Ride safe, get a decent helmet.

arknor said:
must be why holland has so few helmet wearers then yet one of the safest places to cycle
Click to expand...

exactly! instead of scaring people into thinking that you're going to die if you ride to shop without a helmet they should focus on improving the roads/infrastructure for cyclists!

yes cases like mtbs, bmxing etc a helmet makes perfect sense! you're jumping, riding over rocks, between trees etc and it is obvious that you will sooner or later leave your safe zone and crash so a helmet makes sense and I don't disagree with that.
 
It's actually quite hard to find studies that aren't specifically looking at the effectiveness of mandatory helmet laws, which obviously provide a barrier to entry of sorts which is a whole other factor, but those that do exist seem pretty conclusive and favourable to the effectiveness of helmets.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457500000488
Bicycle helmet efficacy was quantified using a formal meta-analytic approach based on peer-reviewed studies. Only those studies with individual injury and helmet use data were included. Based on studies from several countries published in the period 1987–1998, the summary odds ratio estimate for efficacy is 0.40 (95% confidence interval 0.29, 0.55) for head injury, 0.42 (0.26, 0.67) for brain injury, 0.53 (0.39, 0.73) for facial injury and 0.27 (0.10, 0.71) for fatal injury. This indicates a statistically significant protective effect of helmets. Three studies provided neck injury results that were unfavourable to helmets with a summary estimate of 1.36 (1.00, 1.86), but this result may not be applicable to the lighter helmets currently in use. In conclusion, the evidence is clear that bicycle helmets prevent serious injury and even death. Despite this, the use of helmets is sub-optimal. Helmet use for all riders should be further encouraged to the extent that it is uniformly accepted and analogous to the use of seat belts by motor vehicle occupants.
Click to expand...


http://www.bmj.com/content/308/6922/173?linkType=FULL&ck=nck&resid=308/6922/173&journalCode=bmj
Most children (230) were injured after losing control and falling from their bicycle. Only 31 had contact with another moving vehicle. Children with head injury were significantly more likely to have made contact with a moving vehicle than control children (19 (19%) v 12 (4%), P<0.001). Head injuries were more likely to occur on paved surfaces than on grass, gravel, or dirt. Wearing a helmet reduced the risk of head injury by 63% (95% confidence interval 34% to 80%) and of loss of consciousness by 86% (62% to 95%).
Click to expand...


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD005401.pub3/full
There is a paucity of high quality evaluative studies assessing the effect of helmet legislation on bicycle related head injuries: only three were identified for this review. Two of the studies reported a significant protective effect of helmet legislation on bicycle related head injuries, whilst the third reported a non-significant decline in the proportion of head injuries compared with other bicycle related trauma.
Click to expand...

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm198905253202101
Seven percent of the case patients were wearing helmets at the time of their head injuries, as compared with 24 percent of the emergency room controls and 23 percent of the second control group. Of the 99 cyclists with serious brain injury only 4 percent wore helmets. In regression analyses to control for age, sex, income, education, cycling experience, and the severity of the accident, we found that riders with helmets had an 85 percent reduction in their risk of head injury (odds ratio, 0.15; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.07 to 0.29) and an 88 percent reduction in their risk of brain injury (odds ratio, 0.12; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.04 to 0.40).

We conclude that bicycle safety helmets are highly effective in preventing head injury. Helmets are particularly important for children, since they suffer the majority of serious head injuries from bicycling accidents.
Click to expand...


http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/early/2011/05/20/ip.2011.031815.short
The fully adjusted ORs of helmeted versus unhelmeted cyclists are: for AIS1+ head injuries, 0.69 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.81); for AIS3+ head injuries sustained in urban areas, 0.34 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.65), those sustained in rural areas, 0.07 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.23); for AIS1+ facial injuries, 0.72 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.83); and for AIS1+ neck injuries, 1.18 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.47).

This study confirms the protective effect for head and facial injuries, even though soft-shell helmets have now become more common. The reduction of risk is greater for serious head injuries. The study is inconclusive about the risk for neck injuries.
Click to expand...


http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.293
Using population based controls, which provide the best estimate of effectiveness, bicycle helmets decrease the risk of head injury by 85% and brain injury by 88%. The protective effect of helmets is present for riders of all ages, and appears to offer as much protection in crashes involving motor vehicles as it does in crashes without motor vehicle involvement. The different styles of helmets available, i.e. hard shell, thin shell, and no shell, appear to be equivalent in their effectiveness. Helmets meeting either of the two major voluntary standards, ANSI or Snell, appear to be equivalent in their protective effect for most, if not all, injuries.

