closetbiker

Yeah, I don't know. You said,

I wear a helmet because it would be stupid not to.

To me, that's saying it is stupid to not wear a helmet and you wear one, not, it would be stupid for me to ride without one on.

It may not be what you intended, but it's the way it came across.

Six jours

Did not either. Slander! Call the lawyers!

This place is getting goofier by the minute.

John C. Ratliff

Closetbiker,

Actually, even the experts are not as precise as you are here. Look at the discussion on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concussion

They use the wording "Concussion may be caused..." about the mechanisms (pleural) of concussion. But you are positive about that.

Realize that for the first impact, I had a helmet, and did not on the second. Which one caused my concussion? I don't know, but it may have been the second impact. I now do not ride with a helmet which has a taped-on shell (cheaper helmets), but want one with an integrated shell that is molded into the foam, or a hard shell helmet.

One of the reasons for my disagreements with you are your positive, all-knowing presentation of mechanisms of injury, some of which are not correct or are incomplete.ix

Six jours,

Any luck with pushing the pebble into the helmet foam?

John

drumthebenway

I tried to explain that my lack of use of English, living in a non-English-speaking country, was part of the reason for my unclear comment. I realized after you reacted so strongly that I had given the wrong message and I explained my error. Maybe I didn't actually clear that up?

You're right that it's just an internet forum, but it's also a source of information for some people. So it's not completely unimportant for me to at least pay attention to the debate here. I'd like to be able to do so without being intentionally insulted.

Obviously I keep picking the wrong words, but maybe you can finally let this go and not keep throwing it in my face? I did not intend to insult anybody.

closetbiker

but the experts give a much more plausible explanations of how or why something does or does not occur and to be truthful, there is no definitive consensus on brain injury. It still makes a far better platform of discussion than simply stating, "my helmet saved me from brain injury" particuarily when brain injuries happen to helmeted cyclists on a regular basis.

As to the second point, does it matter? Even if the helmet stopped a brain injury on first impact, after that impact, it's protective qualities have totally vanished (being a one hit use item) and if you hit the ground after that impact, you still receive a brain injury.

John C. Ratliff

Yes, actually it does matter. The second hit has a lot less energy than the first, as the fall distance is much decreased (from six feet to about two feet). Forward motion on the second hit would also be greatly decreased.

Also, you make no distinction between the degree of brain injury that one receives. Even with a concussion (which may or may not be an actual injury, according to the writers on Wikipedia), there are a number of levels of concussion. Mine was a Grade III on any of the three scales shown. But there was no contusion, no subdural hemotome, etc., which would be actual injuries.

John

GreenPremier

Good call, hard shell helmets I feel would provide more protection than the usual helmets. I actually just ordered a Pro-tec bmx helmet that has a hardshell. They're fairly comfortable and don't look so dorky.
This whole debate has convincing arguments on both sides. I'm still not completely for or against helmets, but wearing one can't hurt I don't think. It's like an extra shell around your skull. Instead of your skull hitting the pavement directly, how about having a buffer zone?

And someone was saying before that no one has been swayed either way? I have been swayed enough to wear a helmet, it's not THAT much of an inconvenience and it provides a LITTLE protection. Big deal.

I'm still not going to tell someone they should or shouldn't wear one. That's their choice. I ride kind of idiotic by most drivers' opions (going through lights, stop signs etc.) but I also ride carefully, quite aware of what's going on around me.
Why can't one ride this way with a helmet on, in case some idiot driver smashes into you?

John C. Ratliff

GreenPremier,

I like what you say in the first part here, but in the second part it sounds a lot like you are engaged in "risk compensation," or taking more risk because you have a helmet on. I am concerned about that aspect of your post. Please consider abiding by the traffic laws and lights when you ride. This is one argument that people opposed to helmets use, saying that simply wearing a bike helmet encourages this vary "risk compensation," which in effect negates the value of the helmet by making you more vulnerable to accidents with cars because of your riding technique. Do re-think this aspect of your riding.

John

GreenPremier

I think you missed my point. I ride the same way without a helmet on. I don't take anymore risks. I don't take many risks anyway, if the coast is clear at a light, I go. That's not much of a risk if no one is coming. I ride pretty safely for the most part but I do not, for the most part, obey traffic laws. It depends on the day, how much of a hurry I'm in. I tend to be the opportunist.
But wearing a helmet can't hurt, at least the pads will catch the sweat instead of the sun beating down on my forehead and making the sweat run more into my eyes.

John C. Ratliff

GreenPremier,

Good, thank you for the clarification.

John

closetbiker

So, you're saying a single impact helmet is useful in multiple impacts and even when a helmet hasn't prevented an injury, it has.

Your faith is magnificent.

John C. Ratliff

No, I'm just acknowledging that the second impact is much less than the first, usually. At least, it was in my case. But I have switched helmets to ones that will provide multiple impact capability. I don't want my helmet potentially disintegrating like my last one did again. We do learn, over time (usually). And, there is a reason some helmets are a bit more expensive than others.

