New study on helmet effectiveness

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14987
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby mjr » 28 Sep 2016, 12:59pm

Steady rider wrote:I am thinking about the feet in clips and if this would affect the option to roll?

Another excellent point. I probably wouldn't have been able to jump off during my recent incidents (including one where I caught the bike and stopped it falling) if I would have had to release my feet first.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby bovlomov » 28 Sep 2016, 1:03pm

mjr wrote:
Steady rider wrote:I am thinking about the feet in clips and if this would affect the option to roll?

Another excellent point. I probably wouldn't have been able to jump off during my recent incidents (including one where I caught the bike and stopped it falling) if I would have had to release my feet first.

Is this the start of a campaign to outlaw clips?

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14987
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby mjr » 28 Sep 2016, 1:07pm

bovlomov wrote:
mjr wrote:Another excellent point. I probably wouldn't have been able to jump off during my recent incidents (including one where I caught the bike and stopped it falling) if I would have had to release my feet first.

Is this the start of a campaign to outlaw clips?

Not yet. I think it's a pretty daft choice for non-recumbent non-racing/MTB cycling, as I've mentioned in other discussions on this site, but unlike helmets, no-one is talking about forcing cyclists to be clipped to their bikes and it seems like clip use rarely harms others (unlikely clip promotion...).
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 2919
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby The utility cyclist » 28 Sep 2016, 1:19pm

I've tucked and rolled from about 30mph (clipped in), well not so much rolled as changed body shape and back of shoulder took all the impact, not wearing a helmet most definitely saved my life :wink: :lol: , dislocated shoulder with torn gubbins but no head strike. Dunno what is so arrogant about tucking your noggin in, aint that what you do instinctively, only when you have a hat on you tend not to miss the thing you're tucking your head in to avoid??? This is part of the explanation of the 'helmet saved my life' fairytales that keep cropping up all the time (often multiple times in a very short span) from those that wear them.

Steady rider
Posts: 2187
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby Steady rider » 28 Sep 2016, 5:53pm

One option I use myself is to add a small angle section, alloy, to the pedals, it gives a wider base to press on, allowing almost any shoes to be used, and the shoes slide out easy. This is still using the old clips for position. In theory if the straps were nearly tight you could still up to some extent. I consider to be semi-locked into the pedal a poor choice for the sort of cycling I do and risky.

If the following is helpful I not sure?
;;; = pedal runs
ooo = pedal spindle
777 = angle alloy section added 20mmx 20mm roughly x 40mm long

;;;;;;......ooooo......777;;;;;

User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 3871
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: RE: Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby pjclinch » 28 Sep 2016, 7:34pm

mjr wrote:Not yet. I think it's a pretty daft choice for non-recumbent non-racing/MTB cycling


I have SPuD-u-likes on the 8-Freight as I find it helps get a big load up a hill.

I have combined platform/mech pedals on the Moulton, which might be used on a 1 mile trip or a 40 mile trip so it's nice to have the choice. For my Saturday morning bakery run, about 2 miles each way and no traffic I don't lose by putting on my cleated shoes.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...

Stevek76
Posts: 510
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby Stevek76 » 30 Sep 2016, 12:55pm

IME, using the silver multi direction release spd cleats on my mtb being stuck in isn't a problem.

For slower speed stumbles you rapidly get very good at unclipping should a foot need to go down (and obviously you can back the tension down until emergency unclips are second nature). On the rare occasions things go more haywire I find I seem to disconnect just as if I was on flats. The multi release cleats tend to let go fairly easily as soon as the tug goes a few degrees off vertical so there's not much to stop when bike and rider have decided to part ways.

or when you are pushing the limits on a technical Mtb section and something goes wrong.


Most who do mtbing tend to get good at the whole tuck and roll (or whatever action is needed to minimise an uncontrolled dismount) thing quite quickly. Even on the really nasty stuff those capable of attempting it tend to be pretty good at falling off, there are numerous vids of, frankly insane, pro mtbers walking away from falls that would have broken bones on most.

I do wear a helmet mtbing but primarily for undergrowth protection, in my many tumbles, I've yet to actually hit my head, the main thing to teach myself to do was not to full locked arm Superman.

Steady rider
Posts: 2187
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: New study on helmet effectiveness

Postby Steady rider » 1 Mar 2017, 10:56am

http://worldtransportjournal.com/wp-con ... eb-opt.pdf
It is a long paper that shows major weaknesses in the meta analysis report.

Abstract:
Cycle helmets are a contentious issue which stems from evidence both for and
against their use and the negative effects from when legislation is imposed, which
has led to fines for non-wearers, some people cycling less or stopping and health
implications. A meta-analysis by Olivier and Creighton includes reports that compare
the proportion of head injuries or other injuries for wearer vs non-wearers.
Weaknesses in this approach stem from the combined effect of issues which affect
both the accident rate and head injury rate for helmeted vs non-helmeted or not
fully being able to evaluate the differences that occur. The meta-analysis claims that
helmet use is associated with odds reductions of 51% for head injury, 69% for serious head injury,
33% for face injury and 65% for fatal head injury. When examined in detail, all were found to be
unreliable claims due to weaknesses of the supporting evidence and methodology.