My lack of helmet worked for me.

[Cowsham]

And long term health expectancy is much improved.

And hair

[Stevek76]

The classic dutch ice video I think demonstrates the addition complexity riding position adds to this whole topic. I'd hypothesise that a utility cyclist pootling on a sit up and beg bike and zero weight on their hands is far less likely to use their head to break their fall than the strava K/Qom chasing head down time trialist. Everything else fits in a spectrum in between.

[mattheus]

The classic dutch ice video I think demonstrates the addition complexity riding position adds to this whole topic. I'd hypothesise that a utility cyclist pootling on a sit up and beg bike and zero weight on their hands is far less likely to use their head to break their fall than the strava K/Qom chasing head down time trialist. Everything else fits in a spectrum in between.

I'm not sure why that would be, in the case of a slipping over* incident (and I speak as a non-situp-and-beg rider, who always lands on elbow/hip/knee when I crash )

We're both speculating of course; but one thing is to look at pro-racing injuries; collarbones have always been the most common (serious) injury. Yes you get the odd head injury - but they are actually a small minorty. So riders are mostly sticking an arm out in self-defence, and tend to keep their head away from the ground.

*Running into things at speed - where that is traffic, or more likely trees and road-furniture in the pro peleton - could be different. I've only done that once since I was 12, and the driver was prosecuted!

[axel_knutt]

The gross illogicality is the assumption that riding in the door zone and riding at night without lights somehow have a causative relationship with wearing a helmet. It’s utter tosh.

Or rather: I’ll hold it to be utter tosh until the OP can cite some really solid evidence to demonstrate otherwise.

Some people think it's utter tosh that drivers overtake closer to helmet wearers, or that they drive faster when wearing seatbelts, but they're both proven. I recommend reading some psychology to see the things people do, both clever and stupid, without being aware that they're doing it.

Risk compensation is real, although the extent to which it influences the behaviour of cyclists isn’t, so far as I’m aware, anything like well understood. As for the riding in the door zone and going without lights stuff: I still hold it to be utter tosh.

BTW, if you read the conclusions of that paper, they do not support the idea that wearing a helmet makes a cyclist more likely to take risks, in fact they say the opposite, that the appetite for risk (going fast being the risk explored) seems to come first, and the package of gear to do so, including a helmet, follows. It concludes that what it calls “population shift” seems to be a bigger issue thsn risk compensation.

Selective uptake masks risk compensation, and makes it harder to detect. Selective uptake has been demonstrated in the case of seatbelts.

It's worth noting that risk compensation means that someone who doubts the benefit of a helmet is more likely to benefit from it than someone who's convinced of its merit.

However, the title is a bit confusing. Given that anecdotal accounts are usually about how a helmet helped in a crash, I was rather expecting there to be a crash involved where one was not worn! And there's nothing to stop anyone from both riding outside the door zone, and wearing a helmet...

I took this thread to be a parody of the "My helmet worked for me" thread. It appears to just have created a continuation/duplicate of it.

I would urge every cyclist to wear one, they’ve come down a lot in price now, as have helmets, which I believe should be compulsory. If I hadn’t been wearing one I wouldn’t be here today.”" “Any cyclist who goes out without a helmet telling his wife and children he loves them is lying.”"

...and helmet wearers accuse non-wearers of telling them what to do. Jeez.

The classic dutch ice video I think demonstrates the addition complexity riding position adds to this whole topic. I'd hypothesise that a utility cyclist pootling on a sit up and beg bike and zero weight on their hands is far less likely to use their head to break their fall than the strava K/Qom chasing head down time trialist. Everything else fits in a spectrum in between.

Two 'big' crashes I've had:

1) I went down on my right side after a crank broke. No bones broken, but horrendous bruising, and a huge haematoma on my right hip bone.

2) A car pulled out a side road in front of me, I hit the front offside wing, and both me and the bike summersaulted over the car and landed in the road at the far side. I had a scratch on my shin, and not much else.

