1. Increasing the chance of a Torsion/Rotational injury

2. Increasing the likelyhood of hitting your head

3. Increasing the numbers of tree branches you hit

4. Having to lose control of your bike for a short period because you have to duck lower and stop looking ahead in order to avoid such branches.

5. Sweat sucks when it falls from a sponge that every time you move your head decides to empty itself into your eyes. And the times at which you move your head tend to be the times when you want to make a maneouvre which tend to be the times that you actually want to see, not wheel along one handed trying to get the sweat sting out of your eyes.

6. Turning my head sideways with a helmet on is more awkward, and it impedes my view. Instead of seeing a full sky to floor view, I see a Helmet rim to floor view. Granted this means Ill see cars but it does cause a little bit of a distraction for you.

Im not saying its impossible to hit your head, or that you wont hit your head, im saying your body will throw itself in harms way to protect your head naturally, there is no need to suffer the above 6 items (that are the first few things off of the top of my head (no pun intended )) for what amounts to very little extra protection.

Its polystyrene mate... It doesnt protect my damn computer monitor when in the hands of royal mail... why the hell should I trust it to protect my head!

full face helemts enable me to chew.


i presume its also the case with cyclists.

Child cyclist in 2050:





The greater debate that umbrellas this is the classic fight between Public Perception and Reality.

Found this paper which pretty much sums up exactly the way I understand the the earth to circle the sun.

Common Beliefs about bike helmuts

And Ill tell ya wear my opinions are rooted: its in being one of the thousands of bike commuters in Gothenburg and Chicago. Seems those of us that treat bikes as normal safe objects, are the ones that dont fall down as often, and have enough road miles to see this debate for the charade that it is.

Im not going to claim to be some sort of awesome rider, as I corner like a girl, and chicken out at 35mph when descending--just got a lot of miles behind me to form my cynics opinion.

Quote from: M3ta7h3ad1. Increasing the chance of a Torsion/Rotational injury

2. Increasing the likelyhood of hitting your head

3. Increasing the numbers of tree branches you hit

4. Having to lose control of your bike for a short period because you have to duck lower and stop looking ahead in order to avoid such branches.

5. Sweat sucks when it falls from a sponge that every time you move your head decides to empty itself into your eyes. And the times at which you move your head tend to be the times when you want to make a maneouvre which tend to be the times that you actually want to see, not wheel along one handed trying to get the sweat sting out of your eyes.

6. Turning my head sideways with a helmet on is more awkward, and it impedes my view. Instead of seeing a full sky to floor view, I see a Helmet rim to floor view. Granted this means Ill see cars but it does cause a little bit of a distraction for you.

Im not saying its impossible to hit your head, or that you wont hit your head, im saying your body will throw itself in harms way to protect your head naturally, there is no need to suffer the above 6 items (that are the first few things off of the top of my head (no pun intended )) for what amounts to very little extra protection.

Its polystyrene mate... It doesnt protect my damn computer monitor when in the hands of royal mail... why the hell should I trust it to protect my head!

Allow me to comment on a few of your points.

1. Bollocks.  Give me a situation where those effects are more significant and the probability of occurance is higher than the knock your head will recieve and Ill give you a gold star.  And remember I have two years of kinematics and rotational dynamics study under my belt.

2.  Increasing the likelyhood of hitting your head?  Are you serious?  My helmet adds an inch or so onto my height.  Im still lower than minivans etc, and lower than a pedestrian the same height as me.  What exactly are you referring to?

3.  See above, this is just rediculous.

4.  Dont know about you, but I dont tend to go blind when I have to lean forwards a bit more.  And I certainly dont lose control of my bike.

5.  Either you have a serious body problem, or you have a rubbish helmet.  Ive ridden 10 miles to the start of a time trial, done the race at a serious pace and then ridden 10 miles back and never have I had sweat drip from my helmet.  Methinks youre just making things up now.

6.  Evidently youre not wearing your helmet correctly, or youve got a rubbish one.  Mine doesnt impede my view and it cost Ã,£20.