Helmets also appear to provide protection against some facial injuries (42). They appear to decrease the risk of injuries to the forehead and to the mid-face by two thirds, although they offer no protection to the lower face. The protective effect to the mid-face is probably due to the overhang of the rim over the face.

One concern raised about bicycle helmets was that they would increase neck injuries (15). At present there is no evidence that bicycle helmets contribute to neck injury (30, 38, 41, 45), nor has this been found to be the case with motorcycle helmets (34).
Click to expand...


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001855/epdf/standard
Wearing a helmet dramatically reduces the risk of head and facial injuries for bicyclists involved in a crash, even if it involves a motor vehicle. Cycling is a healthy and popular activity for people of all ages. Crashes involving bicyclists are, however, common and often involve motor vehicles. Head injuries are responsible for around three-quarters of deaths among bicyclists involved in crashes. Facial injuries are also common. The review found that wearing a helmet reduced the risk of head or brain injury by approximately two-thirds or more, regardless of whether the crash involved a motor vehicle. Injuries to the mid and upper face were also markedly reduced, although helmets did not prevent lower facial injuries
Click to expand...
 
Wearing a helmet when attacking a MTB track should be a no brainer and I'm not surprised most places make it a rule, it's the same as being required to where a helmet while driving a car on a track, in both cases your intentionally running risks for the thrill and tempting fate.

Out on the street/cycle path is a different matter though and it should always be a personal choice.
 
I'm not sure you can really compare road cycling to mountain biking. Mountain biking through a forest between trees and over deliberately challenging obstacles with loose surfaces and all sorts is very different to cycling on comparatively smooth tarmac with both wheels on the road at pretty much all times.

I wear a helmet, but in 3 years the only time I've even knocked one of them slightly was when I made a hash of mounting a dropped kerb at like 6mph and keeled over. My hip and shoulder were much more badly hurt than my head. Besides that I've once gone literally head over heels when I overshot a bend and hit a kerb and landed in a hedge, and most of the damage was to my hands which ended up full of tiny thorns; I've once skidded on ice and nearly written off a pair of shorts (parp); and once had a bit of impromptu cyclocross when I rode up a grass verge after sliding a bit on a wet manhole cover on a 90 degree corner on a descent. So in 3 years of road cycling totalling nearly 10,000 miles I've not once had an incident where a helmet has really done anything for me. All these were mistakes I'd have made on my own regardless of any cars around me, and none have involved collisions with other vehicles. I'm not going to stop wearing a helmet, because the next clumsy incident I have will see me headbutting a drystone wall for all I know.

I've no illusions that a helmet is going to save my life if a truck runs me over, though.
 
The anti-helmet comments read like they are pointing towards the 'pro' helmet individuals indicating that a helmet will mean you will get up and walk away.

I don't think that's what's being implied here, I think it's merely people indicating that you will have a much better chance of surviving a head-related incident than if you weren't wearing one.

Again, I relate me experiences to MTB more so than road cycling.
 
Jono said:
Not attacking your position on this, but the Netherlands has a completely different attitude towards cycling/cyclists compared to what we have :(
Click to expand...

its an attitude we should embrace though.
we're probably 20 years behind when it comes to cycling even if the government started now
 
My brother nailed a tree head on as a teenager on a DH course and got away with a split helmet and a severe concussion.
The manufacturer actually asked to have the remains of the helmet, and sent him a replacement free of charge.
It was clear that without a helmet he would have been much more seriously injured. He never rides without a helmet now, on the road, or MTB.
 
For me wearing a helmet will be a no brainer. I do wonder whether I would have had brain damage when I rear ended a van (instead I fractured a vertibrae) if I was not wearing one. Is it really that uncomfortable to wear one?
 
yeah never really understood the no helmet argument, if you hit concrete or tarmac with your head or with an inch of plastic/foam in-between which is going to be better? sure there's some freak accidents where you'll be worse off but it's just chance and a much lower chance than it helping.

I can understand it forjust pottering around but anything where you'll hit some speed then it just makes sense to wear one. some of the latest road cycling ones are pretty flimsy though, like usually the more you spend the cooler and more crazy the design instead of the safer it'll be.
 
DanF said:
some of the latest road cycling ones are pretty flimsy though, like usually the more you spend the cooler and more crazy the design instead of the safer it'll be.
Click to expand...

They all meet the same design specifications so pretty much all helmets made by a reputable manufacturer will be "safe" in that regard. Usually when you spend more on a helmet you're paying for weight, comfort, fit or aerodynamics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom