Also, 90+% of all bike fatalites were male. Maybe only men need to wear helmets?

Do you have any data on the number of drivers on the road that experience head trauma? In a car you have seat belts, air bags, crumple zones and numerous other factors to alleviate head trauma. I would expect head trauma in car wrecks to be very rare and only in the very most serious wrecks. I notice that race car drivers do wear a helmet. I think that probably makes sense.

No, I don't, I am asking for it. And your point about race car drivers is exactly to my point, it is all about risk mitigation and risk tolerance. Don't judge me for not wearing a helmet on my bike, UNLESS, you can honestly say that you wear one everytime you are in a car.

I dont judge anyone for not wearing a helmet. I dont wear mine on every ride. To say helmets are pointless and dont help is just silly though.

I also dont think riding a bike without a helmet and driving a car without a helmet are equal risk levels.

I believe that you and I are actually in the same camp. If you look back on my previous couple of posts, you will see that I too, assess the risks of each of my rides and will wear a helmet if I deem there are other variables beyond my control, ie. a large pack of riders or lots of congested traffic. I believe that helmets have a place and perform a function, but it is up to the individual to determine at what point it should be worn.

There seems to be 2 sides, both of which are wrong in my opinion; one says helmets are worthless and may even pose additional dangers, and the other saying that a helmet must be worn everytime you go out on a bike or you are stupid. That is just as wrong. In my life, I have been in the 1 major bike wreck, but I have been in a couple major car accidents, so I would have to disagree that a bike poses more of a risk, simply because you are better protected, and again, it should not matter to those that say I need to wear a helmet on every ride, because there is still SOME risk invloved in driving a car. It is all about odds and risk tolerance.

Yep - completely agree with all of that. Driving has plenty of risk. If we're talking specifically about head trauma only though, I would give the edge to cycling - especially if its a fast group ride situation where crashing is more likely.

To be honest, I didn't know until I opened this thread that there existed a debate on
whether or not it was good to wear a helmet.

I've crashed once. When I got up off of the ground my helmet was cracked in half.
That would have been my head.
To me, there is no debate.

RE: Head Trauma - modern cars are filled with tech designed to protect your head. Seatbelts. Multiple airbargs. Crumple zones, etc. Bikes aren't. It's your head against the pavement/tree/whatever, and crashes on a bike are considerably more likely.

I'm glad you came out of your crash ok.

All I ask is that you let me have that same debate with myself to reach my own conclusion, without being ridiculed for coming to a different conclusion.

Regardless of what side you fall on in this debate, I think it's worth saying:

Please don't go off telling noncyclists that they must wear a helmet and you wear one and it saved your life and they're stupid for not wearing one. You just make this sport seem dangerous, and high risk. I think we're all aware this isn't an adrenaline junky sport. Some non-cyclists seem to think it is.

I'd much rather see people ride, sans helmet, than not ride. Then I can politely suggest that a helmet is worth purchasing and wearing. Otherwise I'm left trying to convince them I'm not an adrenaline junky and it doesn't entitle them to run me down.

Wow, I just wanted say "hey, look at the missing foam & cracks but my head is OK". I didn't expect this to be my longest thread ever...Great discussion!

We can each make adult choices about helmets. With or without, enjoy your next ride!

Whew! I thought for a moment this was the A&S.

I stand corrected, thanks for the link and I will look at the study, one which I have not seen . Again thanks and as Rosanne Rosanna Danna said " Nevermind"

Next you should start a thread with the title "Which chain lube should I use for my bikesdirect bike?"

And for a more recent and contrary point of view.
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1052.html

"Should I carry a gun while riding?" could work too.

Very good information. I am sure it will be discounted by the devout.

Some of it is good. A lot of it is not. The rotational injury stuff is pretty weak, based on "some doctors think". Sure, its worth looking into, but it pretty weak right now. The whole population stuff deals with helmet laws being introduced. Its very difficult to draw any solid conclusion from these - there are a lot of factors at work there. The less exercise and people being more risky with helmets is irrelevant. The answer to those is not to stop wearing helmets, but to get out and ride and don't be stupid just because you're wearing a helmet.

