helmets are not optional

Yes, this can be contentious.

Tonight, I was talking with a neighbor while he was watching his kids ride. I told him about last night's wreck and how it cracked my buddy's helmet rather than his head...he said "these kids need helmets, don't they?"

"Yep"

I didn't lecture, I did berate...he was comfortable in a narrow perspective...and made a choice based on an expanded horizon. He imagined his kids hitting the pavement and was compelled to act.

This is an approach I'm personally comfortable with - effect change through a positive perspective and choice rather than mandate and control. I've always felt this way, but am now learning how to apply it in issues closer to home as well.

I got to witness a woman crashing on a MUT with her baby (helmetless) in a backpack carrier on her back.

The friend I was walking on the MUT with was so upset by the carnage that I never did find out if the child survived. We had to walk away or my friend would have fainted or puked or something.

I agree, adults are one thing (mom wasn't wearing a helmet, either) but children are something else entirely.

Oh, man.

Prayers for the baby, hugs for you and your friend.

Oh, man.

Prayers for the baby, hugs for you and your friend - and baby's mom, too.

I even wear a helmet when I ride to the "Red Box" less than a half mile from my house, or to the grocery store a mile away. I'm on residential streets with no traffic, but in the off chance that a kid or dog or rock happen to throw me- I want my noggin safe and sound (well, safe anyway). Plus, I think I'd look more stupid for NOT wearing one than looking dorky for wearing one.

Whether or not there should be laws requiring people to wear helmets is really just an issue of politics.

My point was simply that it seems awfully stupid to bike without a helmet.

A helmet saved my life and I'll tell the story to anyone that'll listen. Like Mr. Silver, I believe in educating people that I have contact with. I'm lucky enough to be in a profession where I get to chat to a lot of people who ride or are thinking of riding and I do make a difference. I won't go anywhere on my bike without a helmet and I make it pretty clear to my friends that I don't want to ride with them if they won't wear one. The downside is that some people will then choose not to commute because they don't want helmet head when they get to work. Vanity is a powerful thing.

When I first tried clipless pedals, I tipped over and slammed the back of my head into the pavement. Thank heavens for my helmet! The helmet seemed to be fine, but a couple weeks later, I dropped it and it cracked in two. There is no way I would ever get on my bike without my helmet on. It bothers me when other people don't wear helmets because as mentioned previously in this thread, it becomes everyone's responsibility when someone gets hurt and doesn't have health insurance. And lots of people in CA don't have health insurance.

CA has a helmet law for motorcyclists (I'm actually shocked we don't have a bicycle helmet law yet). The other night, I noticed a Highway Patrol car stopped on the other side of the freeway. Next I saw a motorcycle (also on the other side) driving the wrong way on the shoulder. He was not wearing a helmet. I guess he saw the cop and instead of passing him and getting a ticket, he decided to drive the wrong way back to the last on ramp. I found this kind of entertaining.

Anyone in the US who thinks her expensive health insurance covers her for a head injury needs to (1) educate herself about what is involved in rehabbing a TBI and (2) read her policy. Very, very, very few of even the most expensive policies will cover extended neuropsych rehab or occupational therapy. And that gets fewer every day.

I'm not even going to begin to address the rest of it at this hour in the morning, except to say that anyone in the US who thinks the public (government, taxpayers, however you want to phrase it) is NOT subsidizing her expensive health care insurance to a MASSIVE degree, also needs to educate herself.

Go ahead and have your debate, but let's not bring red herrings into it.

I am not dumb enough to think that my medical insurance would pay the entire price of a major brain injury rehab (although my insurance pretty much pays for everything without questioning. And I mean some pretty expensive stuff, no referrals, etc). I only brought up the health insurance aspect because medical costs and not wearing a helmet are related. Also, with the advent of mandatory, state sponsored health insurance in MA (for those who don't have it through work), people are saying the same thing that they say about helmets and seatbelts: "The government should not tell me I have to..."
Last year my son had the norovirus. He was really sick and used his mandated state sponsored health plan (he works for a company with less than 10 people). His girlfriend, who had no insurance, because she is too cheap to pay the small premium for her income level, went to the emergency room and got "free care." Who do you think paid for that?

And what is the Massachusetts program, but a massive state subsidy of four private health insurance/managed care companies? Who's paying for that?

(And what would be wrong with it if my tax dollars did go to help people who really need it, rather than helping insurance and drug company executives buy new yachts as they do now?)

