Am hoping this will get the lurks to join in the debate
Oooh! Tis a hot potato.... passions run high and amok on it...
It's akin to the pro/anti- scam argument and fists and fur flies
OK - part of the thread inspired by the HC and the "should" inclusion which some are leaping and dancing - lycra twisting ... as this means "
Quote:
"Them nowty drivers who 'it us .... their insurance companies'll try it on....!"
(Well - yeah - they do ... they do it when you drive the darned thing as well.. they'll even claim the absurd .. I know ...from experience with my wife's incident. Took us a good six years to prove the was still insured when he tragically died at the wheel of his car - nearly taking my wife with him.. so yes.. am all too aware that these people are the most callous b:censored: rs in the world... ) Anyway - HC drafts aside...
March 2006 BMJ's bulging with arguments from both sides of the coin...
I cannot post and paste... you now have to pay to view on line ... I am not going to type out articles....
Nor get into professional bother
Basically - we had the "Anti" and the "Pro" in the same issue... .. and this is where you can see a parallel perhaps in scamera/helmet arguments as one side claims "lives are saved" and the other ... "well - no ... not to the extent as claimed... "
In Australia .. helmets are compulsory... but there has been no reduction in deaths since the introduction of this law.
Why?
Well
Lot of reasons.. point of impact may not be the head -- other vital organs ...internal bleeds are also extremely serious and cause death...
Helmet is perhaps not that that well designed in that it can only absorb shock if head meets kerb at 12 mph. (hmmm... 12 mph... hmmmm!)
http://www.whycycle.co.uk/safety-helmets.htmPerhaps a thicker polystyrene base may help
This - from above website
Quote:
Any moving object has energy. To stop an object from moving, this (kinetic) energy must be removed by conversion to other energy forms, eg heat and sound OR by using it to alter the chemical or structural composition of a material. Cars have "crumple zones": the front end is designed to concertina, absorbing terrific amounts of energy but whilst bringing the car to a halt (decelerating it) less abruptly and hopefully protecting the driver/passengers by lessening the effects of the impact on them. But there is only so much energy that can be absorbed by this crumple zone, and at higher speeds (increased speed = increased kinetic energy) insufficient energy can be absorbed to adequately protect the occupants. A helmet is designed to work in a very similar way, the polystyrene acting as the crumple zone, lessening the impact on the skull. The helmet will make contact first and stop moving. However, because it can be crushed, the head inside it is allowed to carry on moving for a short period of time as it crushes the polystyrene, an amount of energy being absorbed in the process. Because the skull is decelerated slightly more gradually, there is a lesser impact between both the skull onto the ground AND subsequently the brain onto the inside of the skull. Brain damage occurs if the impact between it and the skull is too great, ie too much energy has to be absorbed by the brain.
The maximum amount of energy is absorbed if the impact area is at its largest, but as the impact area decreases, so does the amount of energy that can be absorbed. If we look back at the example of a car, modern crash safety tests now include a test which only involves half of the crumple zone because very few real collisions involve a perfect head on impact. Cycle helmet standards also try to follow this principle, hence the impact test against a "kerb" shaped object.
Basically - how the helmet works ... the polystyrene does act as a buffer and absorbs some of the shock... thus it lessens some of the injuries to the head.
Where do I stand in this?
Well ... IG receives CW each week and we buy each fortnight - and we buy a Swiss version each month
We also subscribe to
[the
magazine... OK // So we buy C+ each month..
(Useful stuff - lots of nice ride ideas.. gadgets
reviewed) - and we also read a French cycling mag...on occasion.
Helps me keep a language "alive"
Oh ... POINT? of all that ?
Well ...
each one of those mags shows the cyclist wearing a helmet and to be honest - it looks normal to me
I have a collection of helmets.. from the £10 cheapo to the excessively and insanely "more cash than sense" one.... but it looks good ..trendy - stylish .. matches me lycra ... can mount a light on it....
Also find - like IG - keeps me warm and dry - yet ventilated on winter rides - and if you get a variety of sizes so's you can wear a woolly hat if it's really cold ...
Summer? Keeps insects and summer rain away...
Safety? Have sassy kids.. could not insist they wear helmets if I do not..
Also - perhaps I just feel that bit more secure if wearing one....
Where I think the difference between scams and helmets as life savers lie?
And this is the controversial post which I hope will trigger reaction and fair - reasoned debate WITHOUT resorting to highly personal insult as opposed to friendly leg pulling banter when arguments are lost
One can absorb shock in the hopefully unlikely event of an accident
The other can do nowt other than record a speed - but cannot do much else.. and in any case the blipper is usually just blipping and compying on average ..
There is a huge difference between blips and blats ... and the blips are fined and the blats are perhaps part of the "twilight zone"
I am sure A and B cyclists, ed-m, johnsher and Peyote will have much to say on this topic... and perhaps our lurkers and cycling enthusiasts will feel moved to add their take to the helmet pros and cons....
Rest assured - this is a forum which does take road safety issues pretty darned seriously and the collective on this board - whether they ride bikes or not - see all road users as sharers...
Road safety is not about Speed cams... It's about each person taking responsibility and behaving with courtesy, manners and respect for other road users.....
attention to COAST principles is part of it.... and the COAST principles can be more of a life saver - whether you drive past the scam per the lolly or you ride wearing a helmet