Why Do I See So Many Cyclist Without Helmets?

[leeubok]

Does wearing a helmet really put people off cycling? Has anyone ever gone "argh I don't feel like all the effort of putting on a helmet, let's rather not ride today"? 

 

It is a schlep getting dressed for cycling yes. But the helmet is just one of 6 items, and once it's on you forget about it. 

[Patchelicious]

I mentioned it previously a couple of pages ago and have mentioned it a number of times since then that when one is in an accident a helmet could be of use depending on the nature and specifics of the accident. I don't think I ever denied that, on the contrary I mentioned it more than once. What I have tried to raise is the butterfly effect of helmet wear and legislation which makes helmet wear mandatory, for whole populations the overall effect may not be as positive as one would intuitively think. Wearing a helmet is not the panacea to cycling related deaths and or injuries and could potentially lead to a rise in cycling related deaths and/or injuries.

 

Be safe and have a groovy weekend.

 

Edit: when I entered the fray (stupidly admittedly) on post #55 I specifically and clearly stated that helmets could be of benefit and save lives. The vitriol that subsequently followed I can only assume is due to people not actually reading but putting their own thoughts into alleged words.

It definitely was not specifically and clearly stated, between the various insinuation to their frivilousness your intentions might have been lost.

 

When I was a lighty we used to moer off our bicycles all time sans helmet an survived with all teeth in tact. Pros never wore helmets either. But then we had lead in paint an no seat belts in rear of cars either.

 

Wonder what the actual stats are, or maybe a Hurt report or something. I am not convinced thie lil Rudy project piece of plastic I wear is all it's made out to be.

 

A lot of the anecdotal evidence on this thread is just that.

 

 

Commendable.... I trust you obey all laws, never exceed the speed limit etc etc. an no I don't mean to be sanctimonious but no one obeys all the laws all of the time. its impossible.

 

I am not convinced that wearing a helmet is necessarily a good thing, sure it may help save a few but could possibly result in losing a few as well. The invincible feeling when you wear a helmet which causes you to go a little bit faster or taking that lil extra risk.

 

I really would love to see absolute statistics and data on the lives saved by wearing helmets...

 

Lastly, in this country i rarely trust the incumbent government with my well being.

 

 

Sure, an I reserve the right to tell you to go to hell.

 

I aint arguing, I aint fighting but until I see cold hard data that helmets absolutely save lives and make cycling a safer proposition every time I am not convinced of their necessity.

 

Too often, we follow without actually thinking, its not always black an white. ZA implemented helmet laws without actually doing any research into it...

 

The data I can find on the subject is diverse from absolutely helmets save lives (helmet association) to helmets do not reduce hospitlisation etc (independent) to helmets are useless ( brain surgeon)

 

my concern with helmets is the false sense of security they may give, resulting in higher incidence of accidents and injuries. ( the Hurt report identified this)

 

without a doubt in some cases a helmet may save one from injury etc....

 

Can you not see how your stance might seem confusing.

[Skubarra]

IceCreamMan, on 04 Jan 2017 - 8:48 PM, said:

When I was a lighty we used to moer off our bicycles all time sans helmet an survived with all teeth in tact. 

 

Couldn't help but notice how not wearing helmets didn't burden you with a "false sense of security" and made you cycle more responsibly    

[Skubarra]

Does wearing a helmet really put people off cycling? Has anyone ever gone "argh I don't feel like all the effort of putting on a helmet, let's rather not ride today"? 

 

It is a schlep getting dressed for cycling yes. But the helmet is just one of 6 items, and once it's on you forget about it. 

 

Doesn't make sense to me either but unfortunately it's true, a lot of people are really put off by the idea of cycling with a helmet - helmet hair and all that schlepp, people would rather not cycle than wear a helmet.

[Skylark]

Some arguments on this thread remind me of this pic.

 

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170106/647db5e8306b5836e2ea38074db2815a.jpg

[IceCreamMan]

It definitely was not specifically and clearly stated, between the various insinuation to their frivilousness your intentions might have been lost.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can you not see how your stance might seem confusing.

No. It's simple. I am seeing it from an insular an holistic point of view. In an accident scenario a helmet can of course assist, I never denied this.

 

On a global an taking all variables into consideration level however we have a different picture. This is the picture you refuse to acknowledge. Mandatory helmet laws may have a detrimental affect on the general population.

 

Anyway, moot point really. If you refuse or cannot see the bigger picture then so be it.

[IceCreamMan]

Does wearing a helmet really put people off cycling? Has anyone ever gone "argh I don't feel like all the effort of putting on a helmet, let's rather not ride today"?

 

It is a schlep getting dressed for cycling yes. But the helmet is just one of 6 items, and once it's on you forget about it.

