Do you wear a helmet?

[fixer]

"Do you wear a helmet?"

No, and I will never wear one, as a matter of principle.

[Tonyf33]

I'm a slaphead so a bit of sun or cold protection is nice. I wear a trad cotton cycling cap, and it works remarkably well. You'd almost think it had been designed for cycling in... oh, hang on!

Pete.

I've never worn a helmet but do wear this when it's cold, note the attached impact resistant tassles to the top.

[fatnslow]

how is not wearing a helmet a matter of principle?

I always wear a helmet and usually try to persuade the folks I am going out with, just on the grounds that it would be me who has to inform their wife and kids if the worst does happen.

Perhaps people should stop using condoms as a matter of principle

after all it may never happen.

Its not a principle its a choice

Doesn't take a scientist or a study to tell you that putting something designed to dissapate an impact between your head and the ground is a good idea

[kwackers]

Doesn't take a scientist or a study to tell you that putting something designed to dissapate an impact between your head and the ground is a good idea

And if the scientist or study tell you it's a bad idea???

[hubgearfreak]

how is not wearing a helmet a matter of principle?

cycling has a very important role to play both in terms of transport chaos and CO2 emissions.
but to realise it's true potential, there needs to be more people on bikes, for more journeys. it's a safe, normal & everyday activity that all but the seriously unfit can do. to go around with lycra trousers, clicky shoes or plastic hats on leads none cyclists to believe that it's hard work and dangerous. by wearing anything but ordinary everyday clothes (or getting sponsored for a C2C, E2E & etc. holiday) you're doing cycling, congestion and the environment a disservice. that's how it's a matter of principle.

[2Tubs]

Doesn't take a scientist or a study to tell you that putting something designed to dissapate an impact between your head and the ground is a good idea

But it does take a scientist or study to tell you whether something designed to dissipate an impact has any effect on serious head injury.

After all, the design may not work.

Gazza

[fatnslow]

Hold your hands up now all those who don't wear them because they consider them not to be cool
or " I didn't wear one as a kid"

and then develop there deeply held principles to justify it to themselves.

Go on be honest.

Then hands up all those who would be happy sending their children out on bikes without helmet

anyone?

[kwackers]

Hold your hands up now all those who don't wear them because they consider them not to be cool
or " I didn't wear one as a kid"

and then develop there deeply held principles to justify it to themselves.

Go on be honest.

Then hands up all those who would be happy sending their children out on bikes without helmet

anyone?

Cool? I'm as uncool as it's possible to be - and proud.

My principles aren't deeply held, I simply believe if the evidence was compelling it would be obvious. It isn't obvious so therefore things aren't that simple.

I only wear a helmet for commuting, for shops etc I don't bother.

Kids? A five year old banging around outside the house with his mates - definitely. The low speeds and frequent spills are ideal for a helmets level of protection.
However my son is now 20, so tbh he'll wear whatever he feels like and I have no feelings either way.

[Ivor Tingting]

Fight......

I took an oath I would not to post but just couldn't resist. I thought this post was dead.

[alanjb]

Never. But I would if I ever went stumpjumping - and I'd wear elbow and knee protectors too.
In 55 years of almost daily commuting, most of it in Birmingham, I've been knocked off three times by motorists. The last and worst time I had four stitches in my scalp. (A price I think worth paying for all those years of freedom.)
I think helmets came in from the USA where people can be persuaded to buy anything.

[Ivor Tingting]

Never. But I would if I ever went stumpjumping - and I'd wear elbow and knee protectors too.
In 55 years of almost daily commuting, most of it in Birmingham, I've been knocked off three times by motorists. The last and worst time I had four stitches in my scalp.

Ouch! Close run thing. A helmet might have protected your head......

I think helmets came in from the USA where people can be persuaded to buy anything.

Really, have you tried? Certain to make a fortune then if you are persuasive.........

[hubgearfreak]

Then hands up all those who would be happy sending their children out on bikes without helmet

anyone?

you're obviously the type who likes to add something without reading what's already been said. it makes the thread discontinuous, and you look a little daft.

see page three

[EdinburghFixed]

Hold your hands up now all those who don't wear them because they consider them not to be cool
or " I didn't wear one as a kid"

and then develop there deeply held principles to justify it to themselves.

Go on be honest.

Then hands up all those who would be happy sending their children out on bikes without helmet

anyone?

Actually, my story is quite similar to pjclinch's on the previous page. I started out on the premise that a helmet would prevent head injuries and that this was a reasonable trade-off for the expense, discomfort and looking a bit stupid. After all, why else would they exist (the naivety of youth eh?)

Now I am quite happy about being a reformed, bare-headed, normal rider. I don't worry about the minescule risk of head injury on my bike, any more than I do when walking to the shops (which is not the same as denying that it exists) and I am happy to preach the good news about how surprisingly safe cycling is (and how surprisingly unnecessary and counterproductive helmets are).

And in answer to your second question, I will pose another. Coming up on one in three children in the UK now has a serious weight problem - many of whom will go on to suffer from a battery of chronic health problems and then a premature death. On the other hand cycle helmets prevent, at the most optimistic estimate, a really tiny number of serious head injuries. Yet riding instead of driving / being driven is one of the few easy, cheap, convenient (since you'd be sitting in traffic otherwise) and enjoyable ways of taking exercise. I most definitely will not risk my kids being put off by contributing to what is really a moral panic, a culture of fear with little basis in reality.

Yes, they may end up with brain damage from a freak cycling accident. But I'm not prepared to make them wear sleeping helmets, showering helmets, walking helmets, driving helmets, and all the rest (although many of these activities are more hazardous than sitting on a bike). It's all a question of seeing through the spin to the reality beneath.

[aesmith]

cycling has a very important role to play both in terms of transport chaos and CO2 emissions.
but to realise it's true potential, there needs to be more people on bikes, for more journeys. it's a safe, normal & everyday activity that all but the seriously unfit can do. to go around with lycra trousers, clicky shoes or plastic hats on leads none cyclists to believe that it's hard work and dangerous. by wearing anything but ordinary everyday clothes (or getting sponsored for a C2C, E2E & etc. holiday) you're doing cycling, congestion and the environment a disservice. that's how it's a matter of principle.

Very well put, and exactly how I'd have liked to express myself.

I would also add that the insistence on showers at work is another factor pigeon-holing cycling as a specialist activity. You don't have to be an athlete to cycle, and you don't have to work hard enough to need a shower for it to be good for your health.

[hubgearfreak]

I would also add that the insistence on showers at work is another factor pigeon-holing cycling as a specialist activity.

i hadn't thought of that and you're right, thankyou.