Un-ban The Helmet Rule.

[180mmCrank]

There are many stories like the one above here's is one from a couple of weeks ago...

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/848050--cyclist-dies-a-month-after-fall

 

[woodie]

As do you. So much worry about YOUR taxes.

Your taxes and insurance subsidize dangerous driving, much of which is legal, smoking, eating rubbish, sedentary lifestyles, stress, ect, ect. All of which are proportionally much bigger killers than helmets or lack of them.

You want YOUR taxes to ban all these things? (not a bad idea imo).

Or would you rather have intelligent, well educated people who can make effective decisions about their own safety while on the road in any form of transport?

I wear a helmet, its required by law and in racing its probably better than nothing. However helmets will never be a replacement for intelligent decision making and acceptable cycling infrastructure all of which has a far bigger impact on cyclist safety than a bit of foam.

Arguments such as "I had a crash and was wearing a helmet, now I'm ok" verge on the ridiculous.

Why is it redicuolus? When i crashed I went straight over the handlebars and landed flat on my head, my helmet did it's job by breaking with the impact of the fall and absorbing most of the impact for me. Had i not been wearing a helmet my SKULL would have cracked on impact and I could possibly be dead.

I agree people need to make intelligent decisions and there needs to be proper infrastructure for cycling but crashes happen and always will, no matter how carefull people are, and wearing a helmet is a great step towards preventing death. If people can't understand that I feel sorry for them.

 

[Guidokcd]

I think in racing it should stay mandatory, regardless of terrain.

For the everyday cyclist, obviously it's a choice. I say, thin out the herd. However, those who choose to ride sans helmet, should by law, (like in some US states that require this of motorcycle riders) have to sign their organ donor card. That way when one dies from being stupid (IMO) someone will at least benefit from it.

As for kids in Africa, I suggest the Irishman start a foundation that gets NOS helmets and gear donated and shipped to them.

the price of high-end gear is ridiculous, for sure. I'm not sure Nike had anything to do with it, especially since you don't see all that much Nike gear. Yes, the sponsor the TdF jerseys, but so what. You can find plenty of good gear, at very affordable prices online and at some shops. You just won't be as stylish as Pozzato.

 

[Dewulf]

So we pay, through taxes and insurance, for your ignorance, when you choose not to wear a helment, crash and suffer head injuries.

When I was a kid, one of my neighbours died when she fell off her bike and hit her head (years before helmets) - and she was hardly doing walking speed.

You need to think of others apart from yourself.

^ this is correct

What a ridiculous argument. So to follow to its conclusion, helmets should be mandatory when you go out drinking? FFS

and davidg, you FAIL at logic 101 - the example illustrates that you don't have to be going fast to suffer serious injury if you fall, NOT that there is a significant chance of falling and hitting your head if you happen to be walking, drinking etc.

If you're going to "FFS" everytime you don't get something, hmm, lol, maybe you do need to be more careful with your drinking...seems like you might have killed a few brain cells there

 

[liftman]

As an adult citizen of a supposedly free country I should be FREE to choose to wear a helmet or not and my fellow citizens should be FREE from financial responsibility due to any results of my choices. This doesn't mean I wouldn't wear one, just that the government has no business legislating personal safety/health.

 

[hrotha]

As an adult citizen of a supposedly free country I should be FREE to choose to wear a helmet or not and my fellow citizens should be FREE from financial responsibility due to any results of my choices. This doesn't mean I wouldn't wear one, just that the government has no business legislating personal safety/health.

Too bad for you then, because safety regulations are everywhere, from helmets to seatbelts to just how poisonous the food you're consuming is allowed to be.

 

[Michele]

Why is it redicuolus? When i crashed I went straight over the handlebars and landed flat on my head, my helmet did it's job by breaking with the impact of the fall and absorbing most of the impact for me. Had i not been wearing a helmet my SKULL would have cracked on impact and I could possibly be dead.

One my friend got a similar crash during a race; the only difference is that now he's paralized in his legs.
But the helmet saved his life as he hit very strongly on the back of the head.

 

[pedaling squares]

I wear a helmet, its required by law and in racing its probably better than nothing. However helmets will never be a replacement for intelligent decision making and acceptable cycling infrastructure all of which has a far bigger impact on cyclist safety than a bit of foam.

Yep, I agree completely with this. A helmet is no licence to ignore personal or public safety by riding like a moron.

Arguments such as "I had a crash and was wearing a helmet, now I'm ok" verge on the ridiculous.