Since youre so fond of spouting rubbish without having any practical experience, I suggest you do a little test to see what might happen at a roundabout.

Put on a helmet and get on your bike.  Clip in if youve got SPDs, it all adds to the fun.  Now get a mate to run at your side and give you a wee shove.  If you can unclip and clear the bike before your head hits the deck, give yourself a pat on the back and ceremonially burn your helmet.  If however, like any normal person who becomes the victim of a careless driver who isnt looking out for bikes, you go over sideways and hit your head then youll be glad you put on a helmet at the beginning.

Ysee, the thing is all this "Helmets are useless" rubbish just encourages more people to tell themselves they can neglect to wear one because they already feel a bit silly in it.  You obviously own a helmet, so the likelyhood is that at one stage you wore it and felt it necessary to do so.  And now (possibly because of someone ranting about how useless they are on an internet forum) you dont wear it, and preach to others about how apparently theyre more likely to cause damage than prevent it.  See where Im going with this one?  If you dont want to wear one, fine.  Just dont go around trying to justify your own stupidity by telling all and sundry that theyre the ones whove got it all wrong.  Because that would be a bit silly.

And for what its worth, I just skimread that article.  And yes, it fitted exactly into the two categories all anti-helmet propoganda uses - it wont save you when you hit a truck, and head injuries never happen.

Anyone whos interested in that article but doesnt feel like reading it all, just read the last (short) section on "common sense", and see how woefully the author misses the point and scrabbles around for excuses.  "Common sense tells you to wear a helmet but sometimes common sense is wrong".  What a crock of sh*t.  

Quote from: funkychicken9000[drivelsnip]

Ysee, the thing is all this "Helmets are useless" rubbish just encourages more people to tell themselves they can neglect to wear one because they already feel a bit silly in it.  You obviously own a helmet, so the likelyhood is that at one stage you wore it and felt it necessary to do so.  And now (possibly because of someone ranting about how useless they are on an internet forum) you dont wear it, and preach to others about how apparently theyre more likely to cause damage than prevent it.  See where Im going with this one?  If you dont want to wear one, fine.  Just dont go around trying to justify your own stupidity by telling all and sundry that theyre the ones whove got it all wrong.  Because that would be a bit silly.

Its more like people who wear them are too scared to admit that theyve been sucking on the tailpipe for all this time.

Helmet use is always inversely proportional to the popularity of cycling in a country, and mandatory use has doubled the reported ER cycling head injuries in both Oz and New Zealand. Helmet use discourages cycling, and cyclings health benefits far outweigh any chance of traumatic head injury.

In short, Ill repeat the mantra: can slow virtual impact by 3mph, can preven cranial lacerations. Great. Traumatic cycling injuries are very rare. Why do people suffer an inability to understand statistics?

In the US there are approximately 400, 000 deaths from lung disease per year and 700 dead cyclists. Wearing a helmut would not have saved the vast majority of those cyclists, whose deaths were usually due to impact with a motor vehicle. So lets say that 100 deaths out of 300, 000, 000 Americans would be preventable with a helmut...pretty good odds if you dont wear one.

The logic of "every little bit helps" is ludicrous. I suspect the same folks that are so religious about bike helmet usage, open up their cars and speed given the chance. Really, you should drive 90kph when it says so, not 110--every little bit helps. Dont walk down stairs, you might fall, take the elevator--every little bit helps. Never eat sweats or pork ribs as they can contribute to poor health--every little bit helps.

I started riding bikes in the end of the 2nd bike boom, at the end of the 70s. I rode to grade school on public streets. At that time the mantra was "be traffic" and to act vehicular. Cycling fell out of favor by the late eighties and was reborn in many places as some sort of extreme sport, with the usual squawking Henny Pennys screaming "the sky is falling, the sky is falling!!"

