmeteering only a large minority is into foam hats IIRC.

It never occurred to me to wear a bicycle helmet when I was a kid.

It was taught to me to wear one on a motorcycle.

Low sided at 40 mph on a motorcycle. Helmet looked like it was attacked by a right angle grinder. I got up and rode away. Not far, as the bike was in bad shape, but my head was fine.

Now I wear a bicycle helmet, too.

But------------------wouldnt you rather be in your suggested 2 to 26 percent that remains uninjured?

It's not 2-26% remaining uninjured. It is 2%-26% reduction of an already very small number. I reject the reasoning that any given safety measure is automatically justified by any reduction of risk no matter how small. If I thought that, I wouldn't ride at all.

I don't want to talk any adult out of wearing a helmet, nor insist that they should wear one. I do want them to have the information necessary to evaluate their risk, to make their own decisions. Too often the risk is overstated, and the effectiveness of helmets exaggerated. It's often stated that helmets reduce head injury by 85%, and that claim has been conclusively refuted and retracted.

Too often, people don't mind their own f'ing business and think to impress on others what is a personal decision.

More kids are wearing helmets growing up. Bicycle Helmet Laws I'd guess that would lead to more people feeling comfortable wearing them as they get older. Watched my son-in-law helmet the boys before a ride and the oldest reminded him to wear his.

I was just looking at that link and saw a local city to me had a mandatory all age law {rescinded in 1998**. How the heck would you enforce that when the surrounding cities didn't follow suit and you were part of a major bikeway?

They just do. I think I live in the most ridiculous state. WA is riddled with city and county all-ages MHLs.

When I was picking up a bicycle at the (free!) Bikeshare at Timbuk2 in Seattle, they tried to give me a bag, a lock and a helmet.

Told them I didn't need the helmet.
They told me it was the law.
Told them I don't care, keep the helmet.

Rode off happy.

I did not die.

-mr. bill

Hopefully increased bikeshare programs will help to decrease the proliferation of all ages MHLs.