Helmet Poll: First Hand Experience

In article
.com,
"Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:

Michael Press wrote:
In article
. com,
"Ozark Bicycle"
wrote:

Sorni wrote:
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
I'm looking for three data points he

NOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry, Bill, but yes. There has been so much "studies show",
"statistics prove" stuff regarding helmet use, that I thought some
first hand experiences might help put things in perspective. Care to
add yours?

Self selecting case studies are notorious.

What part of "first hand accounts" do you not understand?

Do you have anything to contribute, or are you just taking up space?

I'll think about it.

--
Michael Press

In article .com,
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
I'm looking for three data points he

1) My head struck on object (pavement, vehicle, another cyclist, etc.)
whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and I feel the helmet lessened
the extent of my injuries.

or

2) My head struck on object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I doubt it either lessened or worsened the extent of my injuries (i.e.,
the helmet made no difference).

or

3) My head struck an object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I feel the helmet worsened the extent of my injuries.

Type 1, a road race three weeks ago, wet slick pavement, hit something
(still not sure what) going around an easy corner, went over the bars at
about 20kph. Landing was on hip, shoulder and lastly a very good (loud)
thunk on the helmet...

I suspect that helmets, if nothing else, reduce the number of injuries and
concussions that need medical attention. I'm reasonably sure that I hit hard
enough that I would have been far less likely to get up and finish the race
(slowly). Certainly the marshal at the corner was starting to radio up a
ride for me based on what he saw.


Another type 1, Several years ago doing mountain biking, hit something
(probably a rock) hard enough to put a hole in the helmet. I'm sure that
would have been slightly unpleasant without the helmet.

I can also remember a few other falls where I heard a large thunk as the
helmet hit something on the way down.

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
I'm looking for three data points he

1) My head struck on object (pavement, vehicle, another cyclist, etc.)
whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and I feel the helmet lessened
the extent of my injuries.

or

2) My head struck on object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I doubt it either lessened or worsened the extent of my injuries (i.e.,
the helmet made no difference).

1. front wheel trapped by raised edge of gravel path hidden by fallen
leaves while doing circa 20mph at bottom of hill. I exited sideways and
front "corner" of helmet hit ground as my head & upper body whiplashed,
helmet fractured into two large pieces held together by outer shell. I
spent a night in hospital with concussion & mild (24hour gap) amnesia

2. Same hill. same gravel, same speed, new bike with vee brakes year or
so later - grabbed brake too hard with predictable result. Helmet
barely touched ground, unhelmeted head would not (probably) have hit
ground.

There is of course one self reporting group missed from any "survey"
such as this:
"I wasn't wearing a hemlet and am dead/seriously injured & gave up
cycling as a result/etc" - granted not many but that is the high
consequnce - low probability event at issue.

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as jtaylor
gently breathed:
"Ozark Bicycle" wrote in message
roups.com...
I'm looking for three data points he

1) My head struck on object (pavement, vehicle, another cyclist, etc.)
whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and I feel the helmet lessened
the extent of my injuries.

This isn't going to produce any meaningful data. Most people who are
wearing something "protective" when an accident happens will
assume/believe that the item helped them in some way. This applies to
plastic bike helmets the same way it applies to magical talismans. See
the recent case of the guy hit by a truck where the police are trying to
claim that his helmet saved his live even though it was reduced to small
pieces - i.e. completely destroyed.

Many years ago I knew a member of a small group of teenage motorcyclists
who'd come to regard one particular set of panniers as a talisman,
simply because several of them had crashed while those particular
panniers were mounted on their motorcycle at the time (they swapped gear
about quite a lot), and in each case the rider had survived unharmed. In
reality of course they were all lucky in their crashes, the panniers
being there was just co-incidence. But this lot believed in them with
almost religious fervour. They also smoked rather a lot of pot, which
my have addled their thinking somewhat.

There is a possible case for wearing helmets off-road, but not
elsewhere.

I have a first hand experience where a helmet would have made things
worse had I been wearing one - a skid on loose gravel while taking a
bend, bike went out from under me, I fell sideways to the road while
still moving forward. Managed to avoid bumping my head, just, but had I
worn a helmet it would have hit the road and twisted my neck via the
forward motion.