Quote from: funkychicken9000

Quote from: M3ta7h3ad1. Increasing the chance of a Torsion/Rotational injury

2. Increasing the likelyhood of hitting your head

3. Increasing the numbers of tree branches you hit

4. Having to lose control of your bike for a short period because you have to duck lower and stop looking ahead in order to avoid such branches.

5. Sweat sucks when it falls from a sponge that every time you move your head decides to empty itself into your eyes. And the times at which you move your head tend to be the times when you want to make a maneouvre which tend to be the times that you actually want to see, not wheel along one handed trying to get the sweat sting out of your eyes.

6. Turning my head sideways with a helmet on is more awkward, and it impedes my view. Instead of seeing a full sky to floor view, I see a Helmet rim to floor view. Granted this means Ill see cars but it does cause a little bit of a distraction for you.

Im not saying its impossible to hit your head, or that you wont hit your head, im saying your body will throw itself in harms way to protect your head naturally, there is no need to suffer the above 6 items (that are the first few things off of the top of my head (no pun intended )) for what amounts to very little extra protection.

Its polystyrene mate... It doesnt protect my damn computer monitor when in the hands of royal mail... why the hell should I trust it to protect my head!

Allow me to comment on a few of your points.

1. Bollocks.  Give me a situation where those effects are more significant and the probability of occurance is higher than the knock your head will recieve and Ill give you a gold star.  And remember I have two years of kinematics and rotational dynamics study under my belt.

2.  Increasing the likelyhood of hitting your head?  Are you serious?  My helmet adds an inch or so onto my height.  Im still lower than minivans etc, and lower than a pedestrian the same height as me.  What exactly are you referring to?

3.  See above, this is just rediculous.

4.  Dont know about you, but I dont tend to go blind when I have to lean forwards a bit more.  And I certainly dont lose control of my bike.

5.  Either you have a serious body problem, or you have a rubbish helmet.  Ive ridden 10 miles to the start of a time trial, done the race at a serious pace and then ridden 10 miles back and never have I had sweat drip from my helmet.  Methinks youre just making things up now.

6.  Evidently youre not wearing your helmet correctly, or youve got a rubbish one.  Mine doesnt impede my view and it cost Ã,£20.

Since youre so fond of spouting rubbish without having any practical experience, I suggest you do a little test to see what might happen at a roundabout.

Put on a helmet and get on your bike.  Clip in if youve got SPDs, it all adds to the fun.  Now get a mate to run at your side and give you a wee shove.  If you can unclip and clear the bike before your head hits the deck, give yourself a pat on the back and ceremonially burn your helmet.  If however, like any normal person who becomes the victim of a careless driver who isnt looking out for bikes, you go over sideways and hit your head then youll be glad you put on a helmet at the beginning.

Ysee, the thing is all this "Helmets are useless" rubbish just encourages more people to tell themselves they can neglect to wear one because they already feel a bit silly in it.  You obviously own a helmet, so the likelyhood is that at one stage you wore it and felt it necessary to do so.  And now (possibly because of someone ranting about how useless they are on an internet forum) you dont wear it, and preach to others about how apparently theyre more likely to cause damage than prevent it.  See where Im going with this one?  If you dont want to wear one, fine.  Just dont go around trying to justify your own stupidity by telling all and sundry that theyre the ones whove got it all wrong.  Because that would be a bit silly.

You call my words rubbish, yet you spout even more of your own out?!

Give me a break mate.

1. Ive read studies and reports on it Will link them up here if I can find them. I also understand the physics of having something catch on the road causing your head to twist.

2. If you have an inch wider head, the distance your head has to travel to the floor is decreased, the amount of force that your shoulders can absorb prior to your head hitting the floor is decreased also (as your head will hit before they cushion the blow fully.

Heres a little test. Without a helmet lay on the floor, find a book or similar object that will fit through the gap created by holding your head level.

