Cycling UK Forum

cyclemad wrote:but isn't it better/safer to wear a correctly fitted cycle helmet rather than nothing at all?

It's much better people keep their unwelcomed opinions to themselves,and not shout them to all and sundry

Mike Sales wrote:I wonder if helmet wearers ever get shouted at by non-believers?

Under my breath I do!

Saw a couple of riders the other day, riding on the footway/pavement.
I wanted to stop and tell them to ..........

A. Get off the footpath onto the road.
B. Stop wearing a silly helmet because you're riding a bike on a footpath! What are you going to do? Fall off it?
C. Why aren't all the pedestrians wearing a helmet who you are having to navigate past?

Mick F wrote:

Mike Sales wrote:I wonder if helmet wearers ever get shouted at by non-believers?

Under my breath I do!

Saw a couple of riders the other day, riding on the footway/pavement.
I wanted to stop and tell them to ..........

A. Get off the footpath onto the road.
B. Stop wearing a silly helmet because you're riding a bike on a footpath! What are you going to do? Fall off it?
C. Why aren't all the pedestrians wearing a helmet who you are having to navigate past?

My favourite was on the pavement, wearing Hi-Viz and helmet, completed with a strobe. I gave him a stare with raised eyebrows. I have been known to ask middle aged pavementeers if their mother won't let them ride on the road yet, when in a poor mood.

Mike Sales wrote:I wonder if helmet wearers ever get shouted at by non-believers?

Yup, I have - one damn fool tried to tell me they don't work, a few weeks after mine did work, in an accident

rmurphy195 wrote:

Mike Sales wrote:I wonder if helmet wearers ever get shouted at by non-believers?

Yup, I have - one damn fool tried to tell me they don't work, a few weeks after mine did work, in an accident

When a rider injures their head in a helmet, does that prove anything? See the thread about a guy suing Specialized.
The one time I banged my head on the tarmac I was unhurt, presumably due to my cotton Festina casquette.

rmurphy195 wrote:

Mike Sales wrote:I wonder if helmet wearers ever get shouted at by non-believers?

Yup, I have - one damn fool tried to tell me they don't work, a few weeks after mine did work, in an accident

Did they shout at you in the street? Without stopping? Without waiting for a reply?

reohn2 wrote:

cyclemad wrote:but isn't it better/safer to wear a correctly fitted cycle helmet rather than nothing at all?

It's much better people keep their unwelcomed opinions to themselves,and not shout them to all and sundry

Wellll ......

At that moment when I reach the status "old enough to get away with playing the eccentric old fool" I will so-play that fool. It seems like a fine hobby, with many opportunities for perhaps unkind pleasures; but pleasures nevertheless. Shouting unwelcome opinions to all and sundry will surely be an important element of playing eccentric. I may do it from a small soapbox or even a large pedestal.

Watcha mean, I've already attained the status "eccentric old fool"!? I'll have you know I am the epitome of sweetness & light, with only helpful advice for all cack-hands, inepts and outright fools everywhere. Oh yes I am!

Cugel, buying a counter-banging stick and a bullhorn next week.

mjr wrote:....Abroad, I've been part of a touring group which had a Dutch woman shout at us that "the Tour de France is that way" which I suspect was aimed at the 80%ish helmet users among us but that's about the only time I've ever been in earshot of anything like that!

It's far less common than motorists shouting at cyclists, though.

I had similar some time ago whilst cycling through France. A elderly French man piped up, rather jovially, the he “didn’t know the Tour de France was coming through today “ followed quickly by “no Brexit!”. (The referendum was taking place two weeks later. )

cyclemad wrote:but isn't it better/safer to wear a correctly fitted cycle helmet rather than nothing at all?

As Ben Goldacre might say, "I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that"

mmcnay wrote:Yesterday afternoon, I was cycling with my son, on a cycle path next to a busy road. A young man on a passing road bike, wearing team colours and a streamlined helmet, shouted that I should be wearing a helmet like my son was. He was loud, his face creased in self-righteousness. I told him to mind his own business. He sped off, the coward, giving me the finger.