But I disagree with this idea. If you knock your head and your helmet is damaged, there's a damn good chance that helmet saved your noggin from some similar harm. Head injuries are really bad news. So long as the rider doesn't spend so much time thanking his helmet that he doesn't look at what caused him to crash in the first place.

 

[The Hitch]

Yep, I agree completely with this. A helmet is no licence to ignore personal or public safety by riding like a moron.


But I disagree with this idea. If you knock your head and your helmet is damaged, there's a damn good chance that helmet saved your noggin from some similar harm. Head injuries are really bad news. So long as the rider doesn't spend so much time thanking his helmet that he doesn't look at what caused him to crash in the first place.

well said.

 

[titleshot]

I agree with Woodie and the UCI/every cycling authority, that helmets are necessary.

Helmets are not super expensive, unless you want the SUPER CARBON VENTED PROTOTYPE model.
I purchased my helmet for $50 and it is the specialized helmet that was worn in the 2008 tour. So I think it is a very good helmet, I am just not paying for the "hype" of the current model, which is why helmets cost $150-200 in the first place.


I think helmets are very necessary on mountain top finishes as well. The races I have done that end in hilltop finishes have had some of the most aggressive racing I have ever seen, so crashed do happen on hills.

 

[Master50]

First of all there is no possible way to rationalize helmets or safety gear since 1/2 the people make their decision based solely on how they feel about the subject and in the minds of most North Americans they believe in helmets.
Every attempt at a logical argument is rebutted with a story of someone who lived because they wore a helmet.
Statistics show that pedestrians and car passengers are equally likely to die of a brain injury than cyclists and don't feel compelled to wear a helmet, No one is telling them to do it. It is just that cycling seems dangerous and dangerous things need safety gear.
If as many lives have been saved by helmets as we like to believe, I wonder why none of my friends died after hitting their heads as kids? I was 30 the year I bought my first helmet but only wore it to race or mountain bike.

Now that helmets are part of the rules they will never go away. What jury would absolve the governing bodies of cycling of responsibility when the first Pro dies from any injury at a race if he also bumps his head. There is more evidence that if you are ever hurt cycling and was not wearing a helmet that the hospital staff will treat you differently regardless of a head injury. So wearing a helmet might get you better treatment.
While I have very little faith in the real protective value of a helmet it is still more protection than you were born with. The chances that you might be in an accident where the helmet increased your injury is almost insignificant so I always wear one. Rationally I should always wear one since there are so many ways to hit your head off the bike. Add a foil liner too, since you really can't be too careful.

 

[BroDeal]

hard to make heads or tales of what your attempting to write are you drunk or recently have a helmet free fall? sorry too easy nice grammar but seriously what are you talking about? as for your personal safety i hope you have complete health insurance to pay for your vegetative state if need be as i dont want to. negligent/stupid people are a drain on society what is the purpose of this thread literally your saying helmets are a problem get with the times old man.

Better drunk than stupid. At least I can sober up.

Helmet test standards are effectively good for simulating falling over while track standing, and meeting the minimum threshold is all the helmet makers are interested in. They would rather shave 10 grams off the weight of their helmets or cut larger ventilation holes so they can advertise those facts than make their helmets more effective. At any sort of speed, bike helmets are a Hail Mary pass. Simpletons who think that they are getting a real piece of safety equipment in a bike helmet likely increase their risk taking behavior because of their misplaced faith in the styrofoam beer coolers on their heads.

You want to be safer on the bike? Wear a motorcycle helmet and full leathers. Think of the number of people who could be saved. Oh, the humanity! Tired of paying for other people's risky behavior? Then let's outlaw alcohol, the number one cause of accidents of all kinds.

 

[bicycles_rule]

I don't think enforcing rules like this helps. you can't force drivers to wear a safety belt. the inconvenience of a helmet is too great when cycling to school or doing groceries. but when I go out on my racing bike, I wear a helmet. I really wouldn't like to crash my head into a car window, but I hope that with my trusty in-mold, I can at least survive it.
I once crashed and went head-first into the (shallow) water a few meters below me. I was cycling at 35 km per hour at the time. It didn't really hurt much at my head. I'm sure I would have had more pain if I hadn't worn one. of course my arms had a few scratches. so yeah, helmets are fine.

 

[flicker]

Better drunk than stupid. At least I can sober up.