(Damage to the bike was the other way around: worse on the second one.)

[cycle tramp]

The classic dutch ice video I think demonstrates the addition complexity riding position adds to this whole topic. I'd hypothesise that a utility cyclist pootling on a sit up and beg bike and zero weight on their hands is far less likely to use their head to break their fall than the strava K/Qom chasing head down time trialist. Everything else fits in a spectrum in between.

Being a utility cyclist who pootles* around on a sit up and beg bike, I've always thought so.
..for a start I'm not attempting to cycle at 16, 20 or 25 mph so there's less kinetic energy involved, secondly my upper body is (probably) more in a relaxed position than anyone riding on the hooks or hoods.. (and I believe that the more relaxed your body is, there is less chance of injury) and thirdly, my head has a couple more milliseconds to hit the hard surface when compared to those in dropped riding position, and perhaps long enough for me to fall on my hands or shoulder, first...

...then we have the issues that sit up and beg bikes probably give a very good view of the road ahead, helping the rider to avoid any potential hazardous situations in the first place, as well as being more easily seen and more easily recognisable by other traffic as a person, rather than an object (light blue touch paper..... stand well back)

(*hands up who remembers the Flumps?)

[drossall]

However, the title is a bit confusing. Given that anecdotal accounts are usually about how a helmet helped in a crash, I was rather expecting there to be a crash involved where one was not worn! And there's nothing to stop anyone from both riding outside the door zone, and wearing a helmet...

I took this thread to be a parody of the "My helmet worked for me" thread. It appears to just have created a continuation/duplicate of it.

Quite. I simply remarked that the parody would work better if the reported incident(s) had included an accident that was survived without serious injury.

[GedBen]

Quite. I simply remarked that the parody would work better if the reported incident(s) had included an accident that was survived without serious injury.

Over the last sixty odd years of cycling, I have come off a few times. Last time was last year, riding home - fairly high-speed downhill, dark and wet. I came down pretty heavily and slid along the tarmac. Got up and rode home. Injuries manifested themselves the following day - damaged shoulder and hip (eventually diagnosed as a suspected cracked pelvis). I've never worn a helmet except when competition rules dictate.

[irc]

However, the title is a bit confusing. Given that anecdotal accounts are usually about how a helmet helped in a crash, I was rather expecting there to be a crash involved where one was not worn! And there's nothing to stop anyone from both riding outside the door zone, and wearing a helmet...

I took this thread to be a parody of the "My helmet worked for me" thread. It appears to just have created a continuation/duplicate of it.

Quite. I simply remarked that the parody would work better if the reported incident(s) had included an accident that was survived without serious injury.

I would like to oblige but I have never had a serious crash. The few low speed offs I have had have never resulted in my head contacting the ground.
Prevention better than cure etc.
Almost all accidents are avoidable but helmet use is the only thing that gets any attention.
So whenever anyone starts a thread about how a helmet saved their life I just yawn.

Countless examples. A tricky stretch of the A82 in Clydebank for example. Dual carriageway 50mph heavy traffic. Two cyclist deaths in 6 months. I used the shared footpath rather than the road there.


https://www.clydebankpost.co.uk/news/15 ... last-year/

There are several routes from my town into central Glasgow. One I have never used because it combines high speed traffic, blind corners, and that awkward width where it isn't clear to drivers that they can't share a lane with a cyclist. There is also high verges and no pavements so even if you saw a crash coming there is no escape. I see helmeted riders using both roads.

I think cycling is safe with or without a helmet but the already small risk can be greatly reduced by route choice, well maintained bike, good lights at light, awareness of what surrounding road users are doing. Which means mirror use as well as watching ahead.

All the above is stating the obvious. I don't wear a helmet for other low risk activities.