Where helmet laws are made mandatory as much as 40 percent or more of cyclists stop, additionally no real change in death rates or injury rates are discernible. Dr John Adams detected increases in mortality rates in some states when mandatory helmet laws were implemented for motorcyclists. Completely counter intuitive

[IceCreamMan]

No one here, I believe, would disagree with you that behaviour needs to change. I have a couple very interesting articles on alcohol use and cycling related deaths. Would these change yours or others habits of having a pint(or10) with the friends before/during/after a ride? I doubt it. Human nature doesn't work that way. As for risk modifying behaviour, one thing certainly works. That is consequence. Fall on your kop once, develop epilepsy and you'll always wear the helmet after that!

 

HAPPY FRIDAY!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Still trying to understand why the large differences in injuries in other areas between the Netherlands an Australia. Any ideas?

 

I have one an it pertains to the risk compensation that no one wants to hear.

[Patchelicious]

No. It's simple. I am seeing it from an insular an holistic point of view. In an accident scenario a helmet can of course assist, I never denied this.

 

On a global an taking all variables into consideration level however we have a different picture. This is the picture you refuse to acknowledge. Mandatory helmet laws may have a detrimental affect on the general population.

 

Anyway, moot point really. If you refuse or cannot see the bigger picture then so be it.

Please don't try to hide your original core stance under a layer of garnish you call "the bigger picture".

 

I understand the bigger picture a lot better than you think. But this thread was not about the bigger picture, it was about people not wearing helmets and you saying/insinuating/implying that it makes no difference, when it does!

 

In trying to defend your stance you have tried to make this about people being sheep, mandatory laws, then driver behavior, then cyclists behavior, then people being intolerant of your opinion, now rhe bigger picture.

 

" Mandatory helmet laws may have a detrimental affect on the general population."?? Yes it MAY, but until this is supported with good evidence, why should your statement be accepted as fact? Change your MAY to IT DOES with supporting evidence.

 

I could just as easily say " Mandatory helmet laws may NOT have a detrimental affect on the general population."

 

Anyway I am done trying to debate this. Look at all the facts and form an opinion, don't only look for facts that support your opinion. Small cases of potential behavioral changes are outweighed by larger crash protection benefits.

 

Be rational, don't be a politician.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Patchelicious

[kk6gan]

I once had my feelings hurt while cycling and the helmet did not help. At all...

You should try the new Bell Super 3R, can't get hurt feelings while looking so badass! Seriously though, I laughed at this.

 

Also, don't be a donut, wear your helmet!

[carbon29er]

Does wearing a helmet really put people off cycling? Has anyone ever gone "argh I don't feel like all the effort of putting on a helmet, let's rather not ride today"? 

 

It is a schlep getting dressed for cycling yes. But the helmet is just one of 6 items, and once it's on you forget about it. 

Majority of riders do not get dressed to ride. They get dressed for work and ride there and ride home. So yes, putting on a helmet can be a massive schlep.

 

Don't confuse your cycling with how the world cycles.

[Patchelicious]

Majority of riders do not get dressed to ride. They get dressed for work and ride there and ride home. So yes, putting on a helmet can be a massive schlep.

 

Don't confuse your cycling with how the world cycles.

And in the South African context?

We have different problems, laws, behaviors and cultures towards cyclist than other countries.

 

Also remember the context of that statement was. "What happens to the mortality rate" this implies the effect helmet schlep has on recreational activities. I doubt a commuter will bunk going to work because he didn't want to put a helmet on.

[SwissVan]

Majority of riders do not get dressed to ride. They get dressed for work and ride there and ride home. So yes, putting on a helmet can be a massive schlep.

 

Don't confuse your cycling with how the world cycles.

 

Yet motorcyclists manage to beat the schlep because why?

[IceCreamMan]

Please don't try to hide your original core stance under a layer of garnish you call "the bigger picture".

 

I understand the bigger picture a lot better than you think. But this thread was not about the bigger picture, it was about people not wearing helmets and you saying/insinuating/implying that it makes no difference, when it does!

 

In trying to defend your stance you have tried to make this about people being sheep, mandatory laws, then driver behavior, then cyclists behavior, then people being intolerant of your opinion, now rhe bigger picture.

 

" Mandatory helmet laws may have a detrimental affect on the general population."?? Yes it MAY, but until this is supported with good evidence, why should your statement be accepted as fact? Change your MAY to IT DOES with supporting evidence.

 

I could just as easily say " Mandatory helmet laws may NOT have a detrimental affect on the general population."

 

Anyway I am done trying to debate this. Look at all the facts and form an opinion, don't only look for facts that support your opinion. Small cases of potential behavioral changes are outweighed by larger crash protection benefits.

 

Be rational, don't be a politician.

If one looks at the literature it rarely uses absolutes. As you have a better understanding of this you would be aware of this. Even in pro helmet literature it uses terminology like could or may because the reality is it's not absolute.

 

Oh, I have looked at much data from many angles and the surprising thing is that at this point there is no definitive view. The world ain't always black or white but often various shades of grey.

 

Unfortunately, this issue is in the grey. Reconcile with that.

[Patchelicious]

After a lil run I realise that many have fixated on the accident and view the accident as the be all and end all and therein lies the flaw so let me try and be clearer on this.

