My lack of helmet worked for me.

[mattheus]

The lack of helmets worked for all of these Dutch cyclists

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/VxWpwWByPfI

Great video!

Funny to see how long helmet-wearers have been commenting on the link with ice:

Black Ice, a really nasty piece of work, worst than snow.

<snip> ...
Lucky I worn a helmet and after a check-up at the A&E, I'm now licking my wounds and thinking it could of been a lot worst

[Mike Sales]

The lack of helmets worked for all of these Dutch cyclists

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/VxWpwWByPfI

Great video!

Funny to see how long helmet-wearers have been commenting on the link with ice:

Black Ice, a really nasty piece of work, worst than snow.

<snip> ...
Lucky I worn a helmet and after a check-up at the A&E, I'm now licking my wounds and thinking it could of been a lot worst

I once hit black ice and hit the tarmac remarkably suddenly and hard. I wore no helmet, but did not need one. I turned round and rode home very carefully.

[irc]

...
Examples of helmeted riders not reducing their chances of crashing include riding in the doorzone and riding without lights at night. Risk compensation?

I don't understand this, and I think that it would help the discussion greatly if you felt able to expand on the points that you are making.

Thanks

Jonathan

Simply that as far as the general public is concerned and many casual riders the helmet campaigns have had the effect of promoting something that may help in a crash but there is little promotion of avoiding crashes in the first place.

This sort of thing, for example, in a newspaper report after a cyclist and a car were in a collision. The cyclist saying every rider should have a helmet and a helmet cam.

“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.”"

A look at the video showed the crash was easily avoidable. Video was linked in a Blog post from Bez who I believe is also a member here. Video now taken down but screenshots make the point.

https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/the-collis ... -happened/

As Bez said

"Collisions and injuries are newsworthy. Those who suffer them will have had a rare opportunity to perform a real-world test of their safety equipment. Therefore, because it only selects people who have been unable to avoid a collision, the media platform is inevitably skewed towards people who have a relatively low propensity for avoidance and a relatively high rate of valuing protection."




"

[Nearholmer]

Fine.

Just a pity you expressed it in a way that very strongly implies that you believe some things that I would wager good money aren’t true.

[Jdsk]

Thankyou, irc.

I understand the point that you make about reporting of individual's comments after adverse incidents. There's a thread about guidelines for reporting road traffic collisions:
viewtopic.php?t=145903

I'm not sure about "helmet campaigns": please could you give some examples.

What was the point about "risk compensation"?

Thanks

Jonathan

[roubaixtuesday]

I once hit black ice and hit the tarmac remarkably suddenly and hard. I wore no helmet, but did not need one. I turned round and rode home very carefully.

Likewise, though I did have a helmet on (I wear one commuting). I immediately replaced the bent derailleur hanger and bought some spiked tyres.

[Mike Sales]

I once hit black ice and hit the tarmac remarkably suddenly and hard. I wore no helmet, but did not need one. I turned round and rode home very carefully.

Likewise, though I did have a helmet on (I wear one commuting). I immediately replaced the bent derailleur hanger and bought some spiked tyres.

I was riding fixed and was lucky enough to damage neither self nor bike. My strong memory is of how suddenly it happened.

[drossall]

I have some sympathy for the OP. I did understand that he was saying that people place higher priority on wearing helmets than on avoiding crashes in the first place. I've seen this in action in a youth event, where the approach to some scalp injuries occurring was to consider full-face helmets, rather than to try to prevent the crashes from happening. Similarly, if people are wearing helmets and then riding in the door zone, then reversing both (i.e. riding outside the door zone, without helmets) would probably be safer.

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...

[irc]

I'm not sure about "helmet campaigns": please could you give some examples.

What was the point about "risk compensation"?

Thanks

Jonathan

Helmet campaigns? Frequently, after a serious crash, cyclists, or relatives, campaign for helmets. Even if the evidence a helmet would have helped is questionable. For example a girl went over the bars of her bike and broke her neck. She was convinced the helmet saved her life while in fact it may have potentially made things worse as possible landing head first on ahelmet may cause higher forces on the neck than a bare head landing.

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/128 ... irls-life/

Then there was James Cracknell who became a helmet advocate after his crash in Arizona.

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.c ... lls-brain/

I would suggest than not riding east at dawn into a rising sun would be more effective than a helmet in his case. Along with using a mirror. I have had to ride off the road in the USA to avoid being hit by an overtaking vehicle. Using a mirror I saw it coming and could do something about it.

[Cowsham]

Does anyone remotely feel they are wasting their time?

[Jdsk]

I'm not sure about "helmet campaigns": please could you give some examples.

What was the point about "risk compensation"?

Helmet campaigns? Frequently, after a serious crash, cyclists, or relatives, campaign for helmets. Even if the evidence a helmet would have helped is questionable. For example a girl went over the bars of her bike and broke her neck. She was convinced the helmet saved her life while in fact it may have potentially made things worse as possible landing head first on ahelmet may cause higher forces on the neck than a bare head landing.

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/128 ... irls-life/

Then there was James Cracknell who became a helmet advocate after his crash in Arizona.

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.c ... lls-brain/

I would suggest than not riding east at dawn into a rising sun would be more effective than a helmet in his case. Along with using a mirror. I have had to ride off the road in the USA to avoid being hit by an overtaking vehicle. Using a mirror I saw it coming and could do something about it.

Thanks

Campaigns following individual adverse incidents. Got it.

Jonathan

[Blondie]

Does anyone remotely feel they are wasting their time?

Never a waste of time going for a bike ride. It’s all better than being sedentary.

[Cowsham]

Does anyone remotely feel they are wasting their time?

Never a waste of time going for a bike ride. It’s all better than being sedentary.

I agree -- go for a ride -- better than arguing about your helmet or lack of.

[drossall]

More important to your long-term life expectancy, too. Must be something approaching 100 times more, I'd think.

[Blondie]

And long term health expectancy is much improved.