--
- DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. http://www.sheepish.net

Broadband, Dialup, Domains = http://www.wytches.net = The UK's Pagan ISP!
http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk http://www.revival.stormshadow.com

On 2006-05-09, Ozark Bicycle wrote:
I'm looking for three data points he

1) My head struck on object (pavement, vehicle, another cyclist, etc.)
whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and I feel the helmet lessened
the extent of my injuries.

or

2) My head struck on object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I doubt it either lessened or worsened the extent of my injuries (i.e.,
the helmet made no difference).

or

3) My head struck an object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I feel the helmet worsened the extent of my injuries.

Please limit responses to the three scenarios as outlined above. As
simple or as detailed as you like. And, *first hand* accounts only
(i.e., it happened to you). And no responses of "studies show",
"statistics prove", etc.
(And I'm counting on everyone's honesty.)


Is there a reason why you're not asking for significant
crashes, whether helmeted or otherwise?

To share some crash experiences to show willing:

Car went through a set of red lights at the bottom of the hill
in front of me. Hit the brakes as hard as possible but no room to sverve
around and went into the side at around 15 miles an hour. Nasty bruises
to arm/ side/ shoulder from bouncing off the car, trashed front wheel
and forks, drivers side door bent enough in the crash to make it
unopenable. Didn't bang head & wasn't wearing helmet.

Car turns out of side road (driver having looked straight at me)
as I pass and takes out front wheel. Bounce and slide on road hurting
side, shoulder and back where I twisted in the air to try to land
better. Badly winded and shredded clothes but didn't bang head and
wasn't wearing a helmet.

The only time I've crashed & my head's made contact with
anything was on a badly taken corner, hitting a slippy patch I should
have seen/ anticipated and had both wheels slide out. The wooly beanie I
was wearing for the winter cold did a perfect job of protecting my head
from grazes while I slid to a rather gritty stop.

Tim.
--
Tim.

B Paton wrote:

I stopped wearing one last year for road training and friendly group rides
because i got tired of getting sweat dumped into my eyes on fast downhills
when the pads get squeezed by air pressure. I certainly feel safer as a
result, plus the cotton cycling cap is an awesome invention and way more
comfortable in almost all conditions.

If you ever decide to go back, be aware that you can use non-absorbent
closed cell foam pads which don't have that problem.

"Peter Cole" wrote in message
. ..
B Paton wrote:

I stopped wearing one last year for road training and friendly group
rides


If you ever decide to go back, be aware that you can use non-absorbent
closed cell foam pads which don't have that problem.

Thanks, but I am happier now. My days of experimenting to overcome this
deadly hazard posed by the safety device are over.

4) Have crashed more often than I can count. Have NEVER struck my head
- MartleHatted or otherwise - on anything.

--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
Stop it! You're scarin' the Hippo...

Ozark Bicycle says...

Automatons need not respond to this poll.

Whoah, that was mean spirited. I've butted heads with Carl in the past,
and while he is pedantic (and he's darned proud of it), and I often
disagree with him, I would never say anything like that.

Still, your "poll" is obviously biased. For one thing, since I seldom
wear a helmet, and in some 35 years of biking and countless spills I
have never hit my head on an object, I can't participate.

"Ozark Bicycle" wrote in message
oups.com...
I'm looking for three data points he
1) My head struck on object (pavement, vehicle, another cyclist, etc.)
whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and I feel the helmet lessened
the extent of my injuries.
or

2) My head struck on object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I doubt it either lessened or worsened the extent of my injuries (i.e.,
the helmet made no difference).

or

3) My head struck an object whilst cycling; I was wearing a helmet and
I feel the helmet worsened the extent of my injuries.

Please limit responses to the three scenarios as outlined above. As
simple or as detailed as you like. And, *first hand* accounts only
(i.e., it happened to you). And no responses of "studies show",
"statistics prove", etc.

Ozark Bicycle: You are Thompson, Rivara and Thompson, and ICMFP

If you knew anything about helmet research, you would withdraw the above
"research" as being completely invalid. If you really were TRT, you will do
even more "research" to prove the conclusions you had already reached before
you even did the first "research"

Never forget: if the facts get in the way of your perceptions, there must be
something wrong with the facts.