Next... wear a helmet, now do the same test with the same object. Doesnt fit? ahhh thatll be because youve just increased the size of your head. Chances are if you are in an impact, your shoulders will take the blow, giving your hand time to raise (as would be natural) to provide a cushion for your head, and it would also be more likely that the shoulders would absorb all of the impact energy (if a helmet can do it, im pretty damn sure, muscle, sinew, fat, and bone can do it) in a sideways fall and you will be on the "bounce" up (as your body will bounce) without your head touching the floor. Wear a helmet and you lose that natural defence.

Also along the lines of point 3. Tree Boughs and branches, I myself ended up riding into a damn tree on the way in today because I couldnt duck low enough and maintain a forward looking position. If I was wearing a helmet Id have hit it more fully than just a glancing leaf blow on the back of my head.

Point 4. Duck down... Duck down low they way I have to when travelling under drooping damn trees on the trail (that incidentally cover the entire path) where do your eyes go? Ahhh looking at your cross bar yet? Yup! Voila, you are now no longer in control of your bicycle youve lost most of your forward vision, and your technically riding blind. Travelling at 20mph your covering roughly 9 mtrs every second. You look down for two seconds, your 18-20 mtrs further down the road you were on.

5. Its a problem with any helmets that are fitted well to your head, and utilise the common "sponge pad" fitting method. I sweat, I sweat a hell of a lot. The front forehead pad on my Giro helmet collects sweat and dumps it into my face when squeezed, which happens when I turn my head.

6. Its correctly fitted, however with a fat face due to being overweight the strap pulls uncomfortably tight when rotating my head, and turning my head to view traffic I end up with the peak of my helmet impeding the view of traffic I have.

In response to your other witterings. http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ Read it. I read it, and agreed on my experiences with helmets, and made a choice.

And its not a "biased" website... it contains articles for and against, purely for the people who read it to decide on their own grounds.

I recommend my trademark Columbus cap, 8 ounces of luxurious chamois butter, and a dozen 8x10s of Carmen Electra as a panacea.  I hope your bathroom has a lock.

If your 16+ youve probably got really good road skills and know the highwaycode inside out. If youre 8-12yrs old you probably dont.

Im saying the former shouldnt be educating the latter through example.

Yes.

same as wearing a seat-belt if you ask me..  feels wrong without it.

Quote from: M3ta7h3adListen up, here comes the science bit!

I hate to say it mate, but for all your supposed sciencey talk you have absolutely no grasp on the concepts of momentum and energy.

When you tip over sideways on a bike, you have angular momentum.  What happens when your shoulder hits the ground?  You dont "bounce back up", far from it.  Your body isnt a solid beam, surprise surprise bits move!  Your body stops, your head carries on due to its momentum and hits the ground.  Fall over sideways without anticipating it and I would put money on your head making contact with the floor.  Who cares if your head hits the ground 0.01s before it would do if you werent wearing a helmet?  If youre wearing one youll walk away from it like I did when it happened to me, and if youre not then you may just have a trip to A&E and some lovely concussion to go with it.  That type of contact is exactly what a helmet is designed to soothe, they never pretended to help in head-on collisions with lorries.  Toppling sideways as often happens when cars pull out into you at roundabouts, crossings and junctions is where they come into their own.

As for your argument about ducking under trees, if you cant see a safe way through then get off and walk round them.  Saying that helmet wearers are going to suffer more tree-related injuries is rediculous, as its the devil-may-care attitude of deciding to cycle through shrubbery in the first place which is at fault.

And Max, you can spout all the statistics about road deaths and helmet adoption all you like; Im not saying that helmets necessarily save a statistically significant amount of lives.  But if you could go and find me statistics for split scalps, cracked skulls and serious concussion related to cycling I think we both know what theyd show, and thats why wearing a helmet is sensible.

So wearing something that causes accidents because of heatstroke, annoyance, and sweat cascades, is good because it prevents injury in a few select cases? Circular logic!

FC2K, dont use some assumptive imaginary figures, if you want to play the numbers game, quote some numbers. None of this "9/10 ER nurses say..." baloney. Yeah, Ive had stitches twice, so what, helmut wouldnt have helped in either case. Even if it had, I wouldnt be converted. People fall walking every day, but we dont have pedestrian helmets.

By far and away the thing that affects safety is behavior, and by focusing on the red herring of helmets, subscribers to that sort of theology undermine public safety.

I often see whole families out riding these days, as cycling is very popular in our local parks and residential streets. Invariably, theyre riding three abreast or on the wrong side of the road or weaving or running stop signs causing motorists to slam on their brakes. But theyve got their Helmuts on! Yay, woo.

Quote from: maximusotterBottom line: responsible cycling is not dangerous. People that insist on helmets on the street are hysterics. If you insist on responsible street cyclists wearing helmets, then statistically you must support painters on ladders,

what a big load of sh*te

it is a fairly sensible precaution - if you fall of your bike you could bump your head - doing this when on the road & with a car isnt really very good for you

it is not like slipping in the shower or tripping up when running & it doesnt have to be the cyclists fault either as anyone whos cycled in a big city ought to know - cab drivers have an ongoing war with cyclists in London & can get very aggressive

the bottom line is that a helmet could save your life or save you from serious injury & not wearing one while on busy roads is a bit silly to say the least

Quote from: maximusotterSo wearing something that causes accidents because of heatstroke, annoyance, and sweat cascades, is good because it prevents injury in a few select cases? Circular logic!

FC2K, dont use some assumptive imaginary figures, if you want to play the numbers game, quote some numbers. None of this "9/10 ER nurses say..." baloney. Yeah, Ive had stitches twice, so what, helmut wouldnt have helped in either case. Even if it had, I wouldnt be converted. People fall walking every day, but we dont have pedestrian helmets.

By far and away the thing that affects safety is behavior, and by focusing on the red herring of helmets, subscribers to that sort of theology undermine public safety.

I often see whole families out riding these days, as cycling is very popular in our local parks and residential streets. Invariably, theyre riding three abreast or on the wrong side of the road or weaving or running stop signs causing motorists to slam on their brakes. But theyve got their Helmuts on! Yay, woo.

In this country, heatstroke is rare and sweat cascades arent a problem for the majority of the cycling public out on their pleasure rides or commutes.  So no circular logic here.  Also I dont see anywhere where Ive quoted any figures.  Ive stated what happens when a person falls sideways as Id like to think I understand the various motions involved quite well.  Perhaps you could point the figures you dissagree with out and Ill try to address them?

But its important also to note that you can be as safe as you like, but theres a limit to what you can protect yourself from.  You cant always account for other peoples behaviour, women driving into you while theyre busy applying their makeup, etc etc and this is why people take precautions.

I fully appreciate that the majority of cycling accidents are behavioural.  But really thats a seperate issue; if people feel wearing a helmet stops the need for sensible biking then they need the problem addressing through education - not by taking the helmet away!  Theres really no need to compromise on safety.  With more education people are more than capable of being safe cyclists, helmet or no helmet.  I dont think anyone can dispute that really.  

Quote from: Dave

Quote from: maximusotterBottom line: responsible cycling is not dangerous. People that insist on helmets on the street are hysterics. If you insist on responsible street cyclists wearing helmets, then statistically you must support painters on ladders,

what a big load of sh*te

it is a fairly sensible precaution - if you fall of your bike you could bump your head - doing this when on the road & with a car isnt really very good for you

it is not like slipping in the shower or tripping up when running & it doesnt have to be the cyclists fault either as anyone whos cycled in a big city ought to know - cab drivers have an ongoing war with cyclists in London & can get very aggressive

the bottom line is that a helmet could save your life or save you from serious injury & not wearing one while on busy roads is a bit silly to say the least

Problem with your drivel is that its based on Public Perception, and not on any kind of real experience or science.

Countries or regions that have instituted helmet laws for cycling are "paradoxically" experiencing a greater cyclist injury rate. Probably due to increased confidence.

If you routinely fall 3 foot onto smooth concrete, then by all means wear one. If youre someone like me that rides 5-7K per year and finds them uncomfortable, the statistics fail to overcome that discomfort.