I am merely aware of my actual direct experiences regarding crashes where I can respond with sufficient agility to move my entire body in a manner whereby I do not hit my head. I would not want to do anything, such as wearing a helmet, which could limit my agility. Try moving your arm over your head with and without a helmet and you will see it is possible a helmet could limit a person’s movement regarding rolling or putting their hands down to break a fall when they are flying over the handlebars.
OK, you’re proving the point for me. Every criticism - which, by the way, is not germane to the conversation - is expressed from your perspective of interpreting my words. Fine, we all do that, but please, recognise what it is you’re doing.
For example:
I don’t want to make a big deal of it, but that’s what you’re doing. It’s fine, but don’t please throw it back at me and tell me I’m doing something wrong.
The data supports my opinion that educated road users diminish the risks they face on an individual basis. Motorcyclists, previously the ultimately all too frequently splattered daredevils of the road, have taken to learning a lot about dealing with roads, traffic, conditions and so on. The popular bike magazines are full of this stuff, as are the courses that many people take with the motorbike fuzz, and racing courses and so on.
You learn to control the machine in a complex and subtle way. You learn to visually scan constantly, to manage grip, to understand the road surface intimately as you approach, to maintain a speed that allows you ‘to stop in the distance you can see to be clear’, and to behave in a way that projects confidence to other drivers and displays etiquette. Not flowery, aristocratic etiquette, but empathy for other road users, and appropriate (safe) management of their behaviour.
The counterpoint - in my opinion, experience, and perception - is that a lot of cyclists have come on to the road and simply don’t understand the rules of the road, nor the dangers they face. They’ve been egged on by a ‘movement’, which my cycling pre-dates by many years, and a trend - but no-one has been saying ‘hold up! be careful out there!’.
I love that you can get on a bicycle unlicensed, uncontrolled, unmonitored - it’s fantastic. But riding in London is hard work, there’s too much going on to simply puff a pipe and wheel breezily around.
The proof, if any were needed, lies in the needlessly early graves of too many cyclists who ended up in unfortunately deadly situations. Skipper trucks keep crushing people. Me - I’ve always steered well, well clear of them. I use sidestreets rather than main roads, places where large vehicles can’t suddenly pass me at 40mph. Costs me 2 or 3 minutes on a 40 minute journey.
Maybe - and this is what I’m saying - maybe they’d have been better off with education on how to ride in the city.
If you don’t agree, no probs. I’m not here to win votes. I’m not here to play statistical games, nor play with rhetoric, stroke my ego, look good, nothing. I’m just sharing my opinion.
Which is based on years of riding around cities and countryside. Years, and years, and years.
No you are not alone, it is similar to irony of laws to protect us from dangerous terrorists who want take away our freedoms. The laws are worse than terrorists because the laws take away our freedoms whereas terrorists rarely inflict damage. Ironically, despite all the erosion of freedom via NSA etc (monitoring every phone call or site we visit, shoes off and body searches at airports), they can’t stop terrorist attacks notable regarding the Boston bombings.
If governments worldwide designed civilization to be an open prison, which we are not overly far from, the irony is our loss of freedom still wouldn’t prevent terrorism, a few terrorists would still manage commit terrorist acts similar to how governments can’t stop people taking and dealing drugs in prisons. Excessive security does not stop crimes, which is why crimes happen in prisons.
There are many ironies in our world. Here’s a meme for you…
Irony. The government wants to stop terrorists from taking away our freedoms, so the government takes away our freedoms to stop terrorists.
You do realise we are talking about pedal cycles not motorcycles or have I made a silly mistake? Sorry I didn’t realise it was about motorbikes.
Oh, silly me! The only possible explanation is that I stupidly found a motorcycle helmet. There’s no way I could have looked up an extreme example of helmets to demonstrate the value of the things. Bravo for demonstrating your superior intellect.
Wall of hubris
Yeah, that’s great. Do go on. You’re so smart, so clever! I think I’ll go with crash statistics rather than your claims of superhuman abilities to flail, thanks.
I think judging by some comments I must be abnormal regarding my ability to protect my head via adroitly moving my hands, arms, elbows, knees, legs, neck when I have previously crashed.
I guess you don’t have to share your riding space with these things
I haven’t rode a road bike in ages, but back when I did, I would pedal as fast as I could in the highest gear, and still get overtaken by the things. And you know what? Some people delight in trying to ride as close to the bicyclist as they can. On occasion, that goes horribly wrong. Are you faster than a car? Are you heavier? What amount of flailing does it take to survive running into the grille of a Ford F-150?
And now, I’m hobbling off to the grocery store. I’d walk jauntily, but when I was 16, I didn’t think safety equipment was all that important so I didn’t wear it. Funny what meeting pavement will do to knee cartilage…
I was also very quick, perhaps quicker thus I didn’t hit my head. Maybe not wearing a helmet for you wouldn’t help you because the damage (limitations to your reactions) has been done, perhaps your ability to move quickly and agilely has been thwarted, although maybe you could get it back if you stopped wearing a helmet, although I reject all liability for any actions you take and advise you to consult a doctor before cycling without a helmet (warning: this comment may contain nuts).
Principally I think there is an issue of clearance regarding moving your arms around your head, which a helmet would likely restrict even if slightly. Imagine putting your hands-arms over your head if you are falling head-first, imagine you want to modify your fall into a roll, this could be limited or your reactions could be slower if you are wearing a helmet. For example try dancing around wearing a heavy bulky overcoat versus dancing wearing only underwear. It is similar to the nimble skill of a ballet dancer wearing ballet shoes whereas if the ballet dancer is wearing cumbersome army boots the agility and speed are likely to be reduced.
I’m getting the impression that you, sir, must be a ninja.
2 Likes
[quote=“Shane_Simmons, post:146, topic:16635”] Oh, silly me! The only possible explanation is that I stupidly found a motorcycle helmet.There’s no way I could have looked up an extreme example of helmets to demonstrate the value of the things.
[/quote]
Feel free to look up damaged bicycle helmets and post them, I am sure they will seem less extreme. But when you include the photo of a damaged bicycle helmet, for accuracy, please include the photo of the cyclist who didn’t damage their head in any way because they were not wearing a helmet thus they could easily move in a fluid, unrestricted manner thereby avoiding banging their head.
A monster truck, bus, or lorry can seem more threatening but they are moving at a similar speed to cars thus if they knock you over it is the same situation, they are essentially no different to standard cars, metal is metal, the metal of a truck is not harder than the metal of a car. If the car or truck is driving over your skull I think the differing weight makes no real difference. A bicycle helmet does nothing if the wheel of any motor-vehicle is actually crushing your head.
It seems you need a law to force everyone to wear knee pads:
And now, I’m hobbling off to the grocery store. I’d walk jauntily, but when I was 16, I didn’t think safety equipment was all that important so I didn’t wear it. Funny what meeting pavement will do to knee cartilage…
I am somewhat singular thus perhaps I am a latent ninja, although I never realised it. If a law is created forcing people to wear helmets there should be an exemption for ninjas or people similar to myself, if they exist, who have quick reactions.
You know now I think about I must have very quick reactions because recently at the supermarket the assistant dropped my change but when I caught it before it hit the floor she said that was an impressive reaction, she oddly seemed awed, which was surprising because to me my reactions seemed normal or even a bit sluggish, I wasn’t even trying.
1 Like
Per these stats there are around 200 cycling deaths in the Netherlands per year. Compare with ~122 in the UK and ~1000 in the US.
As I posted above with citations (click my avatar on the left to filter this topic for my posts) these numbers are far lower than the general number of random accident related deaths and many other obscure diseases and afflictions.
Or 14 people killed per 1,000,000,000 km travelled.
http://cyclinginfo.co.uk/blog/734/cycling/cycling-rates-by-country/
Normalised for distance travelled, Netherlands is way down at the bottom.
1 Like
OK then.
All? No. Many? Damn right.
Actually accidents don’t merely happen at high speed. Many elderly people can suffer severe head injury merely from falling via walking. The point is if we are so concerned about safety why take any risks, maybe people should wear helmets all the time, people should definitely wear helmets while driving cars because head injuries are very common for cars crashes, in fact you are more likely to suffer a head injury driving a car than cycling so let’s force all motorists to were a helmet. If helmet are OK for racing car drivers then they should be OK for standard motorists too.
“…55,000 teenage drivers and their passengers who were seriously injured in auto accidents during 2009 and 2010, 30 percent suffered acute head injuries…” 16,000 head injuries during 2009 and 2010 is a lot and that’s only teenagers and their passengers.
Indeed.
Although, in a half-formed fantasy similar to ‘Escape from New York’ or something else usually cast as post-apocalyptic, maybe your world wide prison system wouldn’t be so bad. At least then you could join the most badass gang available, and have relatively more freedom and protection from the government than what we see now.
But then, maybe that’s why people lare so attracted to post-apocalyptic sci-fi in the first place. If we were to predict the general future based on the number of past ‘wild’ sci-fantasies have become today’s (or even yesterday’s) realities, then the trend data would probably have us headed straight for some version of that very scenario. Because, epidemiology! (It’s not just for diseases any more.)
1 Like
As pointed out earlier, cars have steel crash cages and federally mandated seatbelts. Airbags too. Do bicycles have any of that?
Man, you ninjas really ought to bone up on your science skills.
2 Likes
So, Mr expert on science skills, are you saying the metal crash cage of a car, air-bags, and seatbelts prevent head injuries for car drivers and the passengers regarding car crashes? I think you need to check your “science” skillz, whereupon you will find driving a car is more likely to result in a head injury for the driver or passenger.
Wow!
So skillz
Amaze
Much intelligernze
Well, let’s think. Put on your ninja hat and let’s think… about science!
- are there more people driving cars or bicycles?
- do bicycles go faster or slower than cars?
- are we talking about basic built-in safety features of vehicles, or additional safety features that have to be added at additional expense and effort?
Isn’t this all irrelevant for you? As a ninja, can’t you just run super fast to go places?
2 Likes
Whydja join just for the cycling helmet discussion?
han er helt trolling.
Wow, so impressive dear scientist. LOL.
You unwittingly hit the nail on the head regarding bikes going slower than cars. You see the high speed of cars despite the protections (air bag, metal cage, seatbelt) means the high speed makes cars more dangerous. If a similar amount of people cycled compared the amount of people driving I am sure fatalities or head injuries would be a lot lower (comparative to car-driver/passenger fatality, injury) even if, or especially because, the cyclists are wearing no helmet.
Instead of mandatory helmets for cyclists we should really be focusing on mandatory helmets for car drivers because cars are more dangerous despite the air-bags, cages and seatbelts.
You’re just jealous because you are not a ninja.
1 Like