This is entirely normal human behaviour.

However, while many of us have got past relishing passing on Received Wisdom (as opposed to critically appraised knowledge) in this way about the time we leave primary school, it does persist in a sizeable chunk of the population.

Pete.

When a club mate told me I looked good but would look better with a helmet, I told him no, I'd look an idiot, like you.

Mike Sales wrote:When a club mate told me I looked good but would look better with a helmet, I told him no, I'd look an idiot, like you.

It is a bizarre claim I sometimes come across to the effect that modern helmets are "stylish".
I don't pretend to understand style and fashion etc., but if this is really so it does seem odd that if I'm in town late on a Friday or Saturday then the folk queuing up at the trendy pubs & clubs aren't all sporting them...

Pete.

pjclinch wrote:

Mike Sales wrote:When a club mate told me I looked good but would look better with a helmet, I told him no, I'd look an idiot, like you.

It is a bizarre claim I sometimes come across to the effect that modern helmets are "stylish".
I don't pretend to understand style and fashion etc., but if this is really so it does seem odd that if I'm in town late on a Friday or Saturday then the folk queuing up at the trendy pubs & clubs aren't all sporting them...

Pete.

I have noted cycle helmets being used in TV comedies and ads to denote a sort of harmless geekishness. Alun Armstrong's character in Old Dogs, New Tricks, for instance.

Mike Sales wrote:The one time I banged my head on the tarmac I was unhurt, presumably due to my cotton Festina casquette.

As a teenager, before helmets were heard of, I banged my head on the tarmac when wearing nothing at all on it. I was checked for concussion in hospital and given the all clear. Otherwise I was unhurt. Presumably my hair saved me.

This is an example of the kind of accident in which a helmet could be damaged quite significantly (should be; that's what's supposed to happen), without necessarily achieving any protection. It's also an anecdote, and it's very hard to be sure what would have happened with a helmet.

Which is why some of us are interested in the national-level comparison of head-injury rates before and after helmets became widespread. The analysis is complex, and conclusions vary, but overall it doesn't seem very convincing. A few analyses show things actually getting worse*, which is the background to explanations such as some mentioned up-thread, for how helmets could make life more dangerous. Of course, others show significant benefit. Those showing really large benefit are not really credible (it turned out that they were comparing kids riding on the streets against those riding in parks, that kind of thing).

The number of people claiming benefit from helmets in crashes is itself a problem. Head injuries tend to be quite well-reported, so we should have a decent idea of the casualty rate before helmets (although cycle accidents are not always separated from others in hospital recording). When you've got loads of people telling you that their helmets have saved them, but you know that the chances of knowing someone who had been killed or (head-)injured have always been mercifully low, it's hard to explain the difference.

* If memory serves correctly, the first of these was in the Journal of Product Liability in 1986, albeit when helmets were of a very different design**. There's also been a lot of correspondence in the British Medical Journal, on both sides of the debate.

** But of course designs are changing again. After years of sceptics worrying about rotational injuries as a possible explanation for the statistics mentioned above, MIPS is becoming de rigeur. If it's necessary, that seems to be in conflict with the historical claims made for massive benefit from helmets without MIPS.

drossall wrote:... This is an example of the kind of accident in which a helmet could be damaged quite significantly (should be; that's what's supposed to happen), without necessarily achieving any protection. It's also an anecdote, and it's very hard to be sure what would have happened with a helmet. ...

Given the tendency for helmets to suffer considerable damage during relatively minor crashes it is quite possible that there would have been an effect had you been wearing a helmet. The helmet would likely have been significantly damaged, but you would have been relatively unscathed (your head might even have been a little less sore). This would potentially have had the effect of you undergoing a spontaneous religious conversion into the Church of the Helmeteer. It would bear some similarity to somebody who had been miraculously cured of a terminal illness, because fatal head injuries only have one relevant outcome for those that suffer from them. The Church has a great many apostles and missionaries within its ranks and they roam the roads preaching about the benefits of helmets to anybody that they think might be in need of conversion.