A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 14th 07, 11:22 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Peter Fox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better

Arghhhhhhh! Just when we thought it was safe and the fine weather
arrived, a passing helmet reference spawns the plague.

OK STOP - THE LOT OF YOU
There's something a lot better to work on where there's a big benefit.

The background
(1) /If/ Hs are useful at all, then the benefit is marginal and unproven
(2) If people want to or not - let them
(3) Everyday cycling isn't an extreme sport (YMMV for sport/off-road.
The following is for everyday cycling.)

The wrong question and right answer
(4) "Should I wear a helmet?" ... "Training is 100 times more effective
that a helmet" (Discussion below)

Change of perception
(5) Modern society leans towards 'magic' things that 'make you safer'.
Cyclists are a bit different - They know the value of taking
responsibility for themselves.
(6) The endless studies of helmet efficacy could be put into perspective
by a simple analysis - which can start here - So 'statistics' for H can
be 'kicked into touch' by similar for 'training'.

Discussion
So that's the outline. In this short post I don't intend to visit every
single nook, cranny, exception and diversion. The object is to move the
'debate' away from "helmets - Good or bad?" to "Helmet's are a long way
down the line after training."

"100 times" Eh? Where does this figure spring from and what exactly is
"training"?
(a) If a helmet costs say £40 then compare the benefit of £40 worth of
training with that of a helmet. For this we can try to look at the two
with/without cases and count the number of life-saving' incidents where
each was effective. To do this we need a rough idea of the frequency of
accidents and in the H-case the effectiveness of preventing worse and in
the T-case number avoided. Doing this accurately is impossible but it
might be possible to get an order of magnitude. Here are my back of the
envelope calculations (One of the objectives of this post is to
encourage alternative b-o-e calculations - a spread of educated guesses
is better than a single estimate. My assumptions are easily challenged
- Good.)

(b) By 'training' I mean getting confident in all matters of bike
handling, road position and interacting with other road users. (NB
Experience is not a substitute for knowledge.) For example using gears,
keeping out of the gutter and knowing how to be seen.


Let us assume a notional cyclist who 'knows how to ride a bike' to the
extent of a bit about gears, has some lights and has been known to cycle
10 miles in one go. But on the other hand, hugs the side of the road,
sometimes uses pavements, gets squashed at road narrowings, takes
shopping home in a carrier from the handlebars and thinks that a yellow
shirt shows up at night.
Q1 How many 'crashes' are they likely to have in ten years?
Q2 How many of these will be mitigated by a helmet?
If this cyclist is much more road-aware then
Q3 How many crashes will never happen?
Q4 How many will be reduced in severity?

Figures out of thin air! A1 is much larger if non-crash incidents with
potential for something worse are considered.
A1 say 10
A2 say 3
A3 say 9
A3 say 9
So that £40 resulted in 3 not-so-bad crashes with a helmet or 9
never-happened crashes with training.

Training is for life and a helmet is for 5 years. 10 years the helmet
had to be replaced 3 times (even without crashing 2 times) so let's say
the helmet cost was £100.

Cost Benefit
H £100 3 less severe crashes
T £40 9 never happened crashes

It is easy to see how much more value for money T is than H.

It is also easy to see where the shortcomings of the analysis lie.
Please don't flame, I've tried to use middle-of-the-road figures for the
sake of illustration not to be taken as gospel. Please make your own
estimates and let us know. [But not while the sun is shining, you have
better things to do].

Conclusion
(7) It is my belief that training is at least one and probably two
orders of magnitude more beneficial than helmets.
(8) This assertion is transparently open to confirmation or refutation
by the use of alternative assumptions as suggested through the massive
experience of URC
(9) Furthermore, this means that the 'helmet debate' is a mere sideline
and public awareness of the value of training needs bringing to the
fore. See (4) above.


=============================================
Working from the data contained in
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/streets/downloads/pdf/LRSR/Topic_Factsheets/Pedal-Cyclist-Casualties-04-05.pdf

I've worked out the average distance between accidents.

Slight - 75,000 miles
Killed/Seriously injured - 460,000 miles
Any - 66,000 miles

This takes into account the known under-reporting at a constant 60%
which is more pessimistic than the best estimate also provided.

For somebody doing 5000 miles a year this is:

Slight - 15 years
Killed/Seriously injured - 92 years
Any - 13 years
=============================================

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the submarine business went under

www.eminent.demon.co.uk - Lots for cyclists
Ads
  #2  
Old April 14th 07, 12:31 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
burt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 393
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better


"Peter Fox" wrote in
message news
Arghhhhhhh! Just when we thought it was safe and the fine weather
arrived, a passing helmet reference spawns the plague.

Discussion
So that's the outline. In this short post


This must be some definition of "short" which isn't in any of my
dictionaries. I couldn't be bothered to read anything after this, so I'm
assuming that this is another troll.


  #3  
Old April 14th 07, 12:40 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Paul Murphy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 273
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better

"Peter Fox" wrote in
message news
Arghhhhhhh! Just when we thought it was safe and the fine weather
arrived, a passing helmet reference spawns the plague.

OK STOP - THE LOT OF YOU


Personally if/when those doctors of influence who frequent this group succed
in changing the BMA's stance on the issue, then I may be persuaded to not go
with 'headwear' (on my electric assist bike) but in the meantime the ball is
in their court to persuade all those other doctors who voted on the matter
that they got it wrong.

Paul M


  #4  
Old April 14th 07, 12:45 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Ziggy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 548
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better

On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 12:40:08 +0100, "Paul Murphy"
wrote:

"Peter Fox" wrote in
message news
Arghhhhhhh! Just when we thought it was safe and the fine weather
arrived, a passing helmet reference spawns the plague.

