Bike helmets
#1
Bike helmets
Hi,
This is not a rant. Bike helmets are a fine idea.
I just wonder how they started to become popular. Back when dirt was still pretty new and I was riding, nobody ever considered the concept, as far as I know.
Plus, in my personal experience, I can't recall anyone getting a head injury from a bike accident. Or even reading about one. (I'm sure that it happened, it just doesn't stand out in my memory).
So, I wondered if it was a trickle down from the racing/enduro/ironman biking that has become so much more popular.
Just curious to see if anyone has any facts -- or speculation.
Thanks,
hj
This is not a rant. Bike helmets are a fine idea.
I just wonder how they started to become popular. Back when dirt was still pretty new and I was riding, nobody ever considered the concept, as far as I know.
Plus, in my personal experience, I can't recall anyone getting a head injury from a bike accident. Or even reading about one. (I'm sure that it happened, it just doesn't stand out in my memory).
So, I wondered if it was a trickle down from the racing/enduro/ironman biking that has become so much more popular.
Just curious to see if anyone has any facts -- or speculation.
Thanks,
hj
#2
Well, just because the stats aren't overwhelming doesn't mean the injuries aren't occuring. However, I still think helmets (bicycles and motorcycles) should be optional. This is a political subject that will quickly get out of hand, but as a matter of fact (I'll try to find the referrence later), safety equipment has a way of causing people to be more dangerous.
For example, in football there are strides being made in the production of new and better safety gear. Yet there are more and more head and neck injuries despite this fact. Why? The theory is that people are putting a lot more faith into the safety gear- i.e., leading with the head in a tackle, instead of the textbook method- causing the injuries. It seems that the more safety gear people wear, the more reckless they play the game.
You can apply that principle to pretty much any safety measure in any activity. Look at the speed limit. Back when we had a national speed limit of 55MPH, it was assumed that the death toll would plummet. Yet even after the national speed limit was lifted and the states had more control over their own laws, the death rate on the highways stayed at pretty much the same level. Why? Because people are going to act like normal, responsible individuals, given the opportunity. Sure, there are going to be some that are reckless and crazy, but you'll have those no matter what the speed limit is. Montana is a good example of this. They lifted the speed limit altogether on the freeways and yet there are as many, if not fewer, highway fatalities even though there is no real speed limit.
For example, in football there are strides being made in the production of new and better safety gear. Yet there are more and more head and neck injuries despite this fact. Why? The theory is that people are putting a lot more faith into the safety gear- i.e., leading with the head in a tackle, instead of the textbook method- causing the injuries. It seems that the more safety gear people wear, the more reckless they play the game.
You can apply that principle to pretty much any safety measure in any activity. Look at the speed limit. Back when we had a national speed limit of 55MPH, it was assumed that the death toll would plummet. Yet even after the national speed limit was lifted and the states had more control over their own laws, the death rate on the highways stayed at pretty much the same level. Why? Because people are going to act like normal, responsible individuals, given the opportunity. Sure, there are going to be some that are reckless and crazy, but you'll have those no matter what the speed limit is. Montana is a good example of this. They lifted the speed limit altogether on the freeways and yet there are as many, if not fewer, highway fatalities even though there is no real speed limit.
#3
I'd say it's at least partly, if not, mostly, trickle-down from racing. Fifteen years ago or so, the major bike-racing organizations started requiring helmets, which trickled down to the smaller events. And, since it's not good to train without if you're going to have to wear one in the race, people wore them.
I used to ride a lot without, but now, when I'm going for an extended ride, I wear one. If I'm just giving the bike a shake-down ride around the neighborhood after an adjustment, I don't. This is for both bicycles and motorcycles.
Here's why I'm inclined to wear one. It's the other vehicles I'm concerned about. It doesn't matter how good of a rider you are, someone could run you over from behind with no warning, and you can't always control your fall to avoid hitting your head. The physics of a head impact are undeniable now--they're not in your favor.
It's not a guarantee, but it is simple, cheap risk mitigation.
Jason
I used to ride a lot without, but now, when I'm going for an extended ride, I wear one. If I'm just giving the bike a shake-down ride around the neighborhood after an adjustment, I don't. This is for both bicycles and motorcycles.
Here's why I'm inclined to wear one. It's the other vehicles I'm concerned about. It doesn't matter how good of a rider you are, someone could run you over from behind with no warning, and you can't always control your fall to avoid hitting your head. The physics of a head impact are undeniable now--they're not in your favor.
It's not a guarantee, but it is simple, cheap risk mitigation.
Jason
#4
#5
You can't remember because of all of the head injuries you suffered from riding a bike without a helmet.
#6
#7
Trending Topics
#10
Of course the comedian then must believe that those that race bikes are sissies then? It is better to learn from the people that thought it was being a sissie and got hurt or killed because of a small accident.
#11
#12
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bigdmizer
General NON-Automotive Conversation
17
03-13-2006 11:04 PM