Cyclists...do you wear a helmet?

I go into schools teaching road safety for kids and we take them out onto the road on their bikes in order to show them the safest way to ride. The two biggest dangers to their safety are poor drives and badly maintained bikes. Whilst a helmet for me is second nature now I never used to wear one.

The drivers that are usually the worst offenders at being impatient, blind to cyclists and downright rude are mostly women aged 30-60 the most polite group seems to be the men aged 20-40 with "boy racers" often being some of the most aware and giving the kids the most room.

Some of the kids bikes are also so dangerous they should be thrown away as fixing them is impossible in some cases. I wish the police would fine idiots riding unsafe bikes to help make sure cyclists have 2 working brakes and reflectors on their bike.

Helmet wise I'd potentially spend alot more time filling in accident forms if kids didn't wear helmets as we often have a minor falls (usually whilst stood still) :thinking:
 
Last edited:
Well I had course to be grateful for wearing a cycling crash helmet a few weeks ago after getting hit by another cyclist(she decided that turning into me was a way of avoidance!);bumped head on road and metal post with a nice new dent on my now dead Specialized lid.Couple of weeks of work with a shoulder separation(maybe I should have worn my armoured motorcycle jacket)but the noggin was ok.
Barry.
 
I suppose it depends on what the helmet is designed to do. protect your head in the event of what type of accident?

Motorcycle helmets are graded on impact rating thats why you get motorcross helmets saying not for road use.

Are cycle helmets graded the same? and if so what is the difference in impact rating between a £24 helmet and a £100 helmet?
 
"If you have a cheap head, get a cheap helmet" was drummed into me when I started motorcycling all those decades ago.

As regards 'road tax' and the right to use roads, pedestrians, cyclists, riders on horseback and those driving livestock have an absolute right to use the public highways. It's a privilege granted by licence to vehicle drivers.
 
Never used to wear a helmet until I started commuting a few years back, now don't ride without one.

I know it won't help much if I get hit by a lorry but it's more likely to help if I go over the bars when hitting one of the many potholes in the roads round these parts.
 
I hear a lot about reasons why people don't wear helmets. If you buy a decent helmet like a top of the range specialized or giro you really won't tell you have one on, now they are so light and have huge vents that them being uncomfortable becomes a moot point. My experiences of the need for a helmet are from when I raced on the velodrome rather than the road (I tended to end up in hedges, grass verges etc rather than the tarmac luckily). I was racing at an outdoor velodrome and came off at about 30-35mph, straight over the handlebars, onto my head and then was run over by the rider behind me. Somehow I walked away with zero injuries apart from some cuts to the face, hands (tore my gloves to shreds), shoulders, knees and shins. The point is that my helmet was in a least 30-40 pieces and I suffered no head injuries. If I had come off at 30mph and crashed head first without a helmet into the tarmac I am pretty sure I would now be dead. Moral of the story ALWAYS WEAR A HELMET!
 
Its down to choice - As I think I mentioned early on in this thread, I dont wear one. In different circumstances I probably would (racing for example), but biking across teh housing estate to the park with the kids - no need. Ok, maybe I should to and from the pub but the road I go on is quiet so no real need.

In something that will probably schock some, my 4yo doesnt wear one. Why? He is on stabilisers so rarely falls, and from when I was a kid, it was falling off something that builds your sense of risk/danger. Padded up to the 9s means there is no consequence to falling off. Sure, there are somethings that are essential like seatbelts, but our society is becoming far too risk averse - the denist makes me wear goggles when doing a clean for example!!!

If you want to wear a helmet fine, but stop the preaching!
 
cambsno said:
Its down to choice - As I think I mentioned early on in this thread, I dont wear one. In different circumstances I probably would (racing for example), but biking across teh housing estate to the park with the kids - no need. Ok, maybe I should to and from the pub but the road I go on is quiet so no real need.

In something that will probably schock some, my 4yo doesnt wear one. Why? He is on stabilisers so rarely falls, and from when I was a kid, it was falling off something that builds your sense of risk/danger. Padded up to the 9s means there is no consequence to falling off. Sure, there are somethings that are essential like seatbelts, but our society is becoming far too risk averse - the denist makes me wear goggles when doing a clean for example!!!

If you want to wear a helmet fine, but stop the preaching!
Click to expand...

Like you said its your choice, but what would you do if your son fell and the worst happened? Surely for the sake of putting a helmet on the risk is not worth it? (Serious question as I am interested in your thoughts as for me it is counter-intuitive, not trying to start arguments or anything)
 
cambsno said:
In something that will probably schock some, my 4yo doesnt wear one. Why? He is on stabilisers so rarely falls
Click to expand...

Can't fault that logic.

Might cancel my car insurance as I've not had a crash in years ;)
 
mrw_y2k said:
Can't fault that logic.

Might cancel my car insurance as I've not had a crash in years ;)
Click to expand...

indeed.

going back a few years to when helmets were very much disregareded my little sister on her bike with stabilisers hit one of those raised brickwork sections in the road and went flying. luckily she landed head first in a load of stinging nettles but had it been tarmac it would have turned out worse.
 
jacob12_1993 said:
Like you said its your choice, but what would you do if your son fell and the worst happened? Surely for the sake of putting a helmet on the risk is not worth it? (Serious question as I am interested in your thoughts as for me it is counter-intuitive, not trying to start arguments or anything)
Click to expand...

Rightly or wrongly, I go by what I did as a kid. I also dont believe in wrapping up in cotton wool so to speak and I do let him take risks in playing as that I believe has a big benefit in development and makes life more fun. In terms of saftey, what about when he jumps off the windowsill? What about when he runs down the slide, or at the top climbs round it and jumps off (hard to explain)? Or some of the may other things he does and will do? Of course I wouldnt want anything to happen, and would not want him climbing the garage roof. The other thing is that by falling off and getting hurt he knows that falling off is not very nice so tries to avoid it. If he wore protection and did not get hurt then its not so bad. Took stabilisers off at weekend briefly on grass, quickly went back on. But when they come off full time will probably insist on a helmet on tarmac as he will be unsteady.

Where to draw the line? Make him wear clothes that cover all of him (no t shirt), wear elbow pads, knee pads, goggles? Not let him go over a cerrtain speed? He could climb a tree in a few years fall and break his neck, do I ban him from climbing trees?

I know that I am more relaxed than many parents I know, for example will think nothing of kids eating food off the floor or not bothering to wash their hands after the loo - exposure to germs in a measured way is good. I know my wife thinks I am a bit too relaxed!
 
Last edited:
Ugh, the point mentioned above always irks me. Pootling around is when they're useful. A motorist hits you at 65mph? I'd wager the helmet wouldn't help you too much. But falling off at 10mph? It'd probably save a case of runny red stuff escaping head.
 
cambsno said:
In something that will probably schock some, my 4yo doesnt wear one. Why? He is on stabilisers so rarely falls,
Click to expand...

Fair enough but what if someone hits into your four year old and knocks them off?
 
Fla5h said:
Fair enough but what if someone hits into your four year old and knocks them off?
Click to expand...


Yes it could happen, but guess what, there weren't cycle helmets when I or many other forum members learnt to ride a bike, had many a fall from my bike as a kids and teenager, I also think helmets can make the cyclists a bit like superman, it's all right I've got a helmet on I am invincible!
 
Davec223 said:
Yes it could happen, but guess what, there weren't cycle helmets when I or many other forum members learnt to ride a bike, had many a fall from my bike as a kids and teenager, I also think helmets can make the cyclists a bit like superman, it's all right I've got a helmet on I am invincible!
Click to expand...

Because we didn't use helmets 20 odd years ago doesn't mean we don't need them now. Like most things safety comes first and were also advancing and evolving when it comes to safty, guess you didn't wear a car seatbelt years ago but you do now...ok it's the law and hopefully sooner rather than later it will be law to wear a cycle helmet
 
Good point, maybe it's safer to sell his bike and only let him play in his room!

Hard to explain, but 95% of his riding is on pavements.
 
I went back on my bike today. After around 2 month break. I stopped as I had enough of drivers, idiot , brainless drivers...I think on last day I missed death by few inches twice....

I'm a cyclist and a driver.
There are idiots on bikers as well and drivers that don't think.
Cyclist that think they can go on red light, basically careless and think they are gods on their rides.

Drivers think that cyclist are lowest from the lowest in the street and in their cars they can do manoeuvres much faster and that's when many accidents happen as well us not paying enough attention what's going on around the car and not only in front.
What I find annoying on bike and in a car, that most drivers don't use indicators and you never know what next manoeuvre will be.

As for road tax, I don't think cyclist should pay.
But every cyclist should have insurance - I do and think that's necessary for both parties.

And helmet..always wear one unless I go off main road
 
bastic said:
I went back on my bike today. After around 2 month break. I stopped as I had enough of drivers, idiot , brainless drivers...I think on last day I missed death by few inches twice....

I'm a cyclist and a driver.
There are idiots on bikers as well and drivers that don't think.
Cyclist that think they can go on red light, basically careless and think they are gods on their rides.

Drivers think that cyclist are lowest from the lowest in the street and in their cars they can do manoeuvres much faster and that's when many accidents happen as well us not paying enough attention what's going on around the car and not only in front.
What I find annoying on bike and in a car, that most drivers don't use indicators and you never know what next manoeuvre will be.

As for road tax, I don't think cyclist should pay.
But every cyclist should have insurance - I do and think that's necessary for both parties.

And helmet..always wear one unless I go off main road
Click to expand...

:lol: What's road tax?
 
Fla5h said:
Because we didn't use helmets 20 odd years ago doesn't mean we don't need them now. Like most things safety comes first and were also advancing and evolving when it comes to safty, guess you didn't wear a car seatbelt years ago but you do now...ok it's the law and hopefully sooner rather than later it will be law to wear a cycle helmet
Click to expand...

So how will That be enforced? Pointless waste of police time as the only victim may be the cyclist. Why not leave it for people to choose, why the nanny state?
 
cambsno said:
So how will That be enforced? Pointless waste of police time as the only victim may be the cyclist. Why not leave it for people to choose, why the nanny state?
Click to expand...

So its not a waste of the NHS time and money where a helmet may have prevented serious injury to a cyclist.
 
Fla5h said:
So its not a waste of the NHS time and money where a helmet may have prevented serious injury to a cyclist.
Click to expand...

What about the waste of the nhs time and money for those injured playing football, cricket, rugby etc... Even with helmets what about the waste of money on cyclist that get hurt? I could save the nhs money by keeping the family in the house!
 
cambsno said:
What about the waste of the nhs time and money for those injured playing football, cricket, rugby etc... Even with helmets what about the waste of money on cyclist that get hurt? I could save the nhs money by keeping the family in the house!
Click to expand...

If you go back and read post #1 you'll see ow a cycle helmet saved someone from a potentially serious head injury
 
Fla5h said:
If you go back and read post #1 you'll see ow a cycle helmet saved someone from a potentially serious head injury
Click to expand...

Everything we do has risk attached. Every time we go up and down the stairs at home we could fall and break our necks. A the other extreme you have tombstoning or base jumping, with most other things somewhere in between.

There was a report in the paper today about how 20mph zones have seen an increase in accidents whereas 30mph have seen a slight decrease. This has been put down to motorists becoming frustrated and not concentrating fully and pedestrians feeling too safe (forgotten the actual wording used).

I am not doubting that in some cases lives can be saved through helmets, but conversely if people feel a bit too indestructible then that could lead to other accidents. If u want to wear a helmet do so, but there is no reason for a law to be bought in.
 
cambsno said:
Everything we do has risk attached. Every time we go up and down the stairs at home we could fall and break our necks. A the other extreme you have tombstoning or base jumping, with most other things somewhere in between.

There was a report in the paper today about how 20mph zones have seen an increase in accidents whereas 30mph have seen a slight decrease. This has been put down to motorists becoming frustrated and not concentrating fully and pedestrians feeling too safe (forgotten the actual wording used).

I am not doubting that in some cases lives can be saved through helmets, but conversely if people feel a bit too indestructible then that could lead to other accidents. If u want to wear a helmet do so, but there is no reason for a law to be bought in.
Click to expand...

End of the day each to their own

Just my opinion and I respect yours:)

But with Wiggy on this one and I think they are looking at this for N Ireland

Good Luck:thumbs:
 
Davec223 said:
Some very interesting reading on this website, shows that claims of cycle helmets and accidents are over hyped.


http://www.cyclehelmets.org/
Click to expand...

'no net benefit from helmets'

It still amazes me that this stuff gets written, from examples already posted here it is quite obvious there is a benefit to wearing a helmet. For instance in my example, if I had hit my head onto tarmac at 30mph without a helmet there would be a good chance of death/serious injury however my helmet took the impact and I got up and walked home. If someone can prove to me the helmet added no benefit in this example I will gladly throw my helmet in the bin :thumbs:
 
Trust the Swedish to come up with an answer. https://vimeo.com/43038579

Not sure how that works with friction though, looks like it has good potential to be a neck breaker to me.. though I haven't read all the documentation.

Wearing a helmet is compulsory by law over here in Oz. If a cop sees you without one they can pull you over and issue a fine.
 
Jayst84 said:
Trust the Swedish to come up with an answer. https://vimeo.com/43038579

Not sure how that works with friction though, looks like it has good potential to be a neck breaker to me.. though I haven't read all the documentation.

Wearing a helmet is compulsory by law over here in Oz. If a cop sees you without one they can pull you over and issue a fine.
Click to expand...

Don't think it is anymore, there is another website from Australia with lots of similar research on it and apparently they have relaxed the laws in posters of Australia.
 
Davec223 said:
Don't think it is anymore, there is another website from Australia with lots of similar research on it and apparently they have relaxed the laws in posters of Australia.
Click to expand...

Hmm, must be pretty recent if they have. A report in The Age from March this year, "In Melbourne’s Operation Halo, 351 [..] cyclists got pinged for not donning a lid" plus 15 fined in one day during a similar operation in Sydney.

It's in the news a fair bit over here, we have different laws in different states, but as far as I'm aware, all still require you to wear a certified helmet. The fine for not doing so here in Victoria is over $140, that's a bit more than the standard fine for opening your car door without looking, and wiping out a cyclist.

Lots of people are opposed to it, as it has discouraged people from riding, leading to obvious effects on general health and fitness, and on congestion in the cities.
 
jacob12_1993 said:
'no net benefit from helmets'

It still amazes me that this stuff gets written, from examples already posted here it is quite obvious there is a benefit to wearing a helmet. For instance in my example, if I had hit my head onto tarmac at 30mph without a helmet there would be a good chance of death/serious injury however my helmet took the impact and I got up and walked home. If someone can prove to me the helmet added no benefit in this example I will gladly throw my helmet in the bin :thumbs:
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty easy to find stats that back up both arguments. In some cases a helmet can save you but in other cases i can see why it wouldn't - like giving a false sense of security for example.

I remember reading that falling off a bike while drink can lead to less injuries as you are more relaxed while I guess being drunk will probably lead to more accidents so it is a balence. Whatever, it should be personal choice.
 
I get the personal choice argument for not making helmets a legal requirement but what I can't understand is why people would take the decision not to wear one.

The evidence is mixed for how much, or if at all, they help but surely the possibility that they can protect you is motivation enough?

If you could see into the future and know that today was the dreaded day you'd be knocked off, would anyone still walk out of the door without a helmet and take their chances?

For me, the simple protection a helmet offers from road rash to my face if I over cook it on or corner or something is ample justification for me to wear a helmet EVERY time I leave the house on my bike, even if I'm just going 5 minutes down the road.

As for the comfort argument, I own a Giro Savant - nothing special, can be bought for under £40 but is reasonably light and comfy - and once it's on my head I literally forget it's there after 1 minute. It doesn't make any noticeable difference to comfort, and I'm not aware that I sweat anymore even where the helmet contacts my forehead.

It just baffles me that people can have such disregard for at least attempting to protect themselves.

Also, as a kid I was always made to wear a helmet. Did I mind? It didn't bother me one bit. It didn't put me off cycling and I still fell off plenty and learnt quickly that falling can hurt pretty bad. You don't need to crack your head open or get a nasty graze to your face from tarmac to get the shock of falling off hard and thinking "I don't want to do that again".
 
Last edited:
This happened to me last night, so thought I would share....

On way home at 845, so not dark but not light either, all cars had lights on, and driving between Cambridge and Royston on A10 which is a single carriageway 60mph road, fairly busy. Bloke biking on other side was wearing a helmet but had no lights front or rear!!!

Now it was admirable wearing a helmet, but a car hittin at 60 would probably make the helmet irrelevant! Fwiw he was also wearing dark clothes.
 
cambsno said:
This happened to me last night, so thought I would share....

On way home at 845, so not dark but not light either, all cars had lights on, and driving between Cambridge and Royston on A10 which is a single carriageway 60mph road, fairly busy. Bloke biking on other side was wearing a helmet but had no lights front or rear!!!

Now it was admirable wearing a helmet, but a car hittin at 60 would probably make the helmet irrelevant! Fwiw he was also wearing dark clothes.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody would suggest a helmet would prevent serious injury involving a vehicle. A road helmet will help protect you if you hit the ground, thats what it's designed to do. A full face helmet that down hill riders use gives much more protection but would still be useless if hit by a car.

All safety protection equipment is designed to specific requirements, my safety boots, glasses and acid proof trousers at work will protect me from my environment but will do naff all if a fork truck driver runs me over.

It's a personal choice if you wear one but don't make a short journey an excuse not to wear one, you can fall off or be knocked of anywhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top