Helmets are not designed to prevent severe head injuries.

This is fairly typical stuff from those who are advocates for helmets. Essentially, it amounts to this- you don't care what the evidence says, you are going to base your behaviour on your perception that you may be at risk, and your belief that a helmet will reduce that risk.

The trouble with this is that it overstates both the risks involved in cycling and the protection that a helmet affords. In the UK, where I live, the figures collected by the Department of Transport show that cyclists are no more likely to sustain severe injuries than pedestrians per mile travelled. That doesn't mean that walking is dangerous, it isn't: what it means is that both cycling and walking are very safe. Nobody that I know of accuses anyone of being stupid, or hopes they are an organ donor, because they don't don a helmet while crossing the street.

There is one cycling death here per two million miles cycled. Figures for the US are comparable. And those deaths include the incompetent kids, the drunks, those who ride at night without lights, those who don't know any better than to be on the inside of large vehicles at intersections. My own chances are much better than that, I have roughly a lottery-winners chance of being killed on my bike. Non-competitive cycling is remarkably safe.

However, it is true that the chance is greater than zero, and if I am killed or brain-damaged while riding, overwhelmingly the likeliest cause will be a collision with a motor vehicle. This is where overstating the protective effects of helmets comes in. Helmets are not specced to provide meaningful protection in such accidents, the forces involved simply overwhelm them. Helmets are tested to protect against a straightforward fall onto your head from seven feet at zero speed. Seriously, that is the standard they have to meet, you can look it up. Even their manufacturers will tell you that they are not made to protect against the sort of accident that is most likely to scramble your brains.

So, I am very unlikely to be involved in a seriously dangerous collision, and if I am, it is very unlikely that a helmet will help. And this conclusion is borne out by the data, which shows that increasing use of helmets has NOT correlated with a reduction in the already small numbers of serious injuries to cyclists.

Wear a helmet by all means, if you want to. It may protect you from superficial injuries in low-speed crashes. But please don't imagine that it will save your life or your senses, that is very very unlikely.

This is good advice that the OP should take note of.

You guys are playing the gambling game. I no longer care about what is or what is NOT too likely. I'm telling you that for well over twenty years of street and trail cycling, I've had more than my share of accidents. None of my accidents, ever presented serious detriment to my health. However, just a few months ago, I saw first hand how critically significant helmets really are. If a speeding car that slammed on brakes had actually hit me, without my helmet being on, then most indubitably, I'd not be here to push the keys on my keyboard, or communicate with stubborn people over the INTERNET.

- Slim

Buy the kind of helmet that has been shown to prevent concussion...... .........then also wear it while you're riding in a car since you'rer more likely to suffer concussion from that activity.

Everytime you ride in a car at 55 mph or even walk down a sidewalk without your helmet you're takign a gamble, which I'm not willing to do. My helmet is on everyday -- heck, even while watching Sunday football at the pub I won't take a risk.

Sorry -- impossible to resist hijack.

If someone wants to wear a helmet, that is as much their right as someone that doesn't want to wear one. There are cities where it is the law for even adults to wear one. If someone wants to do certain group rides, some of those require helmets.

You're wrong to make that assertion. You have no way of assessing what would have happened had you been hit by the car, and no way of knowing whether a helmet would have protected you.

As for the gambling game, if you don't wear a helmet while driving, or while crossing the street, you are making pretty much exactly the same bet as I am. But like I said, wear a helmet if you feel the need. It's just unfortunate that you overestimate what it will do for you.

Gloves vs. helmets: hands heal, brains don't.

Complete agreement with Slim. Racing and touring since 1965, I've had only four potentially concussion-inducing crashes. Unfortunately, the first crash happened the year before Bell introduced the Bell Biker, the first bike helmet designed to reduce skull G forces on impact.

So I've had one so-called "mild" concussion (brief blackout, tunnel vision, partial memory loss, raging headache); I don't care to have another. I'm a great bike handler, and I never crashed in a race, but there's too much that happens out on the road that's out of your control. I don't expect ever to have another crash, but then I didn't expect any of the ones I've had.

I wonder how many of the helmet deniers realize that the antihelmet arguments were first formulated in an effort to repeal the Australian law that requires all adults to wear a bike helmet while cycling and that those arguments are accordingly biased. That said, I agree that wearing your helmet or not absolutely should be your own choice and that that's a bad law, not least because what should be a trivial decision has come to be so controversial.

This debate reminds me of the time when people were adamantly opposed to wearing seat belts. I mean despite the statistics, they were just spittin' mad about their individual freedoms being eroded.

Ralph Nader has tried to explain how dangerous automobiles really are. He has discussed the detriment that automobiles present on just about every level. It is now common knowledge about the importance of seat belts, in the prevention of fatal auto accidents. Based upon the speed that many drivers drive when not obeying the speed limit, many indeed, should be wearing helmets, right along with the unweary pedestrian, as well.

