Remember kids... always wear a helmet. (The almighty bikeradar helmet thread)

http://www.bikeradar.com/

yaknow how threads sometimes get moved and whatnot.

is there a way of actually physically moving this thread to bikeradar rather than just another bit of this forum. It would be great just be able to dump our unwanted threads on them.

we could just dump crazy-ass threads on random forums all over the interwebs.

..... Haven't looked at all the data but I know .........
Proof enough that helmet debates belong somewhere else.

I looked for a helmet last year, and couldn't understand why a £120 helmet was tested to the same standard as the £7.50 ones in Wilkinsons. Answer, they are all equally crap. The only tests that Brit helmets have to pass is the ones set by the manufacturers themselves, who allegedly carry out the testing themselves. I eventually looked on ebay and bought a NOS Bell helmet, Snell approved, with the right sticker inside. It's a bastard to adjust, but at least it has been tested to a higher standard. It's got to be because the helmets approved for British use are ILLEGAL in US.The Bell cost me £10 with money back guarantee if it didn't fit.

Want a reason for buying a helmet? A court recently reduced the compensation paid out to a seriously injured cyclist by 15% because he didn't have a helmet on. Don't give the buggers the chance to screw YOU. Why don't we lobby for a helmet design which is comfortable, affordable, hasthe Snell 95 standard - and doesn't make you look like a total prick.
charlie

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......................

I'm with you on this one Charlie. I think what you'll find is that there are plenty of helmets (forget for a minute the testing/standards necessary) that are comfortable and afordable. My personal opinion on why the majority of poeple don't wear a helmet is because they think they look like a prick when wearing them. And to be honest they can sometimes be less than flattering, but they do the job they are meant to do better than nothing at all. Seatbelts in cars could be considered to look ugly and be uncomfortable, but you'd be stupid not to use it.

Want a reason for buying a helmet? A court recently reduced the compensation paid out to a seriously injured cyclist by 15% because he didn't have a helmet on. Don't give the buggers the chance to screw YOU. Why don't we lobby for a helmet design which is comfortable, affordable, hasthe Snell 95 standard - and doesn't make you look like a total prick.

This will be successfully challenged in due course. Not a reason to buy a helmet.

my 2 cents:

I ended up with a seizure, bought on by concussion, bought on by a stupid pedestrian not looking before walking from between two stationary buses. I had to brake quite hard to avoid her, as swerving wasn't an option. I went arse over tit and ended up faceplanting the concrete.

What's annoying is the one week I spent in hospital, and the fact that if you have a seizure, epilepsy or not, you have your license revoked. I work for a carclub so this isn't great news for the shiney company car i was given, which is now sitting in the carpark at the office doing fuck all.

Then comes the nagging from mother, sister and girlfriend. I am now wearing my Giro Advantage one the road, and it's bloody hot in there. But to be honest, the women had a point; If I was wearing a helmet when that little bitch walked out infront of me, I probably wouldnt have missed a weeks work, and I'd still have my license, and shiney new car.

I'm not sure I'd buy a NOS helmet though. I've been told that helmets have a ~3 year lifespan before the foam starts to degrade. A quick search gives a recommended lifespan of 4-5 years. This isn't an issue with the helmet just getting banged up under normal usage; the actual materials degrade.

The pressure that you had put on you by your nearest and dearest leaves you with no place to go. It also makes the erroneous assumption that if you had worn a helmet, you wouldn't have had a seizure. The best reaction to a crash is to become a better rider, regardless of whether you were at fault or not. Nice and positive and guaranteed to be far more use than wearing a plastic hat.

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/

Safe riding.

Aye. I am a lot more cautious lately with stationary traffic, especially when it's made up of a queue of big red buses. You just can't see a ped until it's too late, and if you're honest, it's perfectly acceptable she didn't look, because I was undertaking (cyclelane) and the traffic was stationary for miles thanks to the burst watermain up ahead.

I will say one thing about wearing a helmet, especially an aero one: when you're wearing that, have a scarf over your mouth, and shades on, you look like an alien warrior that nobody wants to mess with. Which is useful when it comes to shouting at drivers.

citygent... you registered today.

It might be good to point out that the common debates found on most other forums aren't really enjoyed on this one. Why? Because there's no right or wrong, no black or white... it's all very subjective with lots of different results from studies, conflicting information, etc.

So instead of getting involved in such debates like "the helmet debate" or "red light jumping" etc... we would rather that if that you refrain. Or if you feel like ignoring this, then there's a whole world over at bikeradar who welcome your views... but on here, you're likely to have a rough time if what you have to say is about helmets, or jumping lights, etc.

Just take this as friendly and welcoming advice... I don't want to scare you off or put your back out, but you'd get a fiery welcome if you carried on and that's a harsh welcome.

Cheers

I crashed at speed the weekend before last. I had my collarbone pinned under a general anasthetic last Friday. I have a small scratch on the side of my head. The foam on the side of the Giro helmet was last seen in a number of pieces where my head hit the road (not sure if head or shoulder hit first). I have no doubt that had i not had the helmet on I would have a fractured skull or worse.....

You all take your own choice as to whether or not you wear one. For me the decision has always been very clear.

http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/190_07_060409/sik11001_fm.html

One for Oliver, very recent Medical Journal of Australia study into emergency department and hospital admissions for cycle related injuries in victoria 2001 to 2008. Seems that increased numbers of cyclists is not improving the safety of cyclists as there has been a 42% increase in admissions over the 7 year period.

@velocio I fail to see why you had to say that... I was just pointing out that I was not a helmet wearer, and now I am. I at no point made allusions to thinking there is a right or a wrong about this?

I do take it as friendly advice... I just fail to see why it is needed?

citygent has only posted quality so far as far as I can see--the interesting part of his helmet post for me was not the helmet bit but hearing about the consequences of his collision. Anyway, yes, it's true, everybody gets bored of helmet debates, but I haven't seen people slated for them too much--it's more that people get bored, which in itself is a good enough reason not to have them.

helmet off.......

The only thing I feel very strongly about regarding helmets, is that it's completely the wrong time for any laws to be passed etc. We need more people to cycle, especially in the city. For that to happen we need to make new cyclists comfortable, and for whatever reason, not everybody is comfortable with wearing a helmet.

repost

citygent... you registered today.

It might be good to point out that the common debates found on most other forums aren't really enjoyed on this one. Why? Because there's no right or wrong, no black or white... it's all very subjective with lots of different results from studies, conflicting information, etc.

So instead of getting involved in such debates like "the helmet debate" or "red light jumping" etc... we would rather that if that you refrain. Or if you feel like ignoring this, then there's a whole world over at bikeradar who welcome your views... but on here, you're likely to have a rough time if what you have to say is about helmets, or jumping lights, etc.

Just take this as friendly and welcoming advice... I don't want to scare you off or put your back out, but you'd get a fiery welcome if you carried on and that's a harsh welcome.

Cheers

I don't get this at all. It's not as if he started a new thread; it's not as if he resurrected this one today. He only responded to what someone else had said today (charlie). The last post before that was a week ago, and before that this helmet business, no matter how many people find it pointless, seems to crop up every few weeks.

I don't get this at all. It's not as if he started a new thread; it's not as if he resurrected this one today. He only responded to what someone else had said today (charlie). The last post before that was a week ago, and before that this helmet business, no matter how many people find it pointless, seems to crop up every few weeks.

My bad. Lots of apologies. Sorry for jumping down your neck citygent.

Charlie... what were you up to? Bumping a helmet thread on a week in which so many London Paper readers are here?

@velocio I fail to see why you had to say that... I was just pointing out that I was not a helmet wearer, and now I am. I at no point made allusions to thinking there is a right or a wrong about this?

I do take it as friendly advice... I just fail to see why it is needed?

My bad, very sorry.

Bad eyesight you see... lack of avatars... glanced up again, took me several looks to see who was saying what. This is clearly why I need to wear my glasses more.

I apologise. The flak was for charlie, but as I got you confused and noticed you'd just joined I angled on that.

ha! Velocio didn't scroll up enough!

Let the dancing commence! ;)

This will be successfully challenged in due course. Not a reason to buy a helmet.

Actually the Court ruling in this case is entirely consistent with other rulings in the past.

Before seat belts became compulsary, if you were injured in a car accident AND your injury would have been less if you had been wearing a seat belt, your damages were reduced for contributory negligence. The same theory would apply equally for head injuries that could have been reduced or eliminated by wearing a helmet. It is not a question of whether this position is right or wrong, it is a simple statement of the law as it is and as it has been for quite a long time.