Don't forget your helmet

[flecc]

Person taken to hospital as police descend on Gloucester

Helicopters were spotted above the Quedgeley and Kingsway areas

www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk

see what i mean lol need a fkn iron man suit round here

You're making me laugh.

One person was assaulted and a helicopter was seen overhead. This is routine thoughout the country, and long has been.

Still, I suppose it's as exciting as it gets in Gloucestershire.
.

 

[soundwave]

the other one was the air ambulance imo someone got a scooter rammed up there ass

 

[Nealh]

I remember something of that study, a leather bush hat more effective at getting you noticed. Probably beaten by a fit arse, pert breasts and long blonde tresses flowing in the breeze.

Nearly all my cycling is done with a bush hat on my bonce.

 

[jimriley]

Sure about that?

He made no mention of the gender he had in mind sporting those attributes.
.

No judgement involved in that, just a comment on the way the world is. Reporting facts as I remembered, backed up by another poster.

 

[montwo]

the other one was the air ambulance imo someone got a scooter rammed up there ass

An argument for sitting on your cycle helmet?

 

[jimriley]

Nearly all my cycling is done with a bush hat on my bonce.

Don't the corks whack you in the eye?

 

[richtea99]

There is good evidence that wearing a helmet reduces or eliminates head injuries for cyclists.

Would be sweet if you could add the link to the evidence, please.

In the meantime, pedestrians should also consider helmets.
Thinking on, maybe have one at the top of the stairs for those risky descents.
It's terribly dangerous [in and] out there.

 

[soundwave]

An argument for sitting on your cycle helmet?

Tuffley assault: 'Serious attack' near school saw men carrying a knife
A man in his 50s is in hospital

'Serious attack' in Gloucester involved men carrying a knife

A man in his 50s is in hospital

www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk

if i see 3 ppl walking down the road ill run out with my big un splat hat and body armor



got one of these as well should remove a few teeth and half there face

 

[nigelbb]

Would be sweet if you could add the link to the evidence, please.

You must have missed the link to the Guardian review article that I posted earlier. Here is a link to a comprehensive meta-analysis (the statistical gold standard evidence-wise). https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/46/1/278/2617198?login=true

Conclusions: Bicycle helmet use was associated with reduced odds of head injury, serious head injury, facial injury and fatal head injury. The reduction was greater for serious or fatal head injury. Neck injury was rare and not associated with helmet use. These results support the use of strategies to increase the uptake of bicycle helmets as part of a comprehensive cycling safety plan.

 

[richtea99]

Thanks Nigel, I did miss it. I will have a read!

 

[sjpt]

In the meantime, pedestrians should also consider helmets.
Thinking on, maybe have one at the top of the stairs for those risky descents.
It's terribly dangerous [in and] out there.

I've been wearing a helmet on the bike for around 40 years; almost all the time but not always, and I think it would be terrible if it became compulsory.

I've had a few smallish cycle accidents in those times, not the kind where the helmet was relevant. I have had the benefit of the helmets twice. Once a cupboard door fell on my head; I'd just taken the helmet out of the cupboard and put it on prior to riding home from work and was locking the cupboard up. Once I stood up sharply in the garage while under a solid shelf.

 

[StuartsProjects]

I have never, myself, doubted that wearing a helmet would reduce the possibility of head injury, its why I have chosen to wear one for the last 45 years.

Given that there would be a reduction in cycle use (possibly significant) if helmet wearing was compulsory what would be the overall affect on the health of the population ?

Would the population, and children in particular, become healthier if they cycled less ?

Would those left cycling be at more or less risk due to the reduced number of motorists with experience of cycling ?

So where are the statistics that show the 'overwhelming evidence' that there is an overal bennefit of making helmet wearing cumpulsory ?

 

[richtea99]

Personally I would make cycle helmets compulsory as the evidence is overwhelming that they protect the wearer from serious head injury. There is no downside to wearing a helmet. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/sep/22/bicycle-helmets-reduce-risk-of-serious-head-injury-by-nearly-70-study-finds

I am old enough to have legally ridden a motorcycle without a helmet but I'm sure that this is just the same argument made by motorcyclists until helmets were made compulsory in 1973.

It's wrong to compare cyclists with motorcyclists when considering compulsory helmet wearing.

- For motorcyclists, the speed of their own vehicle is a factor. You're saving quite a few motorcyclists from themselves, hence compulsory helmets and training.

