Cunobelin wrote:Just as a thought about compulsion - are you intending to simply note - Helmet worn and tick the box, or are we going to advise (and presumably fine) all those with useless helmets becasue of poor fitting, poor condition and poor strap positioning.
At a guess there'd be a new ISO standard, drawn up by non-cyclists, and you'd be fined if you helmet doesn't have the appropriate sticker. Nobody will care about condition or fit or even whether its buckled.
Wasn't there something in Italy with motorcycle helmets? The initial law said you had to "wear" one, but didn't specify it must be worn on the head.
That is another concern. Safety standards for helmets have dropped overthe last few years, there are only a couple listed as passing the Snell tests and available in the UK. EN1078 was a panacea to the manufacturers and needs to be tightened up severely if helmets are to become anywhere near as efficient as they should be for the claims made
Asdace Like you I too am folically challenged which as you will know presents a few problems when the sun shines, so I also adopt the fasionable cap crash hat combo.I
If i just wear a cap i end up wth a red/white head with a definate demarcation line. If i dont wear a cap I end up with a red/redder head. If i wear just a helmet i run the risk of ending up with a stripy pattern, as it is I have lines where the straps go so i guess i just cant win.
Regarding the peak I keep it on to keep the rain off me glasses.
Thats right I'm a baldy specky four eyes. But at least wearing a helmet can't spoil my looks. Perhaps the worst thing is that mrs cranky says my worst bit is my skinny legs.
It's also sensible to question why helmets are required for cycling but not for other activities that are as common and carry the same risk of injury e.g. walking.
Shall I put guards round my bed then to stop me falling out.
I just don't believe the amount of reasons given both for and against the wearing of helmets and also the comparisons of if cyclists should wear one then why not make pedestrians wear one as well.
If you want to wear one then do so and if not then don't bother.
None of the reports and research that have been done to my mind have neither proved one way or another.
I currently dont wear one but during a visit to the local bike shop to buy a new bike, they attempted to persuade me to change to a helmet-wearer!
I am still pondering over the decision, there are so many different takes on the arguement
-If i dont die from that will i not just die from something else (a little sinister but one viewpoint)
-If i fall off wearing a helmet, what is the likelihood it doesnt help sufficiently anyway - eg i am run over or i break my back
-A very high priced piece of foam can save a life
Did anyone see on (i think it was) the gadget show a few years ago (probably 1 or 2)
There was a new material being developed that could be added to baseball caps and beanies which allowed flexibility but when a fast/brief hit hit it it would strengthen like a helmet, They proved it by putting a treated beanie on a melon next to a normal beanie on a melon, the results were predictable....
anyway what i was coming to was - when is this going to be available and will it be stupidly expensive and not something that will benefit us cyclists?
If you look atthe way helmets work then it is easy to see why todays helmets offer so little protection.
To absorb the impact you need about 8 " of foam to do so, this cushions and absorbs the energy. THe hard shell does nothing to contribute to this.
As helmets become lighter and wih greater ventilation there is less and less material to absorb the impact and are therfore less effective.
Some companies have gi,icks to "increase" this absorption (SPeccialized dual density - 2D) for intance, but unfortunately if you want the protection ofered ten years ago - you have to toughen up the dumbed down standards in use at present and go back to unventilated heavy helmets.
Unless of course the cosmetics are impotrant enouh to allow compromise of safety?
... but there were worries about effectiveness and counterproductive results even then of course - as I may have mentioned, the first concerns of which I am aware came up in (IIRC) the Journal of Product Liability in 1988.
The protection you would need surely depends on the type of fall?
I have never landed on my head coming off a bike, but I have done so coming off a horse. One sliding fall did not apparently break the shell of the riding hat I was wearing, but stripped the velvet covering from one side. It's easy to imagine that that might have been my scalp if I wasn't wearing a hard-hat.
I don't believe wearing a helmet makes me invulnerable. But I wouldn't apply blanket phrases like "totally useless" to any head covering. (Hey, it helps keep my hair in order...) I see the important thing as making people understand how much (or how little) protection it gives you in various circumstances.
Mansfield Marauder wrote:Just out of curiosity did anyone see the BBC news this morning, there was a short clip of a very good example of why we should wear helmets.
I saw a clip of a bloke who came off and appeared to do no damage to his helmet, thus I would question if his head actually hit anything hard enough to do it harm helmet or not. I then saw a presenter raving on about how great helmets were and that everyone should wear one. Journos eh, never let the facts get int he way of the story!
I'm happy or people to make a case for helmets if they can present reasonable evidence. But a bloke falling off in a race, rather than everyday riding circumstances, who then didn't appear to hit his head with any force, or at all ? The fact that he went over the armco and down the drop says that there is a better case for cyclists wearing parachutes than helmets based on this incident!
Yes I wear a helmet, I motorcycle commuted for years before i started cycling to work so I think the idea of not wearing head protection seems a bit strange to me.
"Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable and to give an appearance of solidarity to pure wind" -George Orwell.
Just watched Five news and they did a feature on cycle commuting (part of bike week coverage. That is the good bit). Then that silly woman Natasha Kaplinski just couldn't resist it. "But wear a helmet!" she trilled.
/dog.jpg)
