Anti-Helmet tendency from cycling advocates?

[mstateglfr]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

That's an understatement. Helmets sold in the US have to meet CPSC test standards. The CPSC impact test speed is about 14 mph. Or in other words, the test simulates a rider at a moderate speed falling off their bike and not a rider crashing at high speed, or being hit by a motor vehicle. Even still, impacting at the 14 mph test speed, the g-forces of a dummy head form can't exceed 300 g, which was selected based on g forces to fracture a skull. But concussion and other serious brain injury can occur at less than 300 g.

Bicycle helmets are probably better than nothing, but 1/2" of styrofoam provides little protection in a serious crash.

I last crashed on the road in June '21.
A car honked to let me know it was passing(why?!), I looked back, and then as I looked forward I hit a frost heave. My front wheel wasnt perfectly straight and I wasnt holding tight to absorb the bump, so my front wheel turned to the right and I slammed to the ground on my left side.
I was going 22mph at the time.

My helmet hit the pavement a few times and the shell was shredded up pretty good.
I didnt have a concussion so after a few minutes of settling down, I stupidly kept riding even though I ended up having 3 broken ribs and a separated clavicle.

- Did the helmet keep me from getting a concussion? I have no idea.
- Did the helmet keep me left ear from looking like it had been shredded by a cheese grater? Absolutely.
- Did the helmet keep me from tearing my scalp apart? Absolutely.


A helmet wont save you from everything. That is constantly stated as a way to reduce the benefits of helmets, even though I dont know any adults who thinks a helmet will save you from everything.
Its a really odd strawman argument that continues to be made.
On a related note, a seatbelt also wont save you from everything, but it saves you from a lot. And an airbag doesnt save you from everything, but it saves you from a lot.

[Spoker]

I've gone down on the mtb at 1 mph, and still my helmet hit the rocks hard. Surprised me.

[saab2000]

The hairnet era in US racing ended in 1986 IIRC when the then-USCF was going to be unable to get insurance unless helmet standards were improved and mandated. Those early helmet were ugly, basically just styrofoam and some had fabric colors. That’s my recollection as someone who raced in those days.

Today’s helmet are practically ‘invisible’ to wear, such are the ventilation and weight and strap improvements over the years.

[charliedid]

Are they really anti-helmet or do they just prefer to not always or not ever wear one? I don't recall any writings on the subject (might be) just images which does not imply anything other than personal freedom to choose.

[CAAD]

I'll take any advantage I can to protect myself on the bike, and a helmet is one of them. Even with friends on casual trail rides, I'm usually the only one with a helmet on. But to each their own.

[NHAero]

I fall maybe once/month on the weekly MTB ride, usually uphill at very low speed. I did a similar fall on Hawks in August at D2R2, on rocks. I was glad to have my helmet on. I know that if I hit a tree at 35 mph the helmet isn't gonna do much.

In grad school I hit a dog at very low speed on my 100cc Yamaha late at night (and wished I was riding a Harley, I wouldn't have even noticed I hit him ). I was wearing a Bell Magnum helmet which had a long jagged scrape on it. I was right near home and I came in with my jacket torn and started to tell my roommates what happened and then I just blanked, and asked them what was I just saying? So yeah, they woke me every hour or so that night. I do think without the helmet I would have been worse off.

I don't like to tell others what to do if it doesn't affect me. I wear a helmet even going 3/4 mile down the road for dinner at a friend's house.

Sheldon used to say that the most effective piece of cycling safety equipment was a mirror, not a helmet, because it kept you out of trouble. I use a Take-A-Look and for the last coupla years a Varia too.

I totally agree with Jamesdak's post about we all choose our risks and have to live with the consequences. In some cases like TBIs, society lives with (pays for) the consequences, but until my health insurance premium doesn't help cover smokers from the consequences of their choice I don't think I have much to say.

[Mark McM]

Skiing and cycling have some analogies. They both involve participants traveling across the ground without a protective enclosure, often at high speeds. And both have the dangers of falling, or of collision with stationary objects or other participants. Obviously, there are many differences as well, such snow often being softer than pavement, and there being no motor vehicles to hit skiers. But they are both sports were head injuries are a serious concern, and in which today most participants wear helmets.

Ski helmets also somewhat similar to bicycle helmets, both primarily using similar EPS foam lined helmets to attenuate impacts. Many helmet companies make both bicycle and ski helmets.

In some ways, it is easier to study the efficacy of helmets in skiing than in bicycling: Unlike bicycling, skiing takes place mostly in closed off areas which require ticket purchases, and also it mechanised uphill transport. This means we can get a better idea of just how many people are skiing (through ticket purchases), and how much skiing they do (through monitoring lift traffic). Injury reporting is also more uniform, since these are tended to and recorded by ski patrollers, who are trained and certified by a single national body (National Ski Patrol).