Helmet test standards are effectively good for simulating falling over while track standing, and meeting the minimum threshold is all the helmet makers are interested in. They would rather shave 10 grams off the weight of their helmets or cut larger ventilation holes so they can advertise those facts than make their helmets more effective. At any sort of speed, bike helmets are a Hail Mary pass. Simpletons who think that they are getting a real piece of safety equipment in a bike helmet likely increase their risk taking behavior because of their misplaced faith in the styrofoam beer coolers on their heads.

You want to be safer on the bike? Wear a motorcycle helmet and full leathers. Think of the number of people who could be saved. Oh, the humanity! Tired of paying for other people's risky behavior? Then let's outlaw alcohol, the number one cause of accidents of all kinds.

Bro when I flew over the bars and impacted my head on the pavement I broke my helmet. I am greatful I had a helmet. Speed 15 MPH. Heck of a lot of impact shoulder is still sore 4 months later. Thanks Bell. Also if you ride a bike do yourself a favor and buy health insurance. Helmets and health insurance = responsable cycling. Oh yeah sharing the road with autos and following traffic laws. That is responsable also. If you want danger try cage fighting.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

I think you're supposed to replace them every 3 years or so.

You are probably right. But I'm a confessed tight-wad. Do you work for a helmet manufacturer?

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

What I decide to do with my persnal safety is my choice.A helmet ai'nt gonna save we when the stats proven at 50mph that the vehicle won't save you. The easier you give into drivers the worst it gets cyclists.

I'll agree it's your choice. I'll have to admit, on a long two lane country road going uphill in the sun I have caved in to the temptation to pull the helmet. Only to be reminded of my stupidity by clubbers pointing at their heads as they sped past going the opposite direction. I have a wife and 2 kids who I think still want me around. Helmet on! You got something worth sticking around for?

 

[Square-pedaller]

I don't think enforcing rules like this helps. you can't force drivers to wear a safety belt. the inconvenience of a helmet is too great when cycling to school or doing groceries.

Where are you from? Pretty much everywhere (as far as I know) in Europe has seat-belt legislation, and also, as far as I know, a very high compliance rate.
What's the inconvenience in wearing a helmet?

 

[pedaling squares]

I'll agree it's your choice. I'll have to admit, on a long two lane country road going uphill in the sun I have caved in to the temptation to pull the helmet. Only to be reminded of my stupidity by clubbers pointing at their heads as they sped past going the opposite direction. I have a wife and 2 kids who I think still want me around. Helmet on! You got something worth sticking around for?

I wear a helmet all the time, but I like to think that if I chose to leave it at home I could ride without some knob telling me via some silly gesture what he thinks of my decision. It's probably more about making themselves look superior than a genuine concern for your safety.

 

[flicker]

I wear a helmet all the time, but I like to think that if I chose to leave it at home I could ride without some knob telling me via some silly gesture what he thinks of my decision. It's probably more about making themselves look superior than a genuine concern for your safety.

Cyclists are knobs though. Like the brain surgeon who rides his high end Colnago at 5MPH and blocks traffic. Money plus no common sense =?

 

[Teddy Boom]

HELMETS SAVE LIVES!!!!

Surely pro cycling is an almost ideal control for determining exactly how effective helmets are. Take the years that cyclists were going modern speeds but before the helmet rule. Say, 1970 till 2003 (or 1960?). How many pro cyclists got major head injuries in that time? How many pro cyclists have had major head injuries averted due to helmet use since that time?

My general feeling is that pro cyclists go down often enough that helmets make more sense in the peleton than for the general population. Of course I've never actually seen any evidence.

As a utility cyclist, I find a helmet too inconvenient, and I'm not convinced they offer enough protection to be worthwhile. This doesn't stop me from using bright lights, wearing bright and reflective clothing (especially at night), choosing components for safety (studded tires for winter riding, quality brakes..) and carefully maintaining my bike. All of those things have costs too (both to convenience and in $$$), but they all seem much more useful than a helmet to me.

Similarly, I don't ride with a bell. My voice is far more effective than any bell, and I use my voice to communicate with other road/path users several times on every ride.

So lets take the opposite argument to its logical extreme.

Helmets on cyclists save lives
therefore they are mandatory.

Helmets, five point safety restraints and limiting maximum speed to 90kms per hour will save countless vehicle operators lives.
therefore it should be mandatory.

HOWEVER. This is not the case, simply because a amount of death and injury on the roads is regarded as unavoidable so as to maintain a standard of comfort and convenience for users and a degree of freedom for manufacturers.

