Doctors Against Helmet Laws

[Guest agteros]

Reading on the other hub, discovery noted here, I saw this:

 

http://bicycling.com/blogs/thehub/2011/07/29/doctors-against-helmet-laws/

 

" ... But wearing a helmet shouldn’t be one of them, say doctors in the unexpected results of a British Medical Journal survey.

A poll of 1,427 of the journal’s readers revealed more than two thirds would prefer helmets remain a personal choice and not required by law. Reasons for the opposition to helmet mandates varied. Some respondents argued that the research on helmets reducing the risk of head injury is too inconclusive to support a new law. And there have been studies, such as one conducted by a Bath University professor in 2006, which found passing drivers give less room to helmeted cyclists than they do to those not wearing helmets."

Read the article, and concur, or lament the lack of nanny state-ness of the medical profession

[Eldron]

Me - I'm all for choice. I wear mine 99% of the time - occasionally I like to cruise the hood on my single helmetless. Its the closest you get to flying on the ground and my little middle finger to the nanny staters.

 

Them not wearing theirs doesn't affect my life in any way so I say go for it.

[Goodbadugly]

Always a catching heading.

As far as I could gather from the article it is more a use it/don't use it answer because results were inconclusive. Don't make the law yet.

Me? A helmet once saved my face from an ugly faceplant. I wear mine.

[Christopher Brunsdon]

Its so scientific to base opinions on one mans observations. I read with great interest on bbc.co.uk years ago about the proff's observations with regards to cycling with and without a helmet.

 

Also there is enough evidence in the States to show that helmet laws reduce permanent head injuries after many states enforced motorbike helmet laws.

 

I once had a nasty accident without a helmet and would say that I was lucky and stupid - if I had a helmet I still would have crashed but would not have been walking around with a massive bump on my head.

[Stretch]

I have seen too many examples of helmets saving someone from a serious head injury. A friend of mine had an encounter with a motorbike and his helmet was absolutely smashed but he had zero head injury. Now some will argue that we all cruised the hood (to quote eldron) as youngsters with zero head protection and survived, so what is the big deal, but thats like saying i dont want airbags, side impact barss etc etc because i didnt have them growing up. Sure i sometimes dont ride without my helmet, but thats only sometimes and only if i cruising with my kids in the park.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Yeah, agree Chris, I have read many studies from the states on motorcycle helmet laws and most if not all advocate a helmet as a good safety measure.

 

A blow to the skull need not be hard to injure or maim you, although crashing on a motorcycle without a helmet, even at legal speeds, will probably kill you or certainly put you in intensive care for a while.

[Zac.A]

Ok, maybe for normal people just riding around a helmet is unnecessary.

But for the pro's and in races when the speeds get over 80km/h and you crash, well you're screwed anyway but a helmet will limit the damage. It doesn't matter what scientific evidence there is, having something on your head will protect it more than having nothing.

 

On another note, I broke my arm while not wearing a helmet and was concuss for a while.

Maybe it would've helped.

[Starry nights]

Just because someone if a Prof. does not mean you should believe what they say or write - ask my wife - she believes nothing I say and I am a Prof. :D

 

I use a helmet as it is simply common sense to do so - no science needed for me to protect my nob.

[Guest agteros]

Its so scientific to base opinions on one mans observations. I read with great interest on bbc.co.uk years ago about the proff's observations with regards to cycling with and without a helmet.

 

Also there is enough evidence in the States to show that helmet laws reduce permanent head injuries after many states enforced motorbike helmet laws.

 

I once had a nasty accident without a helmet and would say that I was lucky and stupid - if I had a helmet I still would have crashed but would not have been walking around with a massive bump on my head.

 

 

Please provide the "enough evidence", and ensure that the effect of general better policing and road conditions were removed from the figures BEFORE the numbers are compared.

 

I'd prefer to take my own chances any time myself, and prefer to allow other people to do the same. I do not like nannies, nor do I appreciate being nannied. Needless to say, the same goes for other people. "Stupid does as stupid is" or something like that? Stupid does not always means the lowest common denominator, nor the 'safest' option. Generally speaking, who will be comfortable with some ruling forcing you to do something if common sense / gut feeling / personal experience contradicts the ruling?

