We're aware that dates on the forum are not currently showing correctly, and that mobile users may see some extra spacing between threads. Please bear with us while we get this fixed.
We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
We're aware that dates on the Forum are not currently showing correctly. Please bear with us while we get this fixed, and see Site Feedback for updates.
Helmets
Comments
-
kerby_crawler wrote: »I would suggest riding on the pavement - you need to get pedestrians on your side (motorists are simply not sufficiently scared of you).
If you can get pedestrians to join the campaign to provide a proper infrastructure for cyclists then there may be some light at the end of the tunnel.
Motorists will never join the campaign, unless they have had their bodywork damaged by an uninsured cyclist...
so you feel by encroaching on pedestrian space it gets them on side?0 -
kerby_crawler wrote: »Motorists will never join the campaign, unless they have had their bodywork damaged by an uninsured cyclist...
No because some motorists aren't also cyclists.
Also those motorists that aren't would rather have cyclists somewhere else and not on the road.
However as many of the streets and roads in the UK came into being before cars were common there is an issue with space. There is simply no room on lots of roads to put in cycle paths and some pavements are already too narrow.I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
so you feel by encroaching on pedestrian space it gets them on side?
I guess I just think that if DavidLizard were a cat, now would be a very good time for him to start counting his remaining lives.
Jumping into moving lines of buses, lorries and taxis with only a bike helmet for protection is a bit like jumping off a ferryboat into fastmoving water wearing only a buoyancy aid.0 -
kerby_crawler wrote: »Jumping into moving lines of buses, lorries and taxis with only a bike helmet for protection is a bit like jumping off a ferryboat into fastmoving water wearing only a buoyancy aid.
Except that isn't anything like cycling. A helmet is the absolute last line in protecton JUST IN CASE there's an accident you're involved in that could lead to a head injury. The vast majority of the time what keeps you safe is road positioning, assertive riding, good decision-making, and experience. These reduce the chances of the accident occuring in the first place.
You aren't simply 'jumping into traffic' on a bike any more than you do in a car, or when crossing the road. If you genuinely feel that riding on the road is 'jumping into traffic' then I seriously suggest you look into getting some cycle training (usually available for free via your local council).It's only numbers.0 -
I witnessed a bike crash years ago, just turning left into a side turning, the cyclist hit a small stick lying in the road and the bike slid from under him. He came down and his head hit the kerb edge - knocked out cold instantly. He was wearing a helmet - which was flattened and smashed on the left side where he went down.
A couple of months later he popped round to say thanks for the 1st aid I administered and for calling the ambulance etc. He had suffered a fractured skull from the back of his head, over his ear and onto his forehead. However, his consultant had said to him that if he hadn't been wearing a helmet, which took some of the energy of out the impact, he may have died or at least have suffered a life-changing brain injury as a result (as in having to learn to walk, talk and eat again).
So for me it's simple - a helmet might just save my life, so I wear one. But I accept it's down to individual choice.
On the contrary - sounds to me that the helmet was mostly ineffective given the injuries sustained and the fact it had smashed into pieces instead of remaining in tact.0 -
... However, his consultant had said to him that if he hadn't been wearing a helmet, which took some of the energy of out the impact, he may have died or at least have suffered a life-changing brain injury as a result ...... but they told me I would have died from the impact if I had not been wearing it ...
The skeptic in me must point out the logical flaw in these and similar examples. They are all an appeal to authority, as in the doctor must know what he is talking about.
Whilst I have every respect for hospital staff who are very good at mending patients, they are not expert crash investigators or material scientists.
As I have said before, where is the independent testing of the efficacy of cycle helmets?
Dave0 -
Marco_Panettone wrote: »A helmet is the absolute last line in protecton JUST IN CASE there's an accident you're involved in that could lead to a head injury. The vast majority of the time what keeps you safe is road positioning, assertive riding, good decision-making, and experience. These reduce the chances of the accident occuring in the first place.
You understand that, and I understand that, but lots of cyclists seem to regard being run down by motorists as inevitable/unavoidable.0 -
The skeptic in me must point out the logical flaw in these and similar examples. They are all an appeal to authority, as in the doctor must know what he is talking about.
Whilst I have every respect for hospital staff who are very good at mending patients, they are not expert crash investigators or material scientists.
As I have said before, where is the independent testing of the efficacy of cycle helmets?
Dave
I would guess that medics are quite likely to feel a need to console the victims of an accident - it would be interesting to know whether or not they give different advice to somebody who had chosen not to wear a cycle helmet. Also, I guess there is a fair chance that medics will not make much differentiation between a cycle helmet and a motor-cycle helmet - all they see is a head injury.
Incidentally, are there any compulsory construction standards for cycle helmets?0 -
kerby_crawler wrote: »Incidentally, are there any compulsory construction standards for cycle helmets?
As with all test standards, the mass market cycle helmet manufacturers will make helmets that just pass the relevant standard tests! Exceeding the standards will cost more money and cut into the profit margin.
I suppose that the upper end helmet makers like Giro can indeed make a safer helmet, but I for one will not buy a helmet that costs £200
Dave0 -
Sorry to bump this thread back but it's prompted by me coming off my bike yesterday. My fault entirely but again I didn't land on my head. Hurt my shoulder though. Anyway I'm one of those "irresponsible" morons who have never worn a helmet and never will. Mostly because so many people tell me i should...its an anti authority thing.
My question is this. Based on a thesis that helmet wearers take more risks than non wearers, is anyone aware of any research into the number of crashes in professional cycling since helmet wearing became compulsory in the 90s? I just get the impression watching the highlights every night on the major tours that the commentators are referring to a hell of a lot more crashes than they used to. Not just the ones they show but others that happened earlier in the day or away from the peleton when the motorbike camera isn't always around.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 348.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.4K Spending & Discounts
- 240.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 617.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 175.6K Life & Family
- 254.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards