Am I crazy for not wearing a helmet.

Miguel75 said:
I'm all for personal choice. You want to wear a helmet go for it. You dont want to; don't. I don't feel you need to justify your decisions to us though if something were to go wrong, you may need to justify your decision to yourself.

Not too long ago I had a discussion with a drunk person who thought the wearing of seatbelts was silly and uncomfortable. This discussion took place while we were cutting his passenger (another non seatbelt wearer) out from under the dashboard of the car he wrapped around a pole.

Even though I've only ever been involved in a minor car accident, I'm pretty happy to keep wearing a seatbelt, just in case:)
Click to expand...

I salute you for being the better human and not slipping with the hydraulic spreader and crushing this waste of DNA's skull.
 
Since this thread is still dragging on.. My views are more from the libertarian view point and the consensus (evidence) worldwide. Which is, surprise surprise, wear a helmet when cycling proper.. The rest of the time is a choice, like eating maccas and smoking. Could die, might not. But in this debate people treat you like an antivaxer if you are a helmet dodger.
As pointed out earlier, any cycle enthusiast worth their salt wears a helmet. Maybe the law should be simple, on roads with registered vehicles = compulsory helmet. Bike path = choice.
 
Knuckles said:
So you'll have an "am I an idiot for not wearing my seat belt and disabling the airbags, abs, stability and traction control on my Nissan Cube?" post soon?

Sent from my HTC_M9u using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's just a question of evidence knuckles, plus applying some amount of thought. the context was just riding along a fire trail from one place to another versus mixing it with cars on the road.

But point taken, the world is grey not black and white, but there is surely a point where adults should be allowed to make their own decisions on personal safety
 
pharmaboy said:
It's just a question of evidence knuckles, plus applying some amount of thought. the context was just riding along a fire trail from one place to another versus mixing it with cars on the road.

But point taken, the world is grey not black and white, but there is surely a point where adults should be allowed to make their own decisions on personal safety
Click to expand...

The standards...that the helmets meet...is this not some form of evidence?
 
Is there a man-bun compatible helmet?

I've noticed many hipsters around places like Castlemaine, eschewing head protection and riding bare-bun.

It could be part of their ensemble to go bare-scone though - chino pants, ballet shoes or leather soled pointy toes, plaid shirt or Che Guevara T, Clark Kent glasses, hipster beard, messenger bag and a paperboy or Schwinn Cruiser style bike.
 
golden path said:
Is there a man-bun compatible helmet?

I've noticed many hipsters around places like Castlemaine, eschewing head protection and riding bare-bun.

It could be part of their ensemble to go bare-scone though - chino pants, ballet shoes or leather soled pointy toes, plaid shirt or Che Guevara T, Clark Kent glasses, hipster beard, messenger bag and a paperboy or Schwinn Cruiser style bike.
Click to expand...

The man bun is the protection.
 
pink poodle said:
The standards...that the helmets meet...is this not some form of evidence?
Click to expand...

Serious post alert....

Well, probably fair. The standard is a calculated weight hitting an anvil - designed as a straight down impact into concrete. It's about what happens after someone is hit by a car - it's not the car that kills you, it's the head hitting a road surface from 4 metres in the air that does. But it's also a minimum, so a simple skate helmet with thick solid plastic would out perform an xc lid - ive come across tests on those in the past.

The standards are about repeat testing in a lab - cheap and simple, but unfortunately not graded so you can't pick a safer one. The aim of manufacturers is to build the lightest most comfortable helmet that passes the standard

In the tests, the helmets work by deforming on the inside - there is an impression crushed into the polystyrene. In the real world, helmets splinter into fragments rather than stay together and absorb energy, that's their shortcoming. Why I read up on all this shit, I have no idea, but with only a couple of exceptions, helmets are built for a catastrophic impact with a road surface, not to prevent a concussion, but a death from brain injury.

The biggest safety impact seems to be the reduction of friction, so when your head hits the ground with a helmet, it slides rather than grips and takes the energy - so a helmet that stays together is better
 
pharmaboy said:
Serious post alert....

Well, probably fair. The standard is a calculated weight hitting an anvil - designed as a straight down impact into concrete. It's about what happens after someone is hit by a car - it's not the car that kills you, it's the head hitting a road surface from 4 metres in the air that does. But it's also a minimum, so a simple skate helmet with thick solid plastic would out perform an xc lid - ive come across tests on those in the past.

The standards are about repeat testing in a lab - cheap and simple, but unfortunately not graded so you can't pick a safer one. The aim of manufacturers is to build the lightest most comfortable helmet that passes the standard

In the tests, the helmets work by deforming on the inside - there is an impression crushed into the polystyrene. In the real world, helmets splinter into fragments rather than stay together and absorb energy, that's their shortcoming. Why I read up on all this shit, I have no idea, but with only a couple of exceptions, helmets are built for a catastrophic impact with a road surface, not to prevent a concussion, but a death from brain injury.

The biggest safety impact seems to be the reduction of friction, so when your head hits the ground with a helmet, it slides rather than grips and takes the energy - so a helmet that stays together is better
Click to expand...

So in essence, the standard provides an guarantee to a certain type of impact in laboratory conditions, an impact that happens to be similar to the variety of impacts most cyclists are exposed to. So there is some science available for guestimations and assumptions, unlike say a neckbrace?

I ride in said bmx/dj style lids except when wearing a full face. I feel they offer wider coverage of my melon as they are more encompassong. I've written plenty of them off, splitting 2 almost in half with impact. Both of those splits were at the back of the helmet running up to the crown of my head or further along. I'd be interested to know why that is the place for cracking as I don't recall hitting the dirt head on. I'm really acrobatic and usual perform a variety of gymnastic moves on my way to the shit eating smorgasbord...

Now in comparison of bmx vs xc helmets...my highly scientific backyard experiments of helmet vs machete have shown that a cheap $20 xc helmet from kmart was able to repel 2 full force strikes right on top before exploding, where as my fancy brand name bmx lid was stuffed after the first strike. If I'd been wearing it I'd have received a significant cut, a zombie would've died. Either way I reckon my neck would've been pretty sore just from the force.
 
Poodle, I'm thinking that a machete might not be a very common impact risk in this part of the world.

Perhaps try something the size of a decent rock - 10lb sledgey from 2 metres perhaps? (And watch your shins)

Come to think of it - bowling ball!
 
pharmaboy said:
Poodle, I'm thinking that a machete might not be a very common impact risk in this part of the world.

Perhaps try something the size of a decent rock - 10lb sledgey from 2 metres perhaps? (And watch your shins)

Come to think of it - bowling ball!
Click to expand...

I've also tried hammer and tomahawk. Hammer fucked shit up, punching straight through the outer shell and exploding the inside shell of bmx style helmet. I need to work on my tomahawk skills as it just glanced off. I think my wrist rolled a bit on impact.

I also need a new outdoor table. The current one is now fucked after years of this research...

golden path said:
Depends if you run a jewellery store in parts of Melbourne, I believe....whereupon machete impact can be a clear and present danger....
Click to expand...

There was a machete fight at a pub near Pharma's and my mutual turf not so long ago.
 
pharmaboy said:
It's just a question of evidence knuckles, plus applying some amount of thought. the context was just riding along a fire trail from one place to another versus mixing it with cars on the road.

But point taken, the world is grey not black and white, but there is surely a point where adults should be allowed to make their own decisions on personal safety
Click to expand...
Do you have any evidence that any of these crashes that the victims claim the helmet saved their lives/brain function would have had the exact same result sans lid?

Unfortunately there is zero chance of proving the result either way, as replicating the conditions of the event exactly is impossible. It is however possible, with test rigs, to prove the addition of a safety device to the equation will reduce the severity of the physical forces that result in the fatality/trauma.

It's all a matter of risk management, whether you're talking about helmets, seat belts, abs, srs, not smoking, reducing speed, washing your hands, getting out of bed in the morning. If it MIGHT save me from dying, but might be mildly uncomfortable for 5% of my ride, that's a pretty good deal. Hell, what's the chances, and where's the evidence that the brace position will save your life when your commercial flight plummets to Earth from 30000'? But it's still standard procedure.

Wearing a helmet will [b/]reduce[/b] the risk of death./tpd Wether your casing a 40' road gap, or washing out on a 4km/h corner.

I couldn't give a rats arse if he never dropped his bike, ever, or becomes a vegan from a near fatal blow to his melon from falling off his stationary bike at the bottom of a 1% grade fire trail. His choice, but why ask if it's smart, then bleed like a virgin on her wedding night to John Holmes, when he's told its not. If I want to her a question from someone who's already made up their mind about the subject, I'll get drunk enough to speak to my wife.
 
Last edited:
Knuckles said:
Do you have any evidence that any of these crashes that the victims claim the helmet saved their lives/brain function would have had the exact same result sans lid?

Unfortunately there is zero chance of proving the result either way, as replicating the conditions of the event exactly is impossible. It is however possible, with test rigs, to prove the addition of a safety device to the equation will reduce the severity of the physical forces that result in the fatality/trauma.

It's all a matter of risk management, whether you're talking about helmets, seat belts, abs, srs, not smoking, reducing speed, washing your hands, getting out of bed in the morning. If it MIGHT save me from dying, but might be mildly uncomfortable for 5% of my ride, that's a pretty good deal. Hell, what's the chances, and where's the evidence that the brace position will save your life when your commercial flight plummets to Earth from 30000'? But it's still standard procedure.

Wearing a helmet will [b/]reduce[/b] the risk of death./tpd Wether your casing a 40' road gap, or washing out on a 4km/h corner.

I couldn't give a rats arse if he never dropped his bike, ever, or becomes a vegan from a near fatal blow to his melon from falling off his stationary bike at the bottom of a 1% grade fire trail. His choice, but why ask if it's smart, then bleed like a virgin on her wedding night to John Holmes, when he's told its not. If I want to her a question from someone who's already made up their mind about the subject, I'll get drunk enough to speak to my wife.
Click to expand...
I just did, she said that you shouldn't get so worked up, just get more worked up:behindsofa:
 
pharmaboy said:
Serious post alert....

Well, probably fair. The standard is a calculated weight hitting an anvil - designed as a straight down impact into concrete. It's about what happens after someone is hit by a car - it's not the car that kills you, it's the head hitting a road surface from 4 metres in the air that does. But it's also a minimum, so a simple skate helmet with thick solid plastic would out perform an xc lid - ive come across tests on those in the past.

The standards are about repeat testing in a lab - cheap and simple, but unfortunately not graded so you can't pick a safer one. The aim of manufacturers is to build the lightest most comfortable helmet that passes the standard

In the tests, the helmets work by deforming on the inside - there is an impression crushed into the polystyrene. In the real world, helmets splinter into fragments rather than stay together and absorb energy, that's their shortcoming. Why I read up on all this shit, I have no idea, but with only a couple of exceptions, helmets are built for a catastrophic impact with a road surface, not to prevent a concussion, but a death from brain injury.

The biggest safety impact seems to be the reduction of friction, so when your head hits the ground with a helmet, it slides rather than grips and takes the energy - so a helmet that stays together is better
Click to expand...

That polystyrene deforming, crushing and then breaking up is what absorbs the energy and stops your brain sloshing around inside your skull. They do break up in the real world but they have absorbed a lot of energy before they do. You won't get that with a skate helmet it will work like those desk things with the dangling balls and your brain is the ball at the other end.
 
Knuckles said:
Do you have any evidence that any of these crashes that the victims claim the helmet saved their lives/brain function would have had the exact same result sans lid?

Unfortunately there is zero chance of proving the result either way, as replicating the conditions of the event exactly is impossible. It is however possible, with test rigs, to prove the addition of a safety device to the equation will reduce the severity of the physical forces that result in the fatality/trauma.



I e.
Click to expand...

to the first question, of course not, and that is exactly the point I am trying to make.

However, there is not zero chance, because you can show these things through epidemiology studies by comparing head injury outcomes between helmet wearing crashes and not helmet wearing crashes. Then in the Australian context you can do times based studies as the number of helmet wearers increases. Anyway from those studies the middle ground is around a 50% reduction of head injuries in serious crashes, that relative reduction, of course the risk of an accident on a bike that meets head injury criteria might be 1 in a 100,000 per year, in which case you are reducing risk by .5 per 100,000.

I didn't check the overall injury risk, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were about that for the just riding along paths cohort ( probably pretty different for committed roadies).

in the main, bikes keep the orthopaedic Dept busy, not so much the neurological Dept
 
elliotcook1 said:
Also, since when did people on here start doing the whole "you're one of those (insert different cyclo-sport) types." This place used to be friendly accepting and cool.
Click to expand...

They have always been a pack of chunts here... I ride a roadie, CX, MTB, wear lycra and shave my legs, they fuckin' hate me here :thumb:
 
Strangely I rarely wear a helmet in a skate park on either skateboard or bike. Same goes for dirtjumping did the majority of that sans helmet. Always ride in the bush with the puny piece of foam on my head. Trip to the local store no helmet.

Worst head injury on a bike was a broken skull which occured whilst sitting stationary with helmet on my bars and a friend crashed into me and hit my head on the edge of a gutter.

Have typically been most glad to be wearing full face on DH bike, with #1 being the time I face planted a rock garden and smashing the front of the helmet and keeping my teeth. A normal helmet in that situation would have been useless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top