 

Why stop at helmets as the most common cycling injury these days seems to be shoulder related. Why not force cyclists to wear some or other concoction to prevent rotator cuff / AC ligament injuries? I broke a collar bone before primary school age, doing an involuntary bicycle dismount, maybe I should make it a personal crusade to create a law to force cyclists to wear some funny rescue-the-shoulder contraption

 

Also, I've been in a motor car accident not wearing a safety belt, which incidentally saved my life as I was flung out of the rolling car when the roof was torn off and the car came to a standstill upside down on its window sills. Thank Goodness I broke the law that day!)

 

I've also been in an accident where wearing a safety belt was the correct option as the driver rear ended a stationary vehicle in thick smoke at speed. This saved my face from being pushed through the windscreen. So I'd say relating to a personal experience is pretty mute I can validate whichever choice I want to make by relating to whichever accident

 

Quoting motor cycling laws for validate cycling related decisions is like comparing running and walking; the one is not just a faster version of the other, and the point actually becomes quite irrelevant

 

Sure there are conditions where one choice will be better than the other, but forcing arbitrary laws and ill-researched laws (even with the most PC / best nanny intentions) onto people is to remove choice(freedom) from people.

[Benjamin]

Happy to be a nanny-stater in the medical profession this time round - ususally im saying do whatever you do bru - but the kind of injury probable from a helmetless tip and roll just not worth it.

[Stretch]

Please provide the "enough evidence"............onto people is to remove choice(freedom) from people.

so what you are saying is that regardless of what you do - when its your time to go, its your time to go

 

but seriously, i get what you saying. personally, my risk adverse nature says that a helmet or a seatbelt will save me more often that it will work against me, and therefore i will use them both. i dont wear them because some law says i must, i wear them because it makes logical sense to me

[Guest agteros]

so what you are saying is that regardless of what you do - when its your time to go, its your time to go

 

but seriously, i get what you saying. personally, my risk adverse nature says that a helmet or a seatbelt will save me more often that it will work against me, and therefore i will use them both. i dont wear them because some law says i must, i wear them because it makes logical sense to me

 

By forcing people to make choices that are deemed safe by risk adverse people, they inadvertently may force people into risky situations (Not always, but still...)

Different people have different appetites and different perceptions of what is risky. Neither are wrong or right, Just different. There is place for all of them (and thank you to all the risk takers, otherwise we would all have died of starvation, too afraid to come out of our caves )

 

My take is that the wearing of safety equipment can force people to become complacent about their safety, and when 'found out', they shift blame and sue the makers of the safety equipment. Safety is an attitude, and neither a piece of polystyrene with a plastic cover over it, strapped to your head, nor a safety belt will ensure personal safety! (Just like a gun in the safe, burglar bars and alarm systems)

 

So, "Look and 'kyk' gelyk"!

[jmaccelari]

The article discusses the outcome of an opinion poll, not a scientific study. 'nuff said...

[scotty]

My helmet has saved my pip 3 x. I do not buy this idea that if i'm wearing a helmet i feel more immune and take more risks. The last time my pip was saved was when bikejackers lobbed a paving stone on my head to prevent me fighting back, helmet took most of the blow saving me a crushed skull or at the very least a nasty headache.

[Skott5]

Race organisers force cyclists to wear helmets, not because they worry about their safety, but because they worry about the liability lawsuit.

The rest of the time if you want to ride without a helmet it should be your own choice, you know what the consequences are. Why everyone gets worked up about these issues is beyond me. No one gives a rat arse about the guy standing in the line at Mackie D's waiting to clog up his arteries with a Quater pounder and cheese with fries. It's his choice.

 

Me, I wear my helmet and when I'm on a motorcycle I wear a full face helmet.

[WhuYu]

If any experienced cyclist (by this I mean someone who is not new to cycling)can honestly say that it is not safer to use a helmet than not use it - then, maybe the helmet laws are meant for people like you. Personally - I have had a number of tumbles - and on each occasion been thankful that I had a helmet on. Also - not just for when falling. Especially mtb'ers - riding off-road, your pip is saved when taking knocks from potruding branches/trees/rocks etc. Yes - someone here has said you may be take extra chances with a helmet.........I kinda disagree.......when you are tired and not "focussed"........riding under branches and taking an unexpected"knock" happebns all too often.

My opinion - it is a "no-brainer" (excuse the pun)to wear a helmet when cycling.........my 2 cents worth....