URGH :mad: Do articles such as these really turn folks off of cycling??
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-30417,00.html
AARGGHHHHH
Printable View
URGH :mad: Do articles such as these really turn folks off of cycling??
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-30417,00.html
AARGGHHHHH
Well, one silly little study does not change the fact that I feel safer in my helmet, especially since I've actually had some accidents with some hard blows to the head and felt perfectly fine without causing any excessive "rotation."
Di..yep.
I'm realllyyyyy glad i had my helmet on back in Oct!!!!! :eek: Hey, although noone likes having an "oops, oh dear", you get a nice new helmet :rolleyes: :)
They cause more harm than do good? WHAT??? That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard. I don't think my helmet caused me more harm than good when I went down hard doing 18mph on the road last year. In fact, had I not been wearing it, the crack of my skull on the pavement would surely have left someone a nice mess to clean up. As it was, I just had a headache.
Stupid article! :mad:
I don't think it's the "media" per se, it's the idiotic organizations that promote this kind of stuff. Never heard of it in bicycling before, but they're all over the motorcycling world.
Just yesterday, our local paper made a point of emphasizing that a helmet had saved a rider from serious head injuries in a hit/skip.
Was the Australian study looking at the helmets with the pointed "aero" back sides?
I've read things about how those can cause your head to rotate in a crash, but that's one of those very rare occaisions. Certainly flukey enough that no-one would damm all helmets because of it!
I had heard something similar to this before, but I don't buy the statement that helmets do more harm than good. I think the issue is with some of the "aerodynamic" shaped helmets that have parts that can "catch" on the pavement in a crash as opposed to a more round helmet that wouldn't do that. If the helmet catches on the ground I can see where it would cause extra rotation. I think it was somewhere on www.helmets.org that recommended looking for a helmet with a very rounded shape to avoid this issue. As for helmets discouraging people from riding, I don't buy that either. Especially with as lightweight as helmets are now (my first helmet as a kid was one of those hard-shell Jammer ones that weren't all that well ventilated either, and things have improved a lot since then!). I think I'd be nervous riding without mine.
Lots of people feel safer on sidewalks, too ... studies are good things.
I would say the study should inspire improvements in helmet design, not giving up on helmets.
I have always felt that they should go back to the older bike helmet designs which were more rounded. I love my roller skating helmet!:
http://img.inlinewarehouse.com/ProductImages/PBH.JPG
Those pointy alien helmets are not really safe if your head is skidding on pavement at 30mph.
Studies authored by the president of an anti-helmet organization are prima facie not good things. If they want to have some data to grind their ax with, fine, collaborate with a pro-helmet organization to co-sponsor an independent study, and agree to publish the results regardless of what they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Geonz
It sounds as if the quote "they are causing more harm than good" wasn't actually in reference to the helmets, but to the LAWS requiring the helmets. The journalist appears to have twisted the quote to get a flashy headline.
Personally, helmets when I'm riding are like seatbelts when I'm in a car. I feel naked and vulnerable without them.
The worst thing my helmet gave me was bad hair. I haven't heard many cyclists complain about helmet hair either.
It did prevent me from having something worse than a broken nose when I did a face-plant into stairs. Durn learing curve for toe clips. Klutz. :o
Journalistic integrity would have had it prominently stated that the author of the study is head of a group that opposes the helmet law! Can you say "conflict of interest"?
how could anyone possibly think helmets do more harm than good. I am pretty sure a helmet has saved my life more than a few times.
In defense of journalists, I must say that the authors of news pieces are very seldom the people who choose the title to their stories. Some editor picks the titles, and it's meant to "sell," not to be truthful...
This being said, they should have given more information about who's the author of the study...
+1 on that. I looked up mine the other day after the "what color's your helmet" thread because I couldn't remember - it's a 23yo Bell V1 Pro, and is nicely rounded with nothing much to catch on anything (not completely unlike your skating helmet really). The ventilation is lousy, but that's my only complaint. If I decide to buy a new one, it'll be a Bell Metro or similar, not one of the Alien Queen ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by BleeckerSt_Girl
Not sure about mandatory helmet laws, BUT if you don't wear a helmet, make sure your organ donor card is with you. Makes the process easier. :)
You really ought to replace it..... most of what I've read indicates that helmets should be replaced every 5 years whether they've been crashed in or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by bean fidhleir
Love my Bell Citi.
Smooth and rounded is beautiful.... ;)
http://www.bellbikehelmets.com/produ...asp?prodID=10#
(I have the screaming yellow one)
I hadn't previous heard any debate about aero vs non-aero helmets, but I do remember one other previous helmet design that did turn out to be dangerous.
Do you guys remember the brief fad of no-shell helmets? It was a reaction to big heavy hard shell helmets. Someone figured that mostly what you were protecting against was impact, so the shell was just extra weight and most of the manufacturers started selling helmets that were just the foam inner liner. *Until* it was found that the foam with no coating had a tendency to stick to the pavement, even if just for an instant, and had the nasty consequence of possibly snapping your neck :eek: The helmets could be made safer with the addition of a lycra cover, but they were phased out very quickly for the thin shelled helmets that most of us use today.
Those softshell helmets came out just shortly after I had my concussion. Just long enough that I'd already replaced my helmet with one just like it, a big heavy hardshell thing. Luckily!
Seems like the long, neck-turning aero helmets came out about the same time. I was actually a little surprised when I started seeing people racing in them again recently. I guess the sanctioning bodies figure that the chance of falling in a TT is low enough that those helmets could be made legal? or maybe they're designed now to snap the tail off?
I LOVE that helmet. Hadn't seen it before, but it's fantastic. Everything I'm looking for in a commuter helmet. A place on the back for my blinky light (I have a strap velcro'd on mine now), and an option for a flip mirror. Ohhh...I'm so getting one. Thanks for posting the link!Quote:
Originally Posted by KnottedYet
I've read that too, E, but I've never really seen anything to support the idea, just the flat statement. Have you ever seen any support for the claim?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eden
I wonder whether it isn't one of those dogmatic "everyone should drink 8-10 glasses of water a day" things that has no real basis but everyone repeats because it sounds good. (Maybe I'm just overly suspicious of recommendations that sound like Full Employment For Helmet Makers?) I can understand the idea of replacing a helmet that spends most of its time getting UV-baked in some place like Arizona, because even a UV-stable plastic will eventually degrade. But that doesn't seem as though it would apply to me in Mass, where I ride in rain as often as not and the helmet lives indoors with the bike when I'm not riding.
Of course the idea of having my skull break like a dropped pumpkin isn't too appealing, so I haven't discarded the idea of a new helmet. It would also be nice to have modern fitting, since one of my ears is further back than this helmet likes and the difference is uncomfortable. I know that if I do go for one, I want a bright yellow one like Knot's Citi to match my rain cape. :D
EDIT from helmet.org: "The Bell V-1 Pro was designed to today's standards, but the foam is very stiff, and if you are over 65 you probably should replace that too.
...
Most manufacturers now recommend that helmets be replaced after five years, but some of that may be just marketing. (Bell now recommends every three years, which seems to us too short. They base it partially on updating your helmet technology, but they have not been improving their helmets that much over three year periods, and we consider some of their helmets since the late 1990's to be a step backwards, so we would take that with a grain of salt.) Deterioration depends on usage, care, and abuse. But if you ride thousands of miles every year, five years may be a realistic estimate of helmet life. And helmets have actually been improving enough over time to make it a reasonable bet that you can find a better one than you did five years ago. It may fit better, look better, and in some cases may even be more protective. For an alternate view that agrees with the manufacturers, check out the helmet FAQ of the Snell Foundation. Snell knows a lot about helmets and their views on this subject should not be dismissed lightly, even though we disagree with them."
I think maybe I'll look around and see who's selling the Citi cheapest (the Metro seems to have gone extinct *sigh*)
Another option is the Impulse or Deuce, which you can find at Wal-Mart (I think that's the only place it's available, unfortunately). Same shape as the Citi/Metro but a very good deal! The Impulse is the adult size and the Deuce is the youth size which you'll need if you have a small head like me :). Only bummer is the lousy selection of colors.Quote:
Originally Posted by bean fidhleir
As you say, it's only the Snell Foundation that actually has data to support the 5-year claim, but as you say, they're a very reputable, well established, independent organization, and I'm not going to dismiss their recommendations unless I see someone else's data that's truly better.Quote:
Originally Posted by bean fidhleir
Also, while UV eventually will degrade the outer shell, it's the EPS liner that actually protects your head, and what degrades that is body acids and oils. While I don't know of any helmet-specific data, all you have to do is search on EPS chemical resistance. You'll find that EPS is not at all stable, and the range of chemicals that degrade it include many that are contained in sweat and sebum. If the helmet's touched hair or skin (including being tried on in an LBS!), it's started to degrade, and while repeated exposure, heavy sweat and/or oily hair will make the degradation worse, lack of exposure won't stop what's already started. (Think about fingerprints on brushed stainless steel.)
As someone who's alive and rational today because of a helmet I was wearing at 21 mph, better safe than sorry.
As far as price resistance, honestly bicycle helmets are more like fine Champagne than they are like motorcycle helmets. I have a $40 helmet up north and a $180 helmet down south. There's about a 25% difference in comfort between them :rolleyes:. I don't know that I'll spend that kind of money again, and you definitely don't need to spend that kind of money to get a good, safe, comfortable helmet. Like zen (?) said in another thread, $8 a year for a new helmet every 5 isn't much - especially when you compare it against the annual cost of the support you'd need if you get a significant TBI.
I am a sweaty monster.
I had a lovely Specialized "Mountain Man" helmet a few years back. I watched that foam "melt away" from the inside over the years. It was creepy. Like watching a snowbank melt in a warm breeze.
One day (about 4 years in) a chunk of foam crumbled and fell out.
I switch helmets every 3 years now.
Mind you, my sweat is amazingly caustic. I melt the barrels of some pens, my sweat has dyed my iBook keyboard bright lime green, and any perfume completely changes it's smell once it gets on my skin.
My favorite helmets are generally the cheaper ones, anyway. I don't mind the expense of replacing them, even if my old helmet doesn't look as bad as that Specialized.
(but I kind of figure the cosmetic damage I can see is probably just a hint at the vital structural damage I can't see.)