 

In the event of some kinds of accidents can helmets be of benefit. The answer is obviously yes. Asking a doctor whether helmets can save lives his answer can only be yes as he deals with the ramifications of accidents. (An injuries or reduce the severity of injuries)

So, if you ask me a specific question relating to accidents an the wearing of helmets I could chip in anecdotal evidence too and we would all agree and life would be good.

 

But, the world does not work like that an things rarely operate in isolation and this is where research tends to indicate that helmets do not in fact save lives or reduce injuries but may in fact promote them. Some May take more risks or go faster or feel invincible and this actually CAUSES more accidents. Then the issue that motorists in a study drove closer to cyclists wearing helmets than those not wearing helmets potentially causing more accidents. Other cyclists may also perceive you to be more proficient than you are and overtake closer etc. It's when viewed in this holistic light that the efficacy of helmets is not what it initially appears to be.

 

So if faced with the question as follows: if you ride a bike without a helmet you have a one in hundred chance of having an accident an one in a thousand chance of dying or if you wear a helmet you have a 2 in a chance of having an accident and one in a thousand chance of dying suddenly the response is not so simple.

 

Now, onto a different aspect but similar. It's is irrefutable that alcohol cause cycle accidents and the deaths of cyclists. I suspect alcohol probably causes more carnage to cyclists than the not wearing of helmets ,this is alcohol consumed by cyclists or vehicle drivers. I trust all you ous call out all your buds and everyone in society you see drinking an is going to drive or cycle as technically a single beer puts u over the legal limit.

 

So lets look at this. 

 

1: Could cycling with a helmet increase my risk of having an accident?

2: Is there a benefit of wearing a helmet in the event of a crash?

3: If wearing a helmet does increase the accident rate, does this increased accident rate outweigh the benefits of wearing a helmet?

 

I ran two little silly polls to get an indication.

 

In total there were 159 respondents. At the time of writing.

Notes: There was not a NO IT MADE NO DIFFERENCE TO MY INJURY option, as this would create false positives e.g.: Crashing without a helmet and breaking your ankle/wrist/clavicle etc has no effect on the discussion of head injuries. However for the sake of argument there was also no exclusion of accidents from accidents rates increase based on injury type. i.e.: If you crashed because of wearing a helmet and broke your ankle, it would reflect in the increased accident rate. Giving increased accident rates a slight bias.

 

1: Could cycling with a helmet increase my risk of having an accident?

3 respondents or 1.8% said that wearing a helmet changed their behaviour in such a way that it caused them to crash. 159 said it made no difference. 

 

Thats a possible accident increase rate of 1.8%, directly due to wearing helmets.

 

2: Is there a benefit of wearing a helmet in the event of accident?

87% of respondents said they had personally experienced the benefit of wearing a helmet. 68% of people said that it actually prevented a head injury not just reducing the injury. So there seems to be merit in wearing a helmet in the event of an accident. Consider that the remaining respondents have yet to actually crash.

 

3: If wearing a helmet does increase the accident rate, does this increased accident rate outweigh the benefits of wearing a helmet?

 

Based on the info above?

 

Personally, I would rather crash 101.8 times with the added benefit of wearing helmet than crashing 100 times without one.

 

Even with all the mistakes that I would have made, the results indicate a discrepancy between accident rate increase and benefit of wearing a helmet too vast to label "inconclusive".

Edited January 7, 2017 by Patchelicious

[Patchelicious]

If one looks at the literature it rarely uses absolutes. As you have a better understanding of this you would be aware of this. Even in pro helmet literature it uses terminology like could or may because the reality is it's not absolute.

 

Oh, I have looked at much data from many angles and the surprising thing is that at this point there is no definitive view. The world ain't always black or white but often various shades of grey.

 

Unfortunately, this issue is in the grey. Reconcile with that.

 

Agreed there is rarely absolute proof, you were the one wanting it......??

 

 

Commendable.... I trust you obey all laws, never exceed the speed limit etc etc. an no I don't mean to be sanctimonious but no one obeys all the laws all of the time. its impossible.

 

I am not convinced that wearing a helmet is necessarily a good thing, sure it may help save a few but could possibly result in losing a few as well. The invincible feeling when you wear a helmet which causes you to go a little bit faster or taking that lil extra risk.

 

I really would love to see absolute statistics and data on the lives saved by wearing helmets...

 

Lastly, in this country i rarely trust the incumbent government with my well being.

 

show me the stats that absolutely irrefutably prove that helmets save lives or serious injury and I will believe you.

 

Sadly, you may battle to find this and may in some cases find contradictory stats...strange that.

 

YOU were one wanting absolute proof, now you are saying this doesn't exist.

So in effect, your parameters are unattainable by your own admission.

 

I think this has become about you trying to prove that you are "not wrong" rather than actually debating the merits of wearing helmets. I couldn't be bothered by participating in that excersise. 

 

In conclusion, let me ask you these two simple questions.

1: Do you wear a helmet?

2: And if so, why?

Edited January 7, 2017 by Patchelicious