I would be curious if anyone has published any crash test data with and without helmets. The only way to really know if helmets are effective is to try to simulate typical bike crashes with a test dummy fitted with sensors. I realize this is pretty difficult to pull off, but I'm sure it can be done. Look at the same kind of crash 100 times and compare the sensor data from a helmeted head and a non helmeted head. Of course a dummy doesnt have the curl up instincts and such that a human has, but I still think that would be the best way to know exactly how much impact a helmet can absorb.

What's the first thing you do when someone points above you and yells, "Look out"?

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thum...with-hands.jpg

Right?

Along those same lines, if some negligent driver creams you and causes severe head injury, you can bet that they're going to raise the defense of comparative negligence, if you're not wearing a helmet. In other words they will argue that the cyclist caused his own head injury by not wearing a helmet. The same argument is made all the time in auto accidents where injured victims weren't wearing their seat belts.

I dare say the picture he posted looks like the helmet successfully skidded more than it compressed. I agree that the rotational injury thing is lacking in support. But it's not a completely crazy idea.

And cyclists could do a lot to stop falsely claiming that it's negligent to not wear a helmet. It would reduce the already absent validity of the contributory negligence claim.

Seat belts are legally mandatory, so you are actually breaking the traffic laws by not wearing one. Where helmets aren't (most states for adults), you're not breaking a law. Is it due care to others bank accounts that you wrap your head in Styrofoam now?

(And, I would say, seat belts are better demonstrated to be more effective than motorcycle helmets, much less bicycle helmets).

The mechanical engineer in me says that a fall, regardless of horizontal speed, onto a horizontal surface (IOW, not a curb, lamppost, garbage bin, car bumper, etc), is a fall from 5-6 vertical feet.

In any case, I won't tell you to wear a helmet. You are convinced by population statistics. I don't trust them in determining the best course of action for me. Population statistics pertain to populations. Not individuals. I ride in pack situations. I know for a fact that the type of crashes that happen in pack situations are not controllable. When your front wheel gets swept out, there is no time for the body to react in the normal way to protect your head. I've fallen a fair amount in the course of the last 15 years or so I've been riding road bikes; it wasn't until I started racing three years ago that I started getting into situations where I couldn't protect my head in a fall.

Thus, for me, I wear a helmet (most of the time) because 1) I know the type of risks I expose myself to involve crashes where I cannot control my body position, and 2) my falls typically happen onto horizontal pavement, meaning a fall from 5-6 vertical feet, which is the type of crash the helmet is optimized to absorb. A helmet makes sense for me. If most of my riding were short, 5 mile, low exposure, non-pack riding, commuting, then I probably wouldn't wear a helmet . If my riding was solo training in low car traffic areas, I might not wear a helmet (I do, though it's just out of habit, not because I believe I actually need it). And I don't wear a helmet on my rollers (too hot) even though the risk of falling is similar to that of riding solo on a country road. But in a race or group training ride, a helmet is an essential piece of equipment for injury prevention.

A well-stated point of view, but I have to ask why on this one point. Peril doesn't care how far you are from your house. My rabbit encounter (commute, low traffic, non-pack) was a mere 500 yards from my point of origin. I do not believe anymore that there is a thing called 'low-exposure.' To say that your risk is lowered, sure, I can go with that, but the unexpected can happen anywhere, and at any time. It's not like wearing a helmet is asking someone to endure excruciating torture while riding. It's a freaking helmet: A kind of hat for cycling.

That is a very sensible and well thought out post, and I appreciate that you feel that other people are quite capable of making thier own decisions on this topic. Virtually all my rides are solo or with 1 other rider on quiet country roads, so I do not wear a helmet generally, but I have done pack riding and a few races and wore a helmet everytime.