NO Helmet SAFER?
Thread started by
madmelo at 07.2.09 - 12:42 pm
Dont know if anyone posted this but it scary funny
http://www.good.is/post/brain-bucket/
reply
This is so fucking idiotic. How much room cars give you on the road has NOTHING to do with safety. Not wearing a helmet will not prevent some idiot pulling out 10ft in front of you or swinging their door open into your path. Defensive riding (which is how you should be managing space between you and cars anyway, instead of relying on "safety" gear that drivers may or may not see) only reduces the probability of crashes. What happens when you crash (and you WILL crash) is the only time that wearing a helmet matters.
vladster07.2.09 - 1:06 pm
reply
hahaha
we were just talkin bout this here
http://midnightridazz.com/forums.php?topicId=10461&pgnum=1
KiMS107.2.09 - 1:07 pm
reply
hate some of the gay arguments you guys have.
HANDBONE07.2.09 - 5:23 pm
reply
aaahhhh that's not how a study is run. At least one where you want people to take you seriously.
User107.2.09 - 5:39 pm
reply
hahahaha what a fucking moron, the evidence in his "study" was that on average cars rode 3.35 inches closer to him
I GUESS THAT MEANS ITS SAFER TO RIDE WITHOUT HELMETS! HURRR
robin swabin07.2.09 - 7:11 pm
reply
After my recent incident (solo crash, cracked helmet, knocked out) there is ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT in my mind as to the value of wearing a helmet. Which doesn't mean that it will save your life in all circumstances, but it can greatly increase your chances of survival, or coming away with a headache instead of brain damage. Those are the plain facts to me - you make your choice.
mr rollers07.2.09 - 8:54 pm
reply
i need to get a helmet asap.
funanu07.2.09 - 9:14 pm
reply
OK ...
I am calling FUCKING BULLSHIT on this study:
here is the the gist form the blog linked from the blog linked above:
“Wear your helmet!” Moms are obligated to say it, and in many American cities, riders are obligated by law to do it. But psychologist and avid cyclist Ian (ironically-named) Walker recently challenged conventional wisdom by asking — can wearing a helmet increase your chances of getting hurt on a bike?The answer, according to his own studies, is yes. He found out by rigging his bike up with an ultrasonic sensor that could detect and record how closely cars passed him while riding on city streets, and by riding regularly for two months with a helmet, and for two months without. He was passed by about 2,500 cars, which on average passed 3.35 inches closer to him when he wore a helmet. “They see the helmet and think, Oh, there’s a serious, skillful person,” Walker says. “And you get hit.”
OK the dude hooked a sensor to his bike rode for some months with a helmet and some with out.
This is so unscientific it is silly.
1) This was only tested by ONE PERSON in one locality one time frame during one year.
2) the ONE PERSON was the "researcher"
3) how do we know that he didn't sub-consciously ride differently with a helmet to prove his own theory.
4) assuming this ridiculous unscientific study was accurate, what percentage of accidents are caused by cars passing too closely as compared all other manor of accidents. T-Bones, doors, lack of visibility, road hazards, mechanical failure etc.
5) Finally, to put of fucking cherry on top of his bullshit sundae this guy writes "“They see the helmet and think, Oh, there’s a serious, skilful person,” Walker says. “And you get hit.”
He's putting thoughts in the head of the motorist based on his bullshit assumptions.
And if this is true. How many actual accidents can he refer to of people who got sidswiped by somebody getting too comfortable and passing too close and hitting a cyclist because they thought the cyclist was a skilled rider, based on the fact that the cyclist was wearing a hemet? Accident reports, driver interviews, any data whatsoever to back up his assumptions?
NONE!
The study itself is potentially interesting.
How is passing distance affected by: clothing, lights, bike type, road conditions, time of day, geographic location, local culture, etc etc.
If properly explored, we could possible learn a lot about why people pass too close sometimes.
however the overreaching conclusions of this researcher are complete and utter bullshit.
Right on the surface.
It doesn't take a scientist to figure that out.
The study has zero scientific rigor, and the blogs and websites that have been publishing thsi bullshit for over a year without examining the logic, reason, and method behind this study are as stupid and irresponsible as the "researcher".
I'm not a helmet Nazi by any means.
I try to be disciplined about wearing a hemet, sometimes I take a calculated risk not to. Thats my choice.
But I am really offended by somebody purporting to offer safety advice based on flimsy, circumstantial, unscientific bullshit.
trickmilla07.3.09 - 2:30 am
reply
ive definitely heard half a dozen times "actually there was a study that showed its safer to ride without helmets!"
judging what cars are going to do is a lot easier than being on someones wheel and ending up slightly overlapped and going down from a buzzed wheel, or running into a huge pothole, or taking a turn too agressively
if this guy had 2 accidents in 1 month from cars, hes probably a shitty biker
robin swabin responding to a
comment by trickmilla
07.3.09 - 2:57 am
reply
Better to have one and not need it, than to need one and not have it.
I'm a Medic and have been on both auto vs. bike, with and without rider wearing a helmet. EVERY collision where the rider was wearing a helmet, the rider was better off.
It won't stop a car from plowing into you (It's not a force field) but it will help in minor incidents, which 90% of bike accidents are.
2zRescue07.3.09 - 8:32 am
reply
I agree, even if a study(that has proper controls) shows that cars drive farther away from cyclists not wearing helmets, what happens the one time the car tries to occupy the same space at the same time, all Time Cop and shit. I'd rather have a helmet than be kicked by the car version of Jean-Claude Van Damme.
petzljake07.3.09 - 12:34 pm
reply
two words:
DRUNK DRIVERS
oh, how about two more
DISTRACTED DRIVERS
oh, what about
ASSHOLES IN HUMMERS
yeah. good luck with that whole "no helmet" thing.
ephemerae07.3.09 - 12:38 pm
reply
and an optimus prime helmet would be sick
petzljake07.3.09 - 12:45 pm
reply
well just to b super safe i will ride my bike on the wrong side of the road wit no helmet and a blindfold so i kan be safe :)
=D.T.O.M.=08.5.09 - 12:10 pm
reply
1. How does Ian know the helmet "caused" drivers to act differently?
2. Did he ride the exact same line on each of his rides? 3 inches to the left and "the rider" is closer to cars. 3 inches to the right, and the rider is further from passing cars.
3. Supposing he is correct, his conclusion should have been: 3 inches of extra space (on average) is not too safe when not wearing a helmet. If that is all I get when NOT wearing a helmet, then -- we should all wear helmets.
md208.5.09 - 12:22 pm
reply
i'm sure riding a bike in a chicken suit makes you safer, because drivers are too amused to want to run you off the road.
tell all your friends: chicken suits are the new helmets!
tortuga_veloce08.5.09 - 12:25 pm
reply
Yeah, y'know what? Fuck anyone that says that no helmets is the safer way. The proof is in the pudding that wearing a damn helmet can save your life.
http://www.wyff4.com/news/20187786/detail.html
If that guy hadn't been wearing a helmet, he'd be DEAD. They're not 100%, but they are damn good at trying. It's riding. Meant to be fun and awesome, not a damn fashion show. Frustrates me that most people don't wear them. We all know how unsafe motorists are, let alone random psychos like in the above article!!
sinaphile08.6.09 - 1:38 am
reply
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
+
FAIL.