Really, uncompensated ER care is the most innocuous of the bunch, because there's a complete disconnect between the funding and the usage. The hospital gets construction/development money from the feds, and everyone benefits from the existence of the hospital. In exchange they're obligated to treat all emergent needs.

In your example, State and federal dollars probably paid less for your son's girlfriend than they did for your son. Almost certainly so. And that's before you take into account the fact that his services would've been billed at a deep discount, whereas she will be taken to collection for the face value of whatever the hospital wants to charge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wahine

A helmet saved my life and I'll tell the story to anyone that'll listen. Like Mr. Silver, I believe in educating people that I have contact with.... I won't go anywhere on my bike without a helmet and I make it pretty clear to my friends that I don't want to ride with them if they won't wear one.

---

+1

And part of how I educate people is with my hairstyle. Not everyone wants a helmet-friendly haircut, I understand that. Still, I get comments all the time when I pull off my helmet and fluff up my hair. "Wow, no helmet head, how do you do that?" :D


Another story I tell people a lot is the story of the last time DH and I rode without helmets - because it's not the story of how my helmet saved my life, it's the story about how wearing it shows my concern for my loved ones. I might have told this one here before - but here I go again :rolleyes:

The last time DH and I rode without helmets was just a couple of months after we'd started dating. He'd been living in a helmet-law state for many years, and although he hadn't ridden bareheaded in a long time, he'd done it in his youth, and I guess he was just curious to re-experience what it felt like. I lived in a state without a helmet law, and although I always wore one for long trips and highway travel, I often scooted around town without one. On this particular day, we'd gone camping, and we were going to get dinner at a restaurant near our campsite. It was a mile and a half, and we decided that we'd leave the helmets in the tent.

On that little mile and a half scoot, each of us was so terrified for the OTHER one, that we promised each other then and there never to do it again.

I said it in a previous post, but I'll do it again:

Unfortunately, too many people subscribe to the I-don't-ride-fast-enough-to-need-a-helmet philosophy.

Every potential cyclist should be required to read Dangerous Decision: The Consideration for Helmet Use at Any Speed by J. Raleigh Burt, an 8th grader who earned 1st place in the Junior Division of the 2005 Colorado State Science Fair.

To quote:

"From the height of a recreational riding position, a simple tip-over fall can create enough speed and energy to cause substantial damage to the human head and brain. In other words, it is the height of the potential fall and not just the speed the cyclist is traveling where the threat of injury exists....

The results from the experiment showed that the velocity, force, and energy created in a simple tip-over fall onto a hard surface are more than great enough to cause a serious head and/or brain injury to a cyclist not wearing a helmet. Even collisions with softer surfaces produced potentially hazardous forces."

Update: For a podcast interview with Raleigh plus a link to the complete report, see http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/00000194.

For a rather lengthy list of references to scientific journal articles dealing with helmets and bike safety (many linking you to abstracts only, but certainly still informative), visit the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute at http://www.helmets.org/journals.htm.

Hey, could that post go in its own thread, so we can find it simply with a search?

I bought Zen's bike for my DIL and she's going to use the baby trailer I bought for my dog. I want them both to wear helmets.

Karen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sara

When I first tried clipless pedals, I tipped over and slammed the back of my head into the pavement. Thank heavens for my helmet! The helmet seemed to be fine, but a couple weeks later, I dropped it and it cracked in two.

---

I've repeatedly heard that you should replace your helmet anytime it sustains an impact, even if it otherwise looks okay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OakLeaf

Really, uncompensated ER care is the most innocuous of the bunch, because there's a complete disconnect between the funding and the usage. The hospital gets construction/development money from the feds, and everyone benefits from the existence of the hospital. In exchange they're obligated to treat all emergent needs.

In your example, State and federal dollars probably paid less for your son's girlfriend than they did for your son. Almost certainly so. And that's before you take into account the fact that his services would've been billed at a deep discount, whereas she will be taken to collection for the face value of whatever the hospital wants to charge.

---

That may be true, but the other problem with people going to the ER for things like that is that it contributes to overcrowding and long waits in the ERs. A lot of people seem to think it's OK to go to the ER for minor/non-emergent things because they know they'll get treated and possibly for free, but it really isn't appropriate use of the ER. That's what urgent-care centers are for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSH

With all of that said... I have to say that honestly I don't care if someone wears a helmet or not. It's their life. Their head. It's not my place to tell them to protect it.

---

<climbing onto my soapbox>
I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in here, for what it's worth. I guess I don't care if adults don't wear a helmet, because they're making an "informed" decision. Except for when they wreck, have a massive head injury, become a vegetable, require nursing home care for the rest of their lives, and then I have to pay for their stupidity. That is irresponsible.

The other thing that makes me mad is kids not wearing a helmet. Who wants to see their child in the above situation? I did an ICU stint in nursing school, and took care of not one, but TWO 18 year olds (ok not kids, by no means were they adults either), who had severe head injuries from crashing on their skateboards. They were going to be in a vegetative state for the rest of their lives. One of the mom's said her son wouldn't wear a helmet because it wasn't cool. I get that it's vitally important to be cool, but even at 18, I got that it was also vitally important to be alive. I have never ridden without a helmet, I require my kids to wear helmets, and even my 13 year old will not get on his bike without one despite the fact that some of his friends don't. He tells them "When you've lost the ability to talk or wipe your nose because you've hit a car with your head, I will come to the nursing home and visit you, but I won't be the one in that bed". And, God willing, he won't be.

I know that a helmet is not a guaranteed life-saver, but geeze, it's pretty much all we got, so why not do all you can? Having said that, I have not and would never be rude when speaking to someone about their choices.

I also realize that this mentality goes for other irresponsible acts such as drunk driving, drugs, unprotected sex, etc. I could go ON AND ON, but I shall spare you LOLOL.
<climbing off my soapbox>

The other day I was riding in a rural area and another cyclist came toward me going the other way. He was not wearing a helmet and I gave him a very small kind of flippant wave hello. He gave me a big wave hello and said hi. He must have thought I was being rude because he turned his head around and gave me a huge "what's-up-with-that-attitude" wave. I wish I wasn't going uphill and had more time to prepare, I would have skipped the wave and pointed to my helmet instead.

My husbands life was saved wearing a helmet, and a friend of ours has permanent brain damage from not wearing one. We won't even take short test rides up and down the street without one. Same with the motos, never ride any distance without one. I guess I am so used to wearing a helmet because everything I participate in requires one. Another reason to have really short hair!

Brenda

I didn't have a helmet until I bought my first bike in college for transportation. I've *always* worn one ever since. As does my DH.

Yep - I rode bikes as a kid. It was never even suggested I should wear one, much less that anyone would buy me one. It just wasn't an option. I don't think my parents knew any better. I would have worn it.

If someone makes an informed, rational choice that they don't want to wear a helmet - then fine. Kids should have to wear them, and we need to work towards making it socially acceptable to wear them.

CA

Well, Oakleaf, I guess that I am just an old hippie. I have no problem at all with the government paying for things for people who need it. I guess my problem is that one, people just complain about all of these things that are mandated, but are too irresponsible to take responsibility for their health, safety, etc. In the end, it is really not my problem. But, I wish we could find a way to make things equitable. I don't know why this country has to be so "individualistic" that we have come to this point. Sure, EU countries are highly taxed, but the quality of life just seems better. My husband manages several EU branches of his company and I am envious of the benefits and the lifestyle. Some people would tell me to move, or that I am anti-American, but somehow, there has to be a solution. I am not an expert on this topic. All I know is that my son is very happy to have good coverage for a reasonable premium. He paid about a hundred dollars a month more before this, to insure himself, while most of his friends had none. I don't love insurance companies, but in the past year I have had occasion to use mine for some very expensive diagnostic tests and specialists; 3 MRIs, a CT scan, several ultra sounds, blood work galore, PT, and specialists at the Brigham. I was not questioned on anything. A couple of years ago my husband had 2 stents put in and 2 angioplasties within a year period, which was all paid for, 100%. And there's people on this forum who have to wait months to get approval for an MRI! It's really not fair that all people can't have this; I mean I only have it because the policy at my husband's company is really good.

OK, this is way off topic of helmets. I do get on a rampage about safety and health issues. Just riding with Denise G. and hearing the story of her accident on a personal level has given me a view on this issue that most don't get.
I won't say anymore.

((Robyn,)) how can you and I agree on all that stuff, and have gotten into a disagreement on some technicality? :D:rolleyes::cool:

+1 on preferring social coverage of all medical costs, even those caused by an individual's negligence. I reckon that no matter what it costs the rest of us in dollars, the victims are paying the most in every other way, every day.

Apropos wearing a helmet, I like this aphorism: don't bother with a helmet if you've nothing to protect.

Ages ago, I came across a 2-page excerpt from a trial transcript. The case involved a 40yo man, hs grad, responsible job, solid citizen, who was clipped by a car as he was peddling along. Not a big hit, just a brush with the fender, enough to knock him off the bike. But he wasn't wearing a helmet. Despite how minor the accident was in superficial terms, he suffered permanent brain damage to the point he could no longer work and could barely function at any level. The transcript made poignantly clear that the poor soul could hardly string a coherent sentence together, and it was questionable whether he could truly understand much that was said to him. The excerpt closed with him saying (not as clearly as this) "I should have been dead. They tell me I should have been dead".

I wish I still had that excerpt, because it was terrifying to read. I can't imagine anyone reading it and then going out on their bike without a helmet. They'd truly have to have nothing to protect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jolt

That may be true, but the other problem with people going to the ER for things like that is that it contributes to overcrowding and long waits in the ERs. A lot of people seem to think it's OK to go to the ER for minor/non-emergent things because they know they'll get treated and possibly for free, but it really isn't appropriate use of the ER. That's what urgent-care centers are for.

---

I've used the ER three times since I've lived here. That's 3 times more than the last 10 years before that.

Because we don't have urgent care centers. We have walk-in clinics, but they don't have xrays or do stitches, and they're not open 24/7.

Karen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuckervill

I've used the ER three times since I've lived here. That's 3 times more than the last 10 years before that.

Because we don't have urgent care centers. We have walk-in clinics, but they don't have xrays or do stitches, and they're not open 24/7.

Karen

---

I guess I was referring to the walk-in clinics when I said "urgent care". Stitches and possible broken bones are perfectly reasonable things to go to the ER for (and some ERs now have a "fast track" section for those types of patients, separating them from the more acute ones); things like the norovirus (unless it's a young child and they're getting dehydrated) not so much. People with that type of issue (or other more minor things that sometimes show up in the ER) should go to the walk-in clinic--if they have to wait until the next morning it's not going to hurt anything.

Oh, that's hard! I hear ya - but that's still hard.

I don't go to the ER for just anything, and I've got the kind of pain threshold where when I spilled hot oil and melted my carpet, it didn't really hurt my foot; when I cut my thumb so deeply I had a scar contracture for a year, it didn't much hurt my hand (and I kept on cooking after I got the bleeding stopped), and I never needed medical care for either one of those.

But when I had food poisoning a couple of weeks ago, another eleven hours of moaning in pain with a headache that ultimately Demerol and a liter of fluids helped but didn't eliminate (actually I think mostly it made me stop caring about the headache), and the most miserable nausea you can imagine - sorry, another eleven hours of that wasn't in the cards.

No, I wouldn't have died of it. But to say that was an abuse of the ER is just hard :o

Mostly what I've done that I would consider an abuse of the ER is when my PCP has refused to see me for a sprain because "I'd have to send you to the ER for X-rays anyhow." :mad: I wonder how in tune ER staff are with the state of primary care in this country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OakLeaf

Oh, that's hard! I hear ya - but that's still hard.

I don't go to the ER for just anything, and I've got the kind of pain threshold where when I spilled hot oil and melted my carpet, it didn't really hurt my foot; when I cut my thumb so deeply I had a scar contracture for a year, it didn't much hurt my hand (and I kept on cooking after I got the bleeding stopped), and I never needed medical care for either one of those.

But when I had food poisoning a couple of weeks ago, another eleven hours of moaning in pain with a headache that ultimately Demerol and a liter of fluids helped but didn't eliminate (actually I think mostly it made me stop caring about the headache), and the most miserable nausea you can imagine - sorry, another eleven hours of that wasn't in the cards.

No, I wouldn't have died of it. But to say that was an abuse of the ER is just hard :o

Mostly what I've done that I would consider an abuse of the ER is when my PCP has refused to see me for a sprain because "I'd have to send you to the ER for X-rays anyhow." :mad: I wonder how in tune ER staff are with the state of primary care in this country.

---

Sorry if my previous post came across as a bit harsh--that's the problem with typing things rather than saying them sometimes. I agree with you that a lot of the problem is the state of primary care. As far as your food-poisoning incident, from what you describe it sounds like it was worse than the standard stomach bug (which is more what I was thinking of in the previous post) and I can't really blame you for going to the ER in that case. Again, apologies if my post was offensive.