TBI ain't funny...

A doctor certainly might not know either. Or they might. And no, I wouldn't go so far as you describe. Never have, don't, never will.

No, one never knows. But those coming on here saying a helmet saved their life sure seem to...

Your observation isn't very observant. If you go back, you'll find that I never say helmets are worthless and often chime in when absolutists claim such, that they very well may provide some protection in nearly any kind of crash which includes impact with a helmet. The lesser the potential injury, the more a helmet may provide injury mitigation, but even at severe levels of injury, helmets are shown to provide protection and injury mitigation in some situations. To paraphrase what I've repeated here often enough that an observant person might have noticed: if all a helmet does is provide some level of protection against minor injuries like laceration and abrasion, that's still reason enough for me to wear one.

Wearing a bicycle helmet increases your risk of fracturing a bone in your neck. Don't wear helmets.

Ann Emerg Med. 2016 Jan;67(1):145-6. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.09.012.
[h=1]The Risk of a Bicycle Helmet: Hyoid Bone Fracture.[/h]van Dongen MJ[SUP]1[/SUP], Falger-Veeken SN[SUP]1[/SUP].

I don't think that the article says what you think/hope it says.

Here's the article link:

http://www.annemergmed.com/article/S...300-1/abstract

Here's the abstract:

Hyoid bone fracture is rare, composing 0.002% of all fractures, because of the bone’s flexibility and surrounding structures (mandible and cervical spine). It is usually associated with fractures of the mandible or the thyroid and cricoid cartilages. Hyoid bone fracture is known to be caused by high-impact blunt trauma to the neck. To our knowledge, there is no previous report of a hyoid bone fracture in a bicycle accident because of the strap of a bicycle helmet.

When it's hot and humid I don't like wearing a helmet because the sweat gets in my eyes anf burns.

However i often wear a helmet. That's because #1 . it's where I mount my mirror, #2a . it's bright and makes me more visible and #2b . it distinguishes a b icyclist from a pedestrian; #3 . It offers some protection.

Out on the open road in summer when ity's really humid I forgo the helmet for comfort and safety because the sweat dripping into my eyes is a hazard.

After reading up on the standards and the tests helmets pass I was amazed at just how little protection those standards actually give. BUT, the one time I wiped out and my head slammed onto the pavement (hit hard enough to actually bounce) I was glad i had my helmet on. I had no scrapes or cuts on my head and was able to continue my ride.

Sometimes a helmet will lessen the severity of an injury and sometimes under certain conditions a helmet will worsen an injury. Read up on rotational head injuries.

Cheers

Too much common sense and balanced thinking for this thread, you must have hit your head harder than you thought.:)

Have a Happy New Year.

I used to have the same problem, but I forced myself to get in the habit of drinking water more regularly on rides, which seems to have done the trick.

That reminds me I need to wash the pads out since I had to take it off for that reason the last time it rained hard. Thanks. This thread hasn't been that useful for some time.

# 1 on my list (because I switched mirrors to glasses for that reason) is that I hang my mp3 player and earbuds on it. It's important to protect our hearing you know, so I consider them to be safety features what with high decibel traffic noises. But I just got some new fangled BT headphones (sorry for OT) which will make it slightly less likely for me to wear a helmet now.

Some of us just have really salty sweat, including me. I wear a variety of hats on the bike depending on the weather and ride and they all do a far better job of keeping sweat out of my eyes then any helmet ever has. They also put a thin extra layer between my head and the pavement thus offering head protection of roughly the same magnitude of an actual helmet based on manufacturer claims ;)

How dare you check on the truthiness of that post!

FWIW, here is the full letter.

It absolutely does not say what was "reported" here.

-mr. bill

Actually, it does. A single reported event, in an injury so rare, indicates that the mechanism of injury is important, and worthy of further investigation.

Also, read the full text.

That is moose drool and you know that it is too. The letter absolutely does *not* say what you say it says, and it doesn't support your non-sequitor "recommendation."