Automobiles are unsafe at any speed when they're driven. However, they become exponentially dangerous as they increase their speeds. Cyclists ride their bikes in automobile environments. Rarely are automobiles driven in bicycle environments. Cyclists need to become more aware of the potential capacity for danger that automobiles present. Just because there's one parked in your garage, doesn't make it a member of your family. Automobiles, pollute the environment. They kill and maim people everyday when accidents occur.

The automobile is Not our friend!

- Slim

PS.

That's why we need to safeguard ourselves in every way when in its presence.

This is quickly getting out of hand. OP: I can only suggest that you look at information regarding bicycle accidents, and the protective capabilities of bicycle helmets. Then, you can make an informed choice whether to wear one or not.

Walk out to the sidewalk, lie down on your back. Raise your head a few inches above the ground and bang it, as hard you can, onto the ground. Or, have a wrestler or judoka uchi mata your ass onto the pavement. Try it once with and once without a helmet. Tell me which one you prefer.

+1 Slim.

+1 Harorld.

Monster Pete, I agree that this is getting out of hand. You and chasm should reread the thread title. The OP wasn't asking whether or not it's a good idea to wear a helmet but which helmets people recommend.

Buy the cheapest one on the market since none have any efficacy.

Walk down the sidewalk, drop a banana peel in front of you and slip and smack your head on the concrete both with and without a helmet. If it feels better with a helmet, then you should be arguing that all pedestrians wear helmets.

So when does this get moved to S&A?

Ya know all this chatter about wearing ,or not wearing, a helmet gets tiresome after a short while. I wear a hat when I'm outside and when I'm on a bike I wear a helmet cause a hat won't stay on.

What I'm saying is it's always good to have a head cover when out of doors for a zillion reasons. Some people will not wear a helmet , or a hat, in foolish self serving bravado.

Ok by me.

Just don't expect me to pay your bills while you're laid up cause if you don't think enough of yourself to at least try to protect your body from harm why should I?

Don't expect me to pay your bills while you're laid up after being hit by a car while biking in traffic. If you don't think enough of yourself to ride in a car while in traffic, why should I.

And people who pretend that helmets will help prevent serious injury if you are involved in an accident with a car or in an accident while your bike is moving at (or who even think that helmets can prevent concussion) are either willfully ignorant or illiterate.

But if you are going to wear a helmet, I recommend the bowler helmet:

From here: https://www.bobbinonline.co.uk/Mr-Ben-Bowler-Helmet

Thanks for the info everyone.

Obviously a helmet will not prevent you from turning into a pancake if an 18-wheeler smacks into you or you get knocked in front of an oncoming Dodge Ram.

But, a helmet will probably help when you accidentally fall off of your bike when you hit a crack in the curb and you head smacks onto the ground. I'd prefer to not spend the remainder of my days drooling in a bed being spoon-fed baby food by a nurse.

This anti-helmet argument thing is mildly ******** and totally unhelpful.

Oh! I also tried on some helmets and opted for a Giro Atmos. The fir just seemed a lot better than all of the other options I tried on. I ended up ordering mine online, the pricing was much better than buying in-store.

The point being made was that a cycle helmet will not prevent this. Any helmet will help prevent minor scrapes etc, so if this concerns you, buy any helmet that fits. Just don't assume that it will stop brain injury.

Wait a minute!

Don't all racing events, feature athletes who all wear helmets?

Don't all bicycling entertainment events require that participants wear helmets?

Why?

WTH are we discussing the obvious for?

- Slim

This is an awesome, completely novel argument in favor of helmet wearing-- my eyes are open now.

BTW - everyone who is complaining about the thread going off topic: come off of it. You're posting a comment, so you're engaging in it like everyone else.

I wear a helmet 100% of the time I'm riding a bicycle, but they still suck and don't do a damned thing. I like mine for purposes of reflective tape. It's good for nothing else. Okay - done.

Do you believe that helmets have saved lives before?

Do you believe that helmets have mitigated injuries before?

- Slim

Snell and helmet manufacturers recommend replacing a helmet every 5 years due to degradation of materials in the helmet. You might want to do it every 3-4, if you do a lot of riding and / or the helmet gets abuse.

https://www.smf.org/helmetfaq#aWhyReplace

Unless you the money is burning a hole in your pocket spend $30-$50, that way you will be less reluctant to replace when needed.

Regardless of the naysayers, where a helmet when you ride. It will most likely not save you from a truck hitting you are 50 MPH but it may make a big difference to your noggin in a 10-15 MPH fall which is more than likely to occur.

It is risk reward. Wearing a helmet while walking might save your head during a trip or fall but it is very unlikely that will happen and is a bit impractical. But there are people with motor coordination disabilities that wear one because there is a good chance they will fall.

I wear a helmet while riding and barely know it is there, so it is no big deal. And I don't wear it because I think I will need it. If I did I would not ride. I wear it just in case I will need it. The same reason, I wear a seat belt when I ride in a car.