- For cyclists, it's not the speed of the bike, it's the speed of the vehicle that hits them which is going to be the most significant factor. Cyclists still obviously make mistakes on their own, but at less bone/head-crunching speeds.

Stats:
Serious injury (no other vehicle involved)
- Cyclists 265, Motorcyclists 1146
Serious injury (1+ other vehicle involved)
- Cyclists 4041, Motorcyclists 4284

Ratio for cyclists: 265/4041 = 6.5% were serious solo accidents - surprisingly low
Ratio for motorcyclists: 1146/4284 = 27% were serious solo accidents - pretty high

Source:

Road safety statistics: data tables

Detailed statistics about reported personal injury road collisions for Great Britain, vehicles and casualties involved.

www.gov.uk

Look for RAS40004

Solution: fix the cause of the problem (other drivers lack of skill), not the effect (fragile cyclist's bodies).

Disclaimer: I'm a motorcyclist too.

 

[nigelbb]

It's wrong to compare cyclists with motorcyclists when considering compulsory helmet wearing.

- For motorcyclists, the speed of their own vehicle is a factor. You're saving quite a few motorcyclists from themselves, hence compulsory helmets and training.

- For cyclists, it's not the speed of the bike, it's the speed of the vehicle that hits them which is going to be the most significant factor. Cyclists still obviously make mistakes on their own, but at less bone/head-crunching speeds.

Stats:
Serious injury (no other vehicle involved)
- Cyclists 265, Motorcyclists 1146
Serious injury (1+ other vehicle involved)
- Cyclists 4041, Motorcyclists 4284

Ratio for cyclists: 265/4041 = 6.5% were serious solo accidents - surprisingly low
Ratio for motorcyclists: 1146/4284 = 27% were serious solo accidents - pretty high

Source:

Road safety statistics: data tables

Detailed statistics about reported personal injury road collisions for Great Britain, vehicles and casualties involved.

www.gov.uk

Look for RAS40004

Solution: fix the cause of the problem (other vehicles), not the effect (fragile cyclist's bodies).

Disclaimer: I'm a motorcyclist too.

A cycle helmet will not do much to protect the wearer when struck by a car. If you want to guarantee greater protection you need a full face motorcycle helmet.
Cycle helmets help prevent head injury in relatively low speed accidents just as simple as toppling over from standing or at the relatively low speeds that cyclists attain.
BTW The reason for the disparity in serious injury with single vehicle RTC between bicycles & motorcycles will be due to the lower speed of a bicycle but the figures are incomplete as you would need to factor in number of miles travelled by cyclists vs motorcyclists or number of journeys if you prefer. Then there is a gender difference eg 90% of motorcycle trips made and distance travelled were by men etc etc

 

[vfr400]

You must have missed the link to the Guardian review article that I posted earlier. Here is a link to a comprehensive meta-analysis (the statistical gold standard evidence-wise). https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/46/1/278/2617198?login=true

Conclusions: Bicycle helmet use was associated with reduced odds of head injury, serious head injury, facial injury and fatal head injury. The reduction was greater for serious or fatal head injury. Neck injury was rare and not associated with helmet use. These results support the use of strategies to increase the uptake of bicycle helmets as part of a comprehensive cycling safety plan.

The basic argument is the same as staying at home substantially reduces the risk of getting run over by a bus, stabbed by a terrorist or catching a virus. Should it therefore be made compulsory to keep everyone in their homes. If the answer is yes, then you don't need cycle helmets. If no, it means you want people to make their own choices regarding risks and safety.

I think it was right to ban the use of phones in cars because that affects the safety of innocent third parties, the same as would be allowing people to discharge weapons in public, but I think people should be given the choice of wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet, which only affects their own safety. Personally, I would always wear a helmet on a motorbike

Why draw the line at helmets? Most people fall off their bikes at some point in time - some more than others. Your head is normally the last thing that gets injured. Knees hands and hips are the most common injuries. Why not mandate armoured gloves, kneepads and hip-guards? I know some guys that wouldn't dream of going out on their motorbikes without anything less, while others don't care about these things.

I have three cycle helmets that I wear regularly depending on circumstances, but most of the time I don't wear a helmet. Luckily, the one time I bashed my head badly in a bicycle crash I was wearing one.