What do the skiing statistics tell us about the efficacy of ski helmets? That using helmets appears to decrease minor head injuries, but has not reduced the number of major head injuries or fatalities:

https://www.skimag.com/gear/50-year-...ry-prevention/
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/11/2...g-head-trauma/

[NHAero]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Skiing and cycling have some analogies. They both involve participants traveling across the ground without a protective enclosure, often at high speeds. And both have the dangers of falling, or of collision with stationary objects or other participants. Obviously, there are many differences as well, such snow often being softer than pavement, and there being no motor vehicles to hit skiers. But they are both sports were head injuries are a serious concern, and in which today most participants wear helmets.

Ski helmets also somewhat similar to bicycle helmets, both primarily using similar EPS foam lined helmets to attenuate impacts. Many helmet companies make both bicycle and ski helmets.

In some ways, it is easier to study the efficacy of helmets in skiing than in bicycling: Unlike bicycling, skiing takes place mostly in closed off areas which require ticket purchases, and also it mechanised uphill transport. This means we can get a better idea of just how many people are skiing (through ticket purchases), and how much skiing they do (through monitoring lift traffic). Injury reporting is also more uniform, since these are tended to and recorded by ski patrollers, who are trained and certified by a single national body (National Ski Patrol).

What do the skiing statistics tell us about the efficacy of ski helmets? That using helmets appears to decrease minor head injuries, but has not reduced the number of major head injuries or fatalities:

https://www.skimag.com/gear/50-year-...ry-prevention/
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/11/2...g-head-trauma/

Great point, thanks for the Ski Mag article.

[fourflys]

all this talk about "back in the hairnet days..", etc is just a strawman.. as some have pointed out today is NOT like "back in the day".. and as far as the comment about the peloton being more respectful, etc back in the day, ok..

there are lots of things we didn't or did do 30 yrs ago that we know now was pretty silly.. be it in safety, medicine, the environment, etc.. just because it was or wasn't done 30-40 yrs means absolutely zero for the most part.. times change, we learn more about xxx topic, etc and we adjust the way we do xxx thing.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by fourflys

all this talk about "back in the hairnet days..", etc is just a strawman.. as some have pointed out today is NOT like "back in the day".. and as far as the comment about the peloton being more respectful, etc back in the day, ok..

Yes, many, many things were different back in the day. When looking at the IIHS page on bicycling fatalities, it can be seen there have been many changes in trends of cycling fatalities over the years. The biggest one that jumps out at me is this one:

In 1975, there were 1,003 cyclist fatalities; of those, 786 were people younger than 20 years old, and 212 were people 20 years and older.

In 2022, there were 1,084 cyclist fatalities; of those, 94 were people younger than 20 years old, and 963 were cyclists 20 years and older.

I think It's unlike that cycling has gotten 8 times safer for children and 5 times more dangerous for adults, it is more likely that there has been a large shift in the demographics of cyclists. I think it is also safe to assume that where, when and how people are cycling has also changed dramatically over that time.

[fourflys]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

I think It's unlike that cycling has gotten 8 times safer for children and 5 times more dangerous for adults, it is more likely that there has been a large shift in the demographics of cyclists. I think it is also safe to assume that where, when and how people are cycling has also changed dramatically over that time.

agreed that there were probably many more kids riding bikes before than now.. but, I would also posit that there are a LOT more kids wearing helmets today than in 1975.. no idea what impact that has on the numbers, just a fairly solid fact based on current laws and just looking around..

also, I would be curious what the definition of "cyclist" in the two stats is.. today, there are a TON of kids riding the e-scooters.. are they counted in those numbers? should they be? I would guess they are not being counted in those numbers and probably should be as they are using the same infrastructures as a kid on an MTB or SE big BMX bike riding to school..

also, one of the more interesting stats in that link is where they died.. in 1975, it was pretty much split between rural and urban.. in 2022, the urban deaths (83%) far outweigh the rural (17%).. there could so many factors for this, so.. it is interesting that the total number of deaths in 1975 vs 2022 are roughly the same since the numbers were all lower in the in-between years..

[Permanent socks]

Crashing well is a skill that not many have.

Cat like speed and reflexes FTW! HAHA

I wear a helmet because I look silly on an aero race bike in an aero kit and no helmet.

I rode for decades without a helmet and only put one on 8 years ago, because I started riding a shop" A" ride with some suoer sketchy riders. I was worried about having my wheel chopped and not being able to anticipate that.

[Nevets]

I was hit from behind by a small car in 1997 my (Giro) helmet was split down the middle, I was told my head hit the windshield and also bounced on the ground, Im sure it saved my head from serious damage most of which was broken bones.

[julian3141]

Coming back from a 60 ish mile ride I hit a pothole on my street 200 yards from my front door going about 3mph and went over the handle bars. My helmet took the blow and cracked a little I still got a few scrapes from the MIPS inside the helmet but otherwise, I walked away fine. My take away is that crashes can happen on the most innocent-seeming rides and while a helmet won't save you from a Dodge Ram going 70mph it sure saves me from a much more serious injury in this case. I always wear one even on 5 minuet trips to the store.

[OtayBW]

One experience:
I slipped on a wet lane line years ago and whiplashed to the pavement. First the ankle, then the knee, the hip, shoulder, and finally the helmet which cracked clean through in three places. I wear a helmet on my rides.....