You got caught - again.


Also, I read the full text.

-mr. bill

You should be embarrassed.

:lol:

You are bull****ting.

:rolleyes:

I'm not really an expert in motorcycle helmets, but I sure do use them. I usually don't wear a helmet on a bicycle because I'm a lower speed urban rider (though I do wear a helmet when I go mountain biking or riding at particularly high speeds). I see bicycle helmets as something useful for specific types of ride that are more hazardous, but unnecessary for a basic low speed ride. The individual cyclist should decide if and when they are needed. Motorcycles are a totally different beast. If you want to risk your own head, you go on ahead and ride without one, but I do not want to skid across the street at 30 MPH without a helmet after wiping out. Even moreso if it happens on the freeway (If I'm planning on using 101 or 280, I'll even put body armor on. Flying off a bike at 70 MPH? I want that extra little chance of not dying or being crippled.). It's a whole other world of danger from riding my bicycle around at running speeds.

Hmm, new to the forum, but this reminds me soooo much of helmet threads in a vintage MC forum I help moderate. All I can contribute to the discussion is that I paid attention (most of the time) in my high school physics classes. ;o)

I know it's hard for you to read that much, but give it a try! Sometimes moving your lips helps.

:lol:

Where you are bull****ting people is your "conclusion" from those words. A letter about a single case is not a sufficient basis for such a conclusion.

Your conclusion is either dishonest or incompetent.

"Increases your risk" is rubbish too. But he knows that.

-mr. bill

Good Golly! Two sensible and rational posts about personal decision to wear bicycle helmets in the past month on this thread. That must be some sort of record. :thumb:

It could be "increasing the risk" but that doesn't mean it doesn't decrease the risk of things that are more important.

It's an incomplete argument. In the same way that the still-hypothetical "rotational injury" argument is.

A letter about one specific injury can't address whether something "increases the risk" anyway. (Note that a "letter" is a a "low bar" way of publishing things. Not that that is necessarily a problem but it's important to how the information is used.)

If he pulled this crap where he works, he'd be laughed at!

That's part of why what he is doing is bull****ting.

His statements that people don't understand the letter is bull****ting too.

I see that nobody has yet read the full text the article I posted. Neat trick, claiming that I MSU when you haven't even read what I've posted. But it's what I've come to expect from this crowd.

While we're at it, here's an oldie but goodie. I'm sure it's been posted before, but given the evidenced mental capacity around here, you have probably all forgotten about it.

Feds will stop hyping effectiveness of bike helmets - Greater Greater Washington

**********

That "reduce the risk of a head injury by 85%" does still come up now and again.

About the article, do you mean the "The Risk of a Bicycle Helmet: Hyoid Bone Fracture" letter? I thought maybe you'd accidentally pasted the wrong link since there's no greater risk of neck injury there. If anything, the opposite since the writer claims to have the only example in medical literature, that the injury is extremely unlikely from any cause, and the only indication of the helmet at fault in this freak injury is a "strap shaped" bruise at the back of the neck. If that's the case, show the link which you intended and I'm sure some people will read it.

Front of the neck. "...an ecchymosis became visible in the anterior part of the neck in the shape of the strap of the bicycle helmet".

-mr. bill

That would be less weird than the back of the neck, but still a strange place for a helmet strap. He'd almost need to have loose straps and the helmet pulling from the back of his head.

Regardless it is a very unusual bone to break (.002 of them according to that letter) and an improbable way to injure it. You can't blame the helmet for increasing risk on that basis. Considering how he keeps saying nobody read his article, I really think he may have posted the wrong article.

He is misusing or misunderstanding that link too.


Unlikely.

People posted quotes from the letter, which he either didn't read or didn't understand (somewhat ironic given his other comments). He had ample opportunity to link to the right article.

He "summarized" the article fairly specifically. And, it would be unlikely that there would be another current thing about "a neck bone" being fractured by helmets.

The simplest explanation is that he's just bull****ting people.