There was one time a motorcycle helmet saved me from certain death, but that was before they were compulsory. I was wearing it because it was winter and I needed the extra protection from the helmet and visor against the cold air, though if I hadn't been wearing it, I would have been able to see better, so probably wouldn't have had the night time accident, which was due to me misjudging what I saw through the glare of the scratched visor. I had a couple of other accidents wheere a motorbike helmet saved me from a lot of pain, but I can't say that they were life and death situations.

 

[nigelbb]

So where are the statistics that show the 'overwhelming evidence' that there is an overal bennefit of making helmet wearing cumpulsory ?

Did anyone claim there was? I certainly didn't. On a personal level there is no downside to wearing a helmet. It reduces your chances of head injury quite significantly. If you don't accept that & want the freedom to sustain brain damage & facial injuries you are deluded.

 

[nigelbb]

I have three cycle helmets that I wear regularly depending on circumstances, but most of the time I don't wear a helmet. Luckily, the one time I bashed my head badly in a bicycle crash I was wearing one.

Then there are are those dead or brain damaged ex-cyclists who didn't have the same luck as you in predicting when they would need to be wearing a cycle helmet.

 

[richtea99]

BTW The reason for the disparity in serious injury with single vehicle RTC between bicycles & motorcycles will be due to the lower speed of a bicycle but the figures are incomplete as you would need to factor in number of miles travelled by cyclists vs motorcyclists or number of journeys if you prefer. Then there is a gender difference eg 90% of motorcycle trips made and distance travelled were by men etc etc

You'd probably want to compare hours travelled rather than miles travelled, but yes, agreed.

Did anyone claim there was? I certainly didn't. On a personal level there is no downside to wearing a helmet. It reduces your chances of head injury quite significantly. If you don't accept that & want the freedom to sustain brain damage & facial injuries you are deluded.

The downside is discomfort, inconvenience, and for some - the cost of a decent helmet.

Do you wear gloves when cycling, with proper scaphoid protection? The first reaction to a crash is to put your hand out to soften the impending blow. [Edit: Where does it stop!]

 

[nigelbb]

The basic argument is the same as staying at home substantially reduces the risk of getting run over by a bus, stabbed by a terrorist or catching a virus. Should it therefore be made compulsory to keep everyone in their homes. If the answer is yes, then you don't need cycle helmets. If no, it means you want people to make their own choices regarding risks and safety.

I think it was right to ban the use of phones in cars because that affects the safety of innocent third parties, the same as would be allowing people to discharge weapons in public, but I think people should be given the choice of wearing a seatbelt or motorcycle helmet, which only affects their own safety. Personally, I would always wear a helmet on a motorbike

Why draw the line at helmets? Most people fall off their bikes at some point in time - some more than others. Your head is normally the last thing that gets injured. Knees hands and hips are the most common injuries. Why not mandate armoured gloves, kneepads and hip-guards? I know some guys that wouldn't dream of going out on their motorbikes without anything less, while others don't care about these things.

I have three cycle helmets that I wear regularly depending on circumstances, but most of the time I don't wear a helmet. Luckily, the one time I bashed my head badly in a bicycle crash I was wearing one.

There was one time a motorcycle helmet saved me from certain death, but that was before they were compulsory. I was wearing it because it was winter and I needed the extra protection from the helmet and visor against the cold air, though if I hadn't been wearing it, I would have been able to see better, so probably wouldn't have had the night time accident, which was due to me misjudging what I saw through the glare of the scratched visor. I had a couple of other accidents wheere a motorbike helmet saved me from a lot of pain, but I can't say that they were life and death situations.

You'd probably want to compare hours travelled rather than miles travelled, but yes, agreed.

The downside is discomfort, inconvenience, and for some - the cost of a decent helmet.

Do you wear gloves when cycling, with proper scaphoid protection? The first reaction to a crash is to put your hand out to soften the impending blow. [Edit: Where does it stop!]

I always wear gloves when cycling. I learned that lesson age 16 when I came off my motorbike sliding on grit on a bend & wound up with road rash on both palms. I wouldn't dream of riding a motorbike any more but I definitely wear gloves while cycling.

 

[montwo]

Did anyone claim there was? I certainly didn't. On a personal level there is no downside to wearing a helmet. It reduces your chances of head injury quite significantly. If you don't accept that & want the freedom to sustain brain damage & facial injuries you are deluded.

It's fairly obvious by this point that you're up for a rant rather than a discussion.