preferred-google-button
log in
register

Cycle helmet saved my life!

  • Creator
    Topic
  • June 5, 2017 at 9:49 am #27187
    Mungecrundle

    OR prevented a serious head injury.

    OR saved me from a superficial head wound.

    OR failed to provide any meaningful protection, because it broke.

    OR almost caused me a catastrophic rotational neck injury.

     

    First off, I was indulging in risky behaviour which I would not have been without wearing a helmet. In this case racing, closed road event, for a qualification time. Completely my fault, overlapped a wheel, rider in front jinked to the right and down I went at about 25mph on my left hand side. Bad road rash to both knees, left elbow, bruising and abrasions to my left thigh and shoulder, maybe a cracked rib, certainly bruised and painful, bruised palm and knuckles. Gloves ripped, bibshorts ripped, helmet destroyed. Luckily I didn’t take anyone else down with me.

    Fortunately the bike went down on the non drive side, so after being checked out by the medics who were concerned about possible head injury I was able to carry on, although at a much gentler pace.

    This is of course an unscientific piece of anectdata, and I personally have no intention to recreate the event but without a helmet in order to provide a control data point for comparison. However for me this pretty much conclusive that a helmet can mitigate injuries in some circumstances.

     

     

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)
1 2 3
  • Author
    Replies
  • June 6, 2017 at 1:14 pm #894427
    0
    Rich_cb

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    I disagree that the question is ‘completely different’. It’s directly relevant to your response to BtB. Stats about the overall risk of cycling and other modes don’t say anything about the ‘relative risk’ that was your retort to BtB. What matters is the effect on that risk of wearing a helmet or not.

    If one is going to go on about the increased risk from cycling without a helmet as opposed to with one, one should apply equal fervour to the increased risks that result from all other sorts of choices, including the choice to drive a car at all. And one should at least be able to quantify what that increased risk is, compared to all those other risks.

    (I realise you can’t, because it’s too difficult for anyone to work that out, but that’s why your ‘relative risk’ response doesn’t really work)

    Behindthebikesheds stated that it was hypocritical to advocate helmet use for cycling but not while driving or walking.

    The relevant relative risk in that case was between cycling and walking/driving.

    If the relative risk is different (which it is) then it isn’t hypocritical to advocate helmet use for the riskier activity whilst not advocating it for the less risky activity.

    Your other question then asked about the relative risks of helmet use Vs non helmet use in the context of both pollution and exercise on an individual journey basis.

    That is obviously a completely different, and far more complex, question.

    I gave the best data available in response.

    I haven’t at any point mentioned the increased risk of cycling with a helmet Vs without.

    I was merely pointing out that Behindthebikesheds was wrong in his accusation of hypocrisy.

    June 6, 2017 at 12:59 pm #894425
    0
    FluffyKittenofTindalos

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    Er…that doesn’t in any way answer the question I asked! Maybe read the question again?

    My original post about risk was in reply to Behindthebikesheds. Those DfT stats are relevant to that post.

    Your next question asked something completely different.

    There isn’t, AFAIK, any reliable relative risk data available for cycling with a helmet Vs without.

    The best data to respond to your question is the overall mortality data as that gives a relative risk for regular cycling Vs regular driving.

    On any individual journey the variables are far too complex to work out a specific relative risk.

    I disagree that the question is ‘completely different’. It’s directly relevant to your response to BtB. Stats about the overall risk of cycling and other modes don’t say anything about the ‘relative risk’ that was your retort to BtB. What matters is the effect on that risk of wearing a helmet or not.

    If one is going to go on about the increased risk from cycling without a helmet as opposed to with one, one should apply equal fervour to the increased risks that result from all other sorts of choices, including the choice to drive a car at all. And one should at least be able to quantify what that increased risk is, compared to all those other risks.

    (I realise you can’t, because it’s too difficult for anyone to work that out, but that’s why your ‘relative risk’ response doesn’t really work)

    June 6, 2017 at 12:52 pm #894423
    0
    Mungecrundle

    drosco wrote:

    drosco wrote:

    Maybe the whole point of the post was that statistics aside, here’s a practical example of a helmet saving someone from greater injury? No?

