Helmets?

[Vorpal]

Wow I had no idea they caused such consternation! Thank you for your advice, it is much appreciated.

They don’t generally.... but do on this Forum

The do amongst cycle campaigners, not just in the UK, but in most countries.

The only place that I am aware of where even cycle campaigners accept helmets unquestioningly is the USA. A few argue against their promotion, but they are a tiny minority in a group that is already a tiny minority.

[Cyril Haearn]

Why, is the USA different? What about Canadia?

[Vorpal]

Why, is the USA different? What about Canadia?

I don't know about Canada. I suspect it's much like the USA in that regard, but I have never been a cycle campaigner there, nor do I know any, so I can't say for sure.

As for why is it diffferent? I don't know for certain. Much of the modern 'risk aversion culture' comes from the US, but I don't think that most other countries have completely accepted it.

[Mike Sales]

Why, is the USA different? What about Canadia?

I don't know about Canada. I suspect it's much like the USA in that regard, but I have never been a cycle campaigner there, nor do I know any, so I can't say for sure.

As for why is it diffferent? I don't know for certain. Much of the modern 'risk aversion culture' comes from the US, but I don't think that most other countries have completely accepted it.

Is it because it is in the USA that car use is most normalised, that driving is the default mode, so that the road is owned by motors?
Thus cycling is seen as intruding into this environment, and needs to conform to this normality to be accepted. Helmets are a badge of conformity to the motor world, and a sign of accepting our position.

[Vorpal]

Why, is the USA different? What about Canadia?

I don't know about Canada. I suspect it's much like the USA in that regard, but I have never been a cycle campaigner there, nor do I know any, so I can't say for sure.

As for why is it diffferent? I don't know for certain. Much of the modern 'risk aversion culture' comes from the US, but I don't think that most other countries have completely accepted it.

Is it because it is in the USA that car use is most normalised, that driving is the default mode, so that the road is owned by motors?
Thus cycling is seen as intruding into this environment, and needs to conform to this normality to be accepted. Helmets are a badge of conformity to the motor world, and a sign of accepting our position.

I'm sure that contributes. I also think that the culture there is more likely to accept victim-blaming.

[Mike Sales]

I'm sure that contributes. I also think that the culture there is more likely to accept victim-blaming.

In the USA the political culture is less likely to see the solutions to social problems in collective actions, but in individual efforts.
It is seen as your own fault if you live in a slum, not the fault of a society which allows exploitation.

[Vorpal]

I'm sure that contributes. I also think that the culture there is more likely to accept victim-blaming.

In the USA the political culture is less likely to see the solutions to social problems in collective actions, but in individual efforts.
It is seen as your own fault if you live in a slum, not the fault of a society which allows exploitation.

Sad, but true.

[belgiangoth]

Look at the pros and cons, you have every right to wear a helmet, just make sure it is an informed choice, not a result of the emotive blackmail that forms so much of the pro-helmet argument

I only wear a helmet when I need something to mount helmet mounted lights to (rain and dark).
While the evidence based brigade (me included) will oppose wearing helmets without a good reason, I would say that “if wearing a helmet makes you more likely to cycle” or “makes you happy” or “keeps your other half happy” then these are all good reasons for wearing a helmet.

[UpWrong]

Just bought a new helmet after leaving my Lazer one on a dutch train. I was confused by the new MIPS design. Decided to ignore that and go for smallest that fits my head, light, not expensive and reasonably cool. Bought a Kask Rapido which is ok. Have to say I enjoyed cycling round the Hague in the pouring rain without one - a great sense of liberation and freedom. My assumption is that a helmet will be next to useless in an accident but might be helpful if I come off whilst negotiating obstacles etc.

[JohnW]

I don't like helmets - I never have. They're hot, sweaty and cumbersome.
14 years ago I had a prang, flew over the bars and headed into the tarmac at about 30mph.
Blood was pouring from my ear and I was in the middle of a main road.
I was in intensive care for about three days, in hospital for a week, confined to bed for a further week, housebound for a further three weeks and off the bike for two months.
The head-man who treated me was a cyclist and gave me a telling off, explaining which injuries I'd have avoided if I'd been wearing a helmet.
I've worn one ever since - religiously.
About two years later, one of our club slipped on a corner in ice, hit the road with her head and smashed her helmet. She was unhurt.
Again about two years later I came off on loose gravel on local Greenway, hit a boulder with my head, split the helmet but unhurt.
Three years ago I was hit from behind by a Volvo estate (it's not always an Audi! ) I can't account for this, but I must have been whiplashed or hit by something from behind at head level, because the back of my helmet was smashed to bits. I was injured and incapacitated for 6 weeks, but had no head injury nor headache.