[Jon in Sweden]

2) A car pulled out a side road in front of me, I hit the front offside wing, and both me and the bike summersaulted over the car and landed in the road at the far side. I had a scratch on my shin, and not much else.

(Damage to the bike was the other way around: worse on the second one.)

Almost exactly the same thing happened to me when I was 16 and training pretty hard. A car across me as I was coming down a hill. I didn't have a moment to react, hit the wing, flew over the top of the car and ended up with a small bruise on my thigh. The (steel) frame was crumbled, though the Mavic V section wheels survived unscathed.

I did a wonderful amount of damage to the car though and got a nice insurance payout.

On the topic of helmets, there is little reason not to wear one. I ride 16,000km a year. For all but maybe 300-400km around the village, I wear a helmet. It doesn't affect my riding - I hate crashing and will do all I can to avoid it.

I am grateful that I've not landed on my head yet and hope it never happens. I'll be happy to have a helmet on though if it does.

[roubaixtuesday]

On the topic of helmets, there is little reason not to wear one. I ride 16,000km a year.

I think there are two types of ride where a helmet is significantly problematic.

Firstly when it's very hot. Sweat running over glasses and eyes is pretty much impossible to avoid.

Secondly when it's raining heavily; water runs through the helmet and into your eyes picking up sweat and/or suncream off the helmet, making it impossible to see at all.

The latter can be solved by wearing a cap under the helmet.

[pjclinch]

On the topic of helmets, there is little reason not to wear one. I ride 16,000km a year. For all but maybe 300-400km around the village, I wear a helmet. It doesn't affect my riding - I hate crashing and will do all I can to avoid it.

For the umpteenth time, this exact same line of reasoning ought to apply to driving (where you've even got air conditioning and no great need for exercise to make it even less of a comfort issue, and a large lockable box to store it in when you've parked). Or being a pedestrian, or just being at home (where many/most accidents happen).

But it doesn't.

My reason not to wear one for most riding is the same reason I don't wear a helmet to drive or use the stairs: more faff than I feel it's worth. I'm not suggesting I'm more or less safe without it, simply that ICBA.

I suspect most people's reason to wear one boils down to they're just happier with one than without, but the rationalisations they apply to that preference are (to quote Goldacre & Spiegelhalter) more about "the cultural, psychological, and political aspects of popular debate around risk" than hard objective risk assessment.

There's no problem with wearing a lid because you want to, but if it is down to personal preference rather than objective risk assessment then it's probably good to realise that.

Pete.

[pjclinch]

Secondly when it's raining heavily; water runs through the helmet and into your eyes picking up sweat and/or suncream off the helmet, making it impossible to see at all.

The latter can be solved by wearing a cap under the helmet.

Or pull a helmet cover over any vents. Shower caps work okay for this if you want to save money.

Pete.

[Jon in Sweden]

Or pull a helmet cover over any vents. Shower caps work okay for this if you want to save money.

Pete.

I do this in deep winter as you really want to insulate your head when it's minus 15 or lower. A hat will get sweaty and the wind chill is extraordinary at 50kph and minus 15c.

[Jon in Sweden]

I think there are two types of ride where a helmet is significantly problematic.

Firstly when it's very hot. Sweat running over glasses and eyes is pretty much impossible to avoid.

Secondly when it's raining heavily; water runs through the helmet and into your eyes picking up sweat and/or suncream off the helmet, making it impossible to see at all.

The latter can be solved by wearing a cap under the helmet.

Sweat is an issue, but it's an issue regardless of whether you wear a helmet or not. It gets consistently hotter here than the UK in summer, and I feel the heat more than almost anyone I know. I'd still rather wear a helmet.

I don't wear sunscreen (personal choice, but I don't burn and we're a long way north) and it doesn't rain often here.

[roubaixtuesday]

Sweat is an issue, but it's an issue regardless of whether you wear a helmet or not.

Absolutely not the case in my experience.

I'm not anti helmet, I always wear one commuting, but there are issues with them.