    Nothing more complicated than just that.

    FWIW I decided not to go to hospital or wait for the broom wagon. Bike was still serviceable so I got back on and finished the event making the conscious decision to do so with a broken and therefore non protecting helmet. I did however greatly change my riding behaviour from no longer racing to just being out for a cycle ride.

    I’m also not convinced that I’ll go back to wearing a helmet routinely on my short urban commute as I strongly believe that cycling normally should not be seen as a dangerous pursuit requiring special protective equipment.

    June 6, 2017 at 12:50 pm #894421
    0
    P3t3
    alansmurphy wrote:
    I’m not sure anyone (or anyone in their right mind) would suggest a helmet wont save you from some level of injury in some situations.

     

    It’s the “wasn’t wearing a helmet” when someone’s torso has been crushed to death by a lorry and the putting helmets at the top of the lists when we all know tonnes of metal and piss poor infrastructure are the biggest problems…

     

    Indeed, I would also add that there aren’t many people who would oppose wearing a helmet in high speed bunch racing.  

    But for pottering to work or the shops on a dutch bike…

    June 6, 2017 at 11:44 am #894419
    0
    Rich_cb

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    Er…that doesn’t in any way answer the question I asked! Maybe read the question again?

    My original post about risk was in reply to Behindthebikesheds. Those DfT stats are relevant to that post.

    Your next question asked something completely different.

    There isn’t, AFAIK, any reliable relative risk data available for cycling with a helmet Vs without.

    The best data to respond to your question is the overall mortality data as that gives a relative risk for regular cycling Vs regular driving.

    On any individual journey the variables are far too complex to work out a specific relative risk.

    June 6, 2017 at 11:15 am #894417
    0
    drosco

    Maybe the whole point of the

    Maybe the whole point of the post was that statistics aside, here’s a practical example of a helmet saving someone from greater injury? No?

    June 6, 2017 at 11:08 am #894415
    0
    FluffyKittenofTindalos

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    What is the ‘relative risk’ then? If you understand it so well, can you give figures?

    Give the figures for how much ‘not wearing a helmet’ on a bike ride increases the risk of serious injury or death for someone, vs how much ‘choosing to drive a journey you could walk or cycle’ does, for example (including the health impact of the pollution, as well as the collision risk and cardiovascular effects).

    It depends if you want to look at the risk of death/injury per mile travelled, per travel time or per journey.

    Per mile cycling is slightly safer than walking but per journey and per hour it is far more dangerous.

    Relative risk of death per mile for cyclists Vs pedestrians is about 0.8.

    Per journey it’s about 4.25.

    Per hour it’s about 2.5.

    I think the per hour rate is the best comparator, going out for an hour long ride is 2.5 times more risky than a walk of equivalent duration.

    Taking all risks into consideration cycling regularly is much safer than driving or walking with an all cause mortality risk of 0.59.

    Transport figures are from the DfT and available on their website. Overall mortality figures are from recent BMJ article (reported on this site).

    Er…that doesn’t in any way answer the question I asked! Maybe read the question again?

    June 6, 2017 at 10:52 am #894413
    0
    Rich_cb

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    What is the ‘relative risk’ then? If you understand it so well, can you give figures?

    Give the figures for how much ‘not wearing a helmet’ on a bike ride increases the risk of serious injury or death for someone, vs how much ‘choosing to drive a journey you could walk or cycle’ does, for example (including the health impact of the pollution, as well as the collision risk and cardiovascular effects).

    It depends if you want to look at the risk of death/injury per mile travelled, per travel time or per journey.

    Per mile cycling is slightly safer than walking but per journey and per hour it is far more dangerous.

    Relative risk of death per mile for cyclists Vs pedestrians is about 0.8.

    Per journey it’s about 4.25.

    Per hour it’s about 2.5.

    I think the per hour rate is the best comparator, going out for an hour long ride is 2.5 times more risky than a walk of equivalent duration.

    Taking all risks into consideration cycling regularly is much safer than driving or walking with an all cause mortality risk of 0.59.

    Transport figures are from the DfT and available on their website. Overall mortality figures are from recent BMJ article (reported on this site).