OK STOP - THE LOT OF YOU


Personally if/when those doctors of influence who frequent this group succed
in changing the BMA's stance on the issue, then I may be persuaded to not go
with 'headwear' (on my electric assist bike) but in the meantime the ball is
in their court to persuade all those other doctors who voted on the matter
that they got it wrong.


Have you ever considered taking responsibility for your own decisions about your
safety?

Oh, I suppose you'll say you have: you've made a decsion to let a group of
people who have no particular qualification in analysing the *causes* of
traumatic injury to make the decision for you.




  #5  
Old April 14th 07, 01:22 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Raven[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,162
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts.Springboard for something better

Paul Murphy wrote on 14/04/2007 12:40 +0100:

Personally if/when those doctors of influence who frequent this group succed
in changing the BMA's stance on the issue, then I may be persuaded to not go
with 'headwear' (on my electric assist bike) but in the meantime the ball is
in their court to persuade all those other doctors who voted on the matter
that they got it wrong.


Out of curiousity did you only take up wearing a helmet 18 months ago
when the BMA changed its stance or were you using a different
rationalisation before then?


--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell
  #6  
Old April 14th 07, 01:57 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
John Kane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 885
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better

On Apr 14, 7:40 am, "Paul Murphy"
wrote:
"Peter Fox" wrote in
messagenews
Arghhhhhhh! Just when we thought it was safe and the fine weather
arrived, a passing helmet reference spawns the plague.


OK STOP - THE LOT OF YOU


Personally if/when those doctors of influence who frequent this group succed
in changing the BMA's stance on the issue, then I may be persuaded to not go
with 'headwear' (on my electric assist bike) but in the meantime the ball is
in their court to persuade all those other doctors who voted on the matter
that they got it wrong.

Paul M


I don't know about the BMA's resolution but my bet would be it was
based on ignorance , poor research or the pious thought that a helmet
MUST help.

The Canadian Academy of Sport Medicine supports mandatory helmet
laws. Here is their position paper : http://www.casm-acms.org/forms/state...ikeHelmets.pdf

It would get a failing grade as a high school paper. The inability to
even get the Thompson, Rivara and Thompson reference correct is an
indication of the high quality of the research. It goes down hill
after that.

But I am sure it is used all the time as a reason to recommend wearing
helmets. I would have believed it myself except that I know the
actual research literature.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

  #7  
Old April 14th 07, 03:15 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Peter Clinch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,852
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts.Springboard for something better

John Kane wrote:

I don't know about the BMA's resolution but my bet would be it was
based on ignorance , poor research or the pious thought that a helmet
MUST help.


You're being /far/ too kind to the BMA. They took a well
researched, fairly comprehensively argued piece that said
compulsion was a Bad Thing, scrapped it and created a new one which
ignored much of the same research they'd already looked at the
first time around, added in some really terrible opinion pieces in
their place, rounded off with a few anecdotes, cited laws passed
elsewhere as reasons we need one with no effort to assess if
they've had a useful effect, and then got it voted in using tactics
that would have looked dubious at a party conference in the former
Eastern Bloc.

Still, they /must/ be good, and the end justifies the means, right?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
  #8  
Old April 14th 07, 03:20 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Erik Sandblom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 240
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better

Den 2007-04-14 12:22:35 skrev Peter Fox
:

Arghhhhhhh! Just when we thought it was safe and the fine weather
arrived, a passing helmet reference spawns the plague.

OK STOP - THE LOT OF YOU



Uh, ok.

Erik Sandblom

--
Oil is for sissies
  #9  
Old April 14th 07, 03:26 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Paul Murphy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 273
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts. Springboard for something better

"Tony Raven" wrote in message
news
Paul Murphy wrote on 14/04/2007 12:40 +0100:

Personally if/when those doctors of influence who frequent this group
succed in changing the BMA's stance on the issue, then I may be persuaded
to not go with 'headwear' (on my electric assist bike) but in the
meantime the ball is in their court to persuade all those other doctors
who voted on the matter that they got it wrong.


Out of curiousity did you only take up wearing a helmet 18 months ago when
the BMA changed its stance or were you using a different rationalisation
before then?


If you're wanting a case to take to them in support of getting their stance
changed then the answer is I bought my helmet early in 2006 after the BMA
had made it's policy decision to encourage helmet use and their policy
influenced my decision. Good luck getting a change made! If the case is
really that clear-cut, I imagine the change will be swift...

Paul M


  #10  
Old April 14th 07, 03:33 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Tony Raven[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,162
Default Sorry about this, but you can never have enough helmet posts.Springboard for something better

Paul Murphy wrote on 14/04/2007 15:26 +0100:

If you're wanting a case to take to them in support of getting their stance
changed then the answer is I bought my helmet early in 2006 after the BMA
had made it's policy decision to encourage helmet use and their policy
influenced my decision.


At least that is a consistent position.

Good luck getting a change made! If the case is
really that clear-cut, I imagine the change will be swift...


I doubt it - the decision was based on internal politics, not evidence
so it will need a change of individuals/minds not facts. But members
are working on it.


--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Giro Pneumo Lone Star Edition helmet w/ helmet pod Robbie Brown Marketplace 0 November 18th 04 04:44 PM
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad? Just zis Guy, you know? Racing 0 July 30th 04 08:51 AM
published helmet research - is helmet good thing or bad? Just zis Guy, you know? Social Issues 0 July 30th 04 08:51 AM
Wow... 100,000 Posts bugman Unicycling 5 February 2nd 04 04:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.