John

closetbiker

but the second impact would be subject to no protection and the mechanisms that caused your concussion weren't preventable in either.

I've always thought multiple impact helmets were far more practical but they are subject to half the energy absorption - a drop from 1 meter compared to a drop from 2 meters for a single use helmet and we all know how many concussions football and hockey players have in their multiple impact helmets.

I wish we knew just how protective each helmet was over the required minimum standard. That standard is the de facto maximum standard without this knowledge.

And finally, we both know it's market forces, not quality that determine the price of things. It always amazes me what people pay even for the cheaper helmets when the materials typically cost less than a dollar (https://www.helmets.org/helmcost.htm). But then again, we both know it's the psychology that drives sales of most things rather than rational thought. It's fear itself that prompts a cyclist to wear a helmet when he doesn't wear one otherwise.

Looking back at that video I recently posted, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj8uz...eature=related) do you think these folks have a genuine fear of riding their bikes without helmets? I see much interaction with motor vehicles yet the fear is absent. I see a thread on the commuting forum entitled, "Americans leery of bicycles despite gas price jump". A couple of quotes from some drivers were, "This is the U.S. and people will kill you out there riding your bike," and "I would not take my life in my hands and ride a bike." Fear is an emotion played with, often when there is little underlying reason for that fear. Often solutions are sold to appease the constructed fear even if it is no real solution at all. Some people buy the concept, others don't.

John C. Ratliff

Closetbiker,

You've got some good points here. Take a look at this Ford commercial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPd-W4M0sqE&NR=1

John

closetbiker

you've just got to laugh, otherwise you'd have to cry.

Dad puts a ten sizes too big helmet on his kid flopping all over the place with the straps nowhere near adjusted right because he's a "caring" dad! Then, he throws his older kid a skateboard helmet followed the the car keys, much to the amazement of even the kid (he's surprised that he's been considered to be driving) because it's the car that "safe", it's got a "4 star" safety rating.

It doesn't matter if the kid can't drive, the car's "safe". Doesn't matter that motor vehicles are about the only thing that kills kids (like his) on bikes. Damm the teen-age crash record. The dad's done the research, he's content. He can "buy" all the safety he needs.

Geez, the government should step in on this poop.

gpsblake

I wear a helmet. I doubt if it will save my life in a very bad crash but I do know it will help prevent my head from getting stitches or road-burned if I do wreck.

I do not believe though in lecturing those who don't wear a helmet.

yakmurph

I wish I could wear my full-face (chin bar; visor) motorcycle helmet, while bicycling, year-round.
I wear the Arai in the cold Winter months...but it's impossible in Summer.

Yeah, the brain is an important organ to coddle in protective gear, but so's the rest of the head.

Facial reconstruction surgery is costly, painful, inconvenient, life-changing and the
rehabilitation is quite time-consuming.

I've never done a face-plant onto the tarmac at speed, but I know people who have.

Six jours

And that's all us "anti-helmet" folks are looking for, despite the opinions of some people here. Nobody is trying to get people like you to take your helmet off. We just want to be left alone to make our decisions for ourselves.

closetbiker

live, and let live.

John C. Ratliff

Six jours,

Any luck with the pebble?

John

closetbiker

Would a simple roll in the dirt count?



(plus, we're still waiting - with baited breath - for your analysis on several reports)

Six jours

Yes. I looked it up, and American Heritage Dictionary says "peb·ble (pěb'əl) n.

1. A small stone, especially one worn smooth by erosion."

Being as the gal in the original story didn't specify the surface contours of the "small stone" in question, and being as the precise definition of "pebble" does not hold smoothness as a strict requirement, I went out and found a regular old little rock and stuffed it nicely into my helmet foam. (Doubtless that has now rendered my helmet worse than useless, in the eyes of the helmet Nazis, but that just adds to the charm of it in mine.) In fairness, however, I did not try as hard as I might have to stuff the same stone into my forehead, so perhaps there is still room for debate.

Perhaps we should now see if we can come to a conclusion as to the definition of "is"?

roadiejorge 

To not wear a helmet because of "style" just seems like a silly thing to do, I'd wear a swan shaped helmet if it meant having something to protect my head in the event of a crash. I used to think that way as well until the day I hit an uneven part of the pavement and flew into a tree when I lost control. The helmet my mom gave me and insisted I wear that day saved my skull I'm sure given that the helmet was split in two. I suffered a concussion and considered myself lucky that was it. People can choose not to wear them, it just means adding an extra risk in the event of an accident. I often here people say they're careful to avoid accidents but it's not just one's lack of awareness that can cause you to have a bad fall.

Six jours

Is it just me or do some of these posts seem to have come from people who read the opening post and nothing else?

closetbiker

yeah, I'm sure that's it