    June 6, 2017 at 10:33 am #894411
    0
    Simon E

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

    FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
    Oh dear, another one who thinks helmets have magic powers. Worrying.
    Don’t waste your energy. We can ignore it as it’s utter bollocks, like religious nutters telling us the world is going to end etc etc.

    Anyone who has had a family member who required a feeding tube, regardless of how they reached that state, may find such remarks offensive. But trolls love to cause offence, it makes them feel important while not having to think for themselves or consider that alternative opinions may be valid.

    June 6, 2017 at 10:13 am #894409
    0
    andyp

    The only time I have suffered

    The only time I have suffered a brain injury, I wasn’t wearing a helmet.

     

    I wasn’t cycling, either. I was lying down in a bed.

    I also know someone who suffered a stroke whilst asleep – whilst lying down, in bed. They *are* a financial and emotional burden on their family, possibly for decades (although probably for far less).

     

    Remember, every time you lie down, be sure to tell your family that the possibility exists that you will be a financial and emotional burden on them, possibly for decades. Likewise crossing a road, driving a car, eating *anything*, breathing, swimming…..

     

     

     

     

    Shit…never mind ‘possibilities existing ‘ – my kids **are** a financial and emotional burden on me, possibly for decades, and they don’t even ride bikes. I reckon that the financial and emotional burden aspect started shortly after conception. No procreation without PPE!!!

     

    We could carry on like this for a while, or we could point out that the comment from reliablemeatloaf was, basically, complete toss.

     

    June 6, 2017 at 9:37 am #894407
    0
    FluffyKittenofTindalos

    reliablemeatloaf wrote:

    reliablemeatloaf wrote:

    To wear a helmet or not is easy:
    If you want to wear a helmet, wear one.

    If you don’t want to wear one, don’t. Just be sure to tell your family that the possibility exists that you will be a financial and emotional burden on them, possibly for decades.

    And enjoy your feeding tube.

    Oh dear, another one who thinks helmets have magic powers. Worrying.

    June 6, 2017 at 9:35 am #894405
    0
    FluffyKittenofTindalos

    Rich_cb wrote:

    Rich_cb wrote:
    BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

    I presume you and your family wear helmets for walking and getting into a motor vehicle or you’re a massive hypocrite?

    You really don’t understand relative risk.

    What is the ‘relative risk’ then? If you understand it so well, can you give figures?

    Give the figures for how much ‘not wearing a helmet’ on a bike ride increases the risk of serious injury or death for someone, vs how much ‘choosing to drive a journey you could walk or cycle’ does, for example (including the health impact of the pollution, as well as the collision risk and cardiovascular effects).

    June 6, 2017 at 8:33 am #894403
    0
    Rich_cb

    BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

    BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

    I presume you and your family wear helmets for walking and getting into a motor vehicle or you’re a massive hypocrite?

    You really don’t understand relative risk.

    June 6, 2017 at 7:49 am #894401
    0
    fenix

    Podc wrote:

    Podc wrote:

    reliablemeatloaf wrote:
    To wear a helmet or not is easy:
    If you want to wear a helmet, wear one.

    If you don’t want to wear one, don’t. Just be sure to tell your family that the possibility exists that you will be a financial and emotional burden on them, possibly for decades.

    And enjoy your feeding tube.

     

    Wearing a helmet when riding a bike doesn’t ensure that you will never ‘be a financial and emotional burden on them, possibly for decades.’

    It might reduce that risk very, very slightly, but with an attitude that suggests the helmet will save you from any brain injury then I suspect it would increase the risk very significantly.

    Yes this. It’s ridiculous to say that you won’t suffer brain injury wearing a helmet. Schumacher wore one skiing after all ?

    June 6, 2017 at 7:06 am #894399
    0
    JohnnyEnglish

     

     

    [/quote]

    I presume you and your family wear helmets for walking and getting into a motor vehicle or you’re a massive hypocrite?

    [/quote]

     

    I would hazard a guess that he does not do either of these activities at 30mph on the highway.

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 16 through 30 (of 43 total)
1 2 3
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.