Mandatory helmet laws are a excuse of governments to take the focus from real road safety and efforts to get people out of cars and onto bikes.

The only thing that makes cycling safer is more cyclists and right now compulsory helmets are not encouraging this.

This. 1000x this!!!

I mean just look at the seat belt example. When lap belts first came out, people were told to use them, they'll save your life. In the end, it isn't clear exactly, but lap belts may have caused more injury than they prevented. Once the defective design was fixed by adding shoulder restraint, seat belts became very obviously beneficial, and I'd never drive without wearing one. (edit: Now, of course, there are even better seat belt designs -- 5 point restraints as found in race cars -- but nobody suggests those for cars, because they'd be impossibly inconvenient.)

It isn't nearly as simple a question as most people think [strike]though[/strike](ed).

 

[Teddy Boom]

Bro when I flew over the bars and impacted my head on the pavement I broke my helmet. I am greatful I had a helmet. Speed 15 MPH. Heck of a lot of impact shoulder is still sore 4 months later. Thanks Bell. Also if you ride a bike do yourself a favor and buy health insurance. Helmets and health insurance = responsable cycling. Oh yeah sharing the road with autos and following traffic laws. That is responsable also. If you want danger try cage fighting.

Was the styrofoam in your helmet crushed? My understanding is that if it wasn't crushed, your helmet probably didn't prevent a serious injury, though it probably did prevent superficial cuts and bruises to your head.

 

[flicker]

Was the styrofoam in your helmet crushed? My understanding is that if it wasn't crushed, your helmet probably didn't prevent a serious injury, though it probably did prevent superficial cuts and bruises to your head.

The foam wasn't crushed. I believe it might have prevented some injury. I will take any monetary price over injury. I guess I am nuts that way. New helmet 120, so what.

 

[ultimobici]

Two words are all that is necessary to answer this inane question.

Andrei Kivilev

On March 11, 2003, Kivilev was racing in the second stage of Paris–Nice, between La Clayette and Saint-Étienne. Approximately forty kilometres from the stage finish, as the peloton passed through Saint-Chamond, Kivilev collided with Polish team mate Marek Rutkiewicz and German Volker Ordowski of Team Gerolsteiner, although they were not seriously hurt and finished the stage. The helmet-less Kivilev hit the ground, and did not rise. Kivilev immediately fell into a coma, initially being taken to the Saint-Chamond hospital before being transferred via air to the intensive care unit at Saint-Étienne hospital, where he was diagnosed with a serious skull fracture and two broken ribs. His condition worsened overnight, and Kivilev died of his injuries at 10am on March 12, 2003. He was survived by his wife Natalia and six month old son Leonardo. A few days later his friend, Alexandre Vinokourov, won Paris‑Nice.

Just because the number of deaths in the preceding years was no higher does not mean that there weren't serious head injuries that could have been prevented. Helmets don't only prevent death, but also prevent brain injury too. I will resist compulsion in day to day life but in competition all it takes is one touch of wheels and it's bye bye. Oscar Pereiro and Pedro Horrillo probably wouldn't be walking and talking had they not had helmets on. Speeds have gone up since the 70's and 80's. If you'd ridden with original Super Record, you'd know that they are poor compared to Shimano Sora! Descending at 100kmh+ was not an option for even the most adept rider back in the day, but on modern post 90's dual pivots it is.

 

[flicker]

Two words are all that is necessary to answer this inane question.

Andrei Kivilev



Just because the number of deaths in the preceding years was no higher does not mean that there weren't serious head injuries that could have been prevented. Helmets don't only prevent death, but also prevent brain injury too. I will resist compulsion in day to day life but in competition all it takes is one touch of wheels and it's bye bye. Oscar Pereiro and Pedro Horrillo probably wouldn't be walking and talking had they not had helmets on. Speeds have gone up since the 70's and 80's. If you'd ridden with original Super Record, you'd know that they are poor compared to Shimano Sora! Descending at 100kmh+ was not an option for even the most adept rider back in the day, but on modern post 90's dual pivots it is.

Skull fractures can happen at slow speeds also, keep the helmets.

 

[ladyvader]

After reading the OP comments and all the others. I do wonder if the OP ever thought about Saul Raisin's crash. No helmet and he would have died. He can't race anymore because of it.

Alberto Contador as well.

If these guy were not wearing a helmet, they would not be with us today. Let alone the many others that have crashed and their helmet saved their life.

What about Jens crash during last years TdF? His injuries could have been a lot worse if not for a helmet.