I always wear a helmet now - because of my own experience - no-one persuaded me but the doctor's advice made it's mark. What I do is up to me, and what others do is up to them.

Three things I've learned to watch for are :
1).Shape around the head.
2). Ventilation.
3). Don't ask the price - don't be put off by price - you'll have to try helmets to satisfy item 1). You may have to try several different brands.
4). Pay what you have to, to ensure correct shape and fit - ask the price afterwards.
5). Be sure that replacement inner pads are easily and freely available. They get sweated up and horrible.
A 6th thought is not to buy on-line. You can't try it on on-line. If you've saved a few quid on-line, and find it's wrong then you've all the pain of returning it and getting another and you're still not sure....................a cheapo may not be right for you, and may fail to perform when you need it most.

The last two that I bought were :
1). A frighteningly expensive (and wonderfully ventilated) Giro - the importer's rep came to the bike shop to help me with that.
2). A Specialized - less expensive, but the bike shop are Specialized dealers/agents and fit me right.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not suggesting that a helmet will save you in every and any situation, but some protection is potentially better than none.

Edited 20th July - highlighted heavy.

[Oldjohnw]

What a sensible post, JohnW.

It's all in the name!

[mattsccm]

The answer is dead simple. Buy the one that fits. All else is subjective and even that is to some extent. My aero enclosed TT helmet is actually cooler than my much ventilated road one. It was cheaper as well. Design really.

[Cugel]

Why, is the USA different? What about Canadia?

I don't know about Canada. I suspect it's much like the USA in that regard, but I have never been a cycle campaigner there, nor do I know any, so I can't say for sure.

As for why is it diffferent? I don't know for certain. Much of the modern 'risk aversion culture' comes from the US, but I don't think that most other countries have completely accepted it.

The US risk-aversion culture?

It's interesting that you find that in cycling. In US woodworking circles the very opposite applies. It's almost a necessary badge of manly bravery to eschew safety guards, devices and procedures in that domain - the amateur woodworking domain at least.

For example, even today, there's a large resistance to the notion of guards over table saw blades; riving knives; sliding carriages (rather than dangerous homemade sliding contraptions). When someone invented a sawstop thingy that stopped the blade rotation instantaneously via detection of a touch of the operator flesh on the blade, there was a huge controversy about how real woodworkers just needed to be experienced to avoid losing a hand or it's fingers and that sawstop was just a money-gouging scheme. Peculiar.

Cugel

[Mike Sales]

Why, is the USA different? What about Canadia?

I don't know about Canada. I suspect it's much like the USA in that regard, but I have never been a cycle campaigner there, nor do I know any, so I can't say for sure.

As for why is it diffferent? I don't know for certain. Much of the modern 'risk aversion culture' comes from the US, but I don't think that most other countries have completely accepted it.

The US risk-aversion culture?

It's interesting that you find that in cycling. In US woodworking circles the very opposite applies. It's almost a necessary badge of manly bravery to eschew safety guards, devices and procedures in that domain - the amateur woodworking domain at least.

For example, even today, there's a large resistance to the notion of guards over table saw blades; riving knives; sliding carriages (rather than dangerous homemade sliding contraptions). When someone invented a sawstop thingy that stopped the blade rotation instantaneously via detection of a touch of the operator flesh on the blade, there was a huge controversy about how real woodworkers just needed to be experienced to avoid losing a hand or it's fingers and that sawstop was just a money-gouging scheme. Peculiar.

Cugel

own, use
It is peculiar. The Merkin attitude to guns seems to show an acceptance of risk rather than limit the freedom to own the damn things.

[Cyril Haearn]

Cugel, please to comment on the Welsh attitude to safety with woodworking tools in relation to the attitude to Hellmuths for cycling
Danke