I have to agree on the helmet front. If you tried to break that helmet in the way you've done, youd need to hit it bloody hard with a hammer or similar. Just think of that happening to your head.

I'm anti-helmet, there you go, up front. Would you have crashed if you weren't wearing a lid? Would you have taken the risk, would you have been more aware? Maybe (I admit it is a maybe).

Statistically helmet wearers are run over and crash more often... go figure. Places that have introduced mandatory helmet use have not felt a decrease in fatal injuries - the jury is still out on minor trauma (some studies indicate that deaths per Km ridden actually go up with increased helmet use!)

Ever squeezed a helmet? Yep, they will snap - you don't need a hammer just use your hands (its' an expensive experiment though). Most modern helmets don't meet rigorous safety standards any more (remember ANSI anyone?). They are designed to be cool, light, marketable and stop minor injuries below 20 km/h. Pros wear their free helmets because they have to it's in the UCI rules and their sponsorship contracts. They are fined if they don't wear them when training (their helmet sponsors don't like the sales implication).

You'd just as likely break your spine if you hit anything with your head at over 30 km/h and the extra thickness of a helmet may magnify neck injuries because, in effect, your nogging hits the deck/car/wall earlier with more momentum and greater leverage?

Sad to say that during the last 8 years 5 people I know have died whilst cycling. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WAS WEARING A HELMET. That is truly tragic.

Glad you survived the crash, Rob. Blimey that must've hurt!

igamogam:

Sorry, but you are just plain misinformed about the odds of injury, helmet v. non-helmet. You also seem to be misinformed about ANSI, which adopted ASTM standards more than decade ago. If you trying to say that helmets were once safer than they are now, you are just plain wrong, and no one should believe you.

If you don't wear a helmet, it can only out of the need to make some sort of comment, or to speculate about the "moral hazard" of safety equipment. I suppose there are people who make important decisions in this way, but most of them are misguided adolescents with parent issues.

Whatever you choose, don't base your decision on incorrect facts. Feel free to google "ASTM" "helmet safety" and/or "moral hazard" if you don't know what I'm talking about.

Oh dear. Three words: can, worms, can-opener...

Glad the noggin is in one piece though.

I kinda opened the can on purpose!

But igamogam, my head, in a helmet, hit a pavement and wall hard. The helmet is cracked, my head isn't. (And if you're worried the pavement and wall are fine...) As I say, 'tis your choice, good luck to both lid wearers and non-lid wearers but I know which team I'm on from here on in.

I assumed as much Robspeding.

There's rather a drawn out discussion on the subject here too: http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/news/article/court-judgment-has-major-implications-for-cyclists-20250

I'm in your team too.

Sorry to hear you've had a crash. I take it you'll be signing the deisel petition on the no10 website now ;-)

Hmm...

igamogam;

What you also have to remember is that the VAST majority of regular, enthusiast bikers and cyclists use a helmet. Therefore, if theres (totally made-up numbers here - just for statistics) 10,000 guys and girls that wear helmets, and 1,000 that don't. Say 1% of them crash - thats only 10 injuries for the non-helmet crew, but 100 for the pro-helmet bunch.

Go figure...

AND I'd dare say most people who wear a helmet push harder, because they are more serious, dedicated cyclists too. I NEVER see any 12 year olds riding on the local park on BMX's wearing helmets, but I've NEVER seen ( / saw, whatever) serious roadies, or MTB's WITHOUT a helmet.

Now, I know I could be wrong, BUT, I have more than a sneaking suspiscion I'm not... And thats before the evidence that wearing a helmet MAY help prevent injuries.

downfader - give me the link. I'm on it! In fact. I fancy a campaign in mag.

@ igamogam: you're begging to be flamed!

Seriously though, I've worn a helmet since they were made compulsory here in Australia on 1st July 1990, and I'd feel naked without one. Every pro racer wears one. I think back to riding in the UK without one and I shiver. When you're coming down a mountain at 80+ KMH with about 2 square inches of rubber on the road, it's ridiculous to not wear safety equipment.

Of course, you may be doing the World a favour by removing yourself from the gene pool...!

I really should know better but just a bit more in response to igamogam...As a bike journo who can get free lids I'm happy to squeeze them and I'm yet to break one just by simple squishing - sorry. And anyway, if I'm correct then that's partly the point of a helmet – it is designed to deform as that's how it absorbs the shock. Oh and the reasons Pros have to wear helmets? At Paris-Nice in 2003 Andrei Kivilev collided with a couple of riders, hit the ground and fell into a coma. He died the next day. He wasn't wearing a helmet and it was this incident that led to the UCI imposing it's rule about helmets.

I can see the value of wearing helmets, I wear one on my mountain bike (even though I have had 2 spills BECAUSE of my helmet), when snowboarding or skiing and if I feel at there is higher than usual risk on the road. I was an early adopter hard shell helmet wearer, raced in a helmet for 14 years and enforced helmet wear as a race official. I just don't see how wearing a helmet makes cycling safer when statistically and personally what I see is the direct opposite.

If it is ever made compulsory I just won't ride much any more and I know so will thousands of other people. Who will lose out? Cyclist, there will be even fewer and those left will be even more marginalised and in danger.

As regards ANSI/ASTM I agree there has been progress but in Europe these standards are not enforced and you don't really know what you are getting any more because some manufacturers don't actually comply with the standards because of costs.

There is direct link between high helmet use and high death rate. (see: http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1079.htm). The countries with the fewest helmet wearers have the most cyclists and the safest roads. (http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1012.html). There is plenty of statistics and hospital records out there that says just the complete opposite of what is logical. Just explain it...

Call me cynical, but just how much pressure/backhanders did it take for the UCI to enforce helmet use on pros and remember how few wanted to wear them...?

I still stand by what I personally know to be true, all the folk that I know that have been killed wore helmets, I don't know anyone who was killed whilst not wearing one.

You can berate me for being ignorant or illogical or just plain stupid but are you sure?

From my knowledge of statistics, unless everyone in the argument understands and agrees with where the numbers are coming from, the stats are meaningless as I'm pretty sure that both sides can pull out references to legitimate numbers to support their arguments.

So ignoring stats we are left with common sense. Common sense tells me that the potential upside of helmet wearing significantly outweighs the downside. The road is a very unpredictable environmet and it would be extremely easy to fall and hit one's head on something unsuitable - which could have fairly nasty repercussions. A helmet reduces the chances of bad repercussions, which seems like good common sense to me.

ps. I have had a serious head injury. I am recovered probably as much as I'm going to recover. Trust me, it is nasty.

Gotta love a helmet debate!

I think both sides are a wee bit polarised, but its fairly obvious that there is strong evidence for and against helmets and good arguments on both sides. There hasnt been a good meta-analyses yet either. Although i thought the 'safety in numbers' and 'helmets reduce numbers' trends were pretty consistent and powerful. I'd be interested to see the outliers to those.

There is of course overwhelming evidence that not cycling is very very very dangerous and that this evidence should always overule any minor hazards like head injuries, which hardly kills anyone in comparison to diabetes, heart disease cancer etc

That goes back to individual choice or as roastiecp says 'common sense'. The problem with 'common sense' is that it is not common its individual. So my 'common sense' says the complete opposite to Roastiecp. My common sense says i'm safer without, because i'm more cautious without one (but i wear one when conditions are definelty hazardous)

Yep, you just can't beat a good skid-lid discussion!

To Roastiecp: I see your point however I had a 40km/h plus head-butt/crash when my forks sheared off. 22 stitches a broken nose, whiplash and a lower lip that had to be re attached to my jaw (plus all the other ops to sort stuff out later). The first thing the doctor in the A&E said was (& I quote) "Let's see... Oooh - you are a mess, good job you weren't wearing a helmet, you'd have broken your neck".

I'm not comparing accidents and I feel bad for anyone who has a bad spill but it cuts both ways sometimes.

To cycledad2: I really wish there were truly impartial and clear statistics on this subject. Then I'd shut my trap. :-)

Sorry forgot about this. Was going to post it last night but have been a bit run down lately.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/StopDieselSpills/

The guy appeared on another cycle forum, hit 8k motorbike was written off on a RAB and he decided enough is enough. Seemed like a cool bloke too and tragic how the motorbike ended up. I'm sure he'd appreciate the link being published in the mag. :-)

Hubby is a regular on this site and thought it was amusing and educational for me to see and read the results of your crash, after having a minor one myself today. Glad you're doing ok. I'm a bit battered and bruised after mis-negotiating a curb on my way to work, helmetless! I must admit that I do treat the journey between my kids primary school and the office as a bit of a time trial - and find myself getting annoyed at having to break behind slow moving traffic. I choose to ride without a helmet (but don't allow the kids that choice) purely 'cause I like the wind through my hair!! After seeing your sorry face and feeling the 'egg' on my temple from today's tumble, I'm going to adopt the safer approach and wear my helmet while in traffic - at least until the icy conditions improve.

But, your debate about skid-lids does remind me of my motor-cycling days. I feel it's true that you DO take more risks and ride faster when you know you're wearing protective gear. I regularly used to push myself when in full leathers and wearing a decent helmet (which, infact, did save my life for sure once during a crash on a fab corner at 70mph). I definately used to ride slower and not take the corners so tightly when not in my leathers.

It's got to be a matter of personal choice though, once you're old enough to know the facts and risks. The statistics offered up in the debate didn't mean a lot to me but I'd like this research to be done where we know there are high numbers of bike riders in urban places, like China, for instance.

@igamogam: I'd hardly trust a doc who didn't even witness the accident happening as an expert on the physics of the accident...

Accidents are at best unpredictable, and extremely difficult even for experts to piece back together.

I came off at about twice that speed. Skinned most of my body including my face (hence the nick), but not even a scratch on my helmet. Clearly in this case the helmet made no difference whatsoever. A week later my best mate ran into the side of a car that pulled out from a junction, est speed 30km/h. Connected the car with his head, knocked him clean unconscious. Helmet was trashed. Did it save his life or make the damage worse? Probably debatable, but common sense still tells me...

ps. Agree with choice and will always support the right to ride hatless.

I can understand how in, say Australia, where helmets are obligatory, there could be a rump of pissed-off libertarians who manipulate data to argue against what they perceive as an infringement of their liberty. But in countries where helmet use is optional, it staggers me every time I read someone trying to argue that helmets aren't a good thing.

It's very simple: don't wear one if you don't want to. Preaching about them being bad (with, of course, no evidence to prove this - "oh you'll get rotational brain injury" is a theory which as far as I can tell has never been even anecdotally backed up and is only potentially pertinent in a tiny minority of very specific accidents, and "oh you'll ride more aggressively" - uh, no I won't, thanks very much, and anyone who does has themselves, not the helmet, to blame) is at best misguided and selfish and at worst irresponsible and malicious.

I've now had six spills on my bike and I've not hit my head once, and if I ride the rest of my cycling career and never hit my head, I'll have lost nothing. If I do hit my head then I am 100% certain I want to be wearing a helmet.

What I REALLY want to see is some realistic and proper testing of cycle helmets in the same way they test cars with dummies. Nothing has ever been done like that so why should anyone take a helmet use seriously. I wear one and even I am sceptical, and I've said before that I wear it to keep the sun out me eyes and because of the vents.

Having said all of that I'm still with Biondino here, I suppose theres the case of the "what ifs" sometimes when I wear them.

I wear a helmet cause i ride like a nutter. I've always ridden like a nutter and i used to fall off a lot until i got good at it. It could be argued that knee pads and gloves are as useful - certainly i had regular lacerated palms as a kid until i founf out about track mitts. And i've got scars on my knees...

Perhaps on a pootle along the promenade in the summer i won't bother with the lid. Bombing through traffic at 25mph? Lid please...

i had a big off from my mountain bike last summer(over bars off boardwalk on cannock chase) 13 stones landing on its

head made a cracking noise that made my blood run cold!!! it was my BELL helmet not my neck giving up the fight.as a

45 year old dad of 2 young kids that lid was the best 40 quid ive ever spent.

i also hate big government and the nanny state with a passion. life should be free to have its choices.

CHOOSE WISELY FOLKS!!!!

I used to regularly commute an 18 mile round trip, with no helmet, mostly because of the 'it'll never happen to me and anyway helmet wearers look really uncool' kind of thinking . Recently I've married and had a child. My (new) wife suggested I wear a helmet and I had to agree totally with her. We now live in a very hilly area & my morning commute takes me down a mile long hill where speeds of up to 40mph are easily reached. As a father & husband its a responsible decision I have to take & now wouldn't cycle anywhere without the lid. Fathers, mothers, husbands, wives...think about your dependants.

Sorry to hear you had that crash Rob.... but hey, all cyclists will and you seem to be okay so its all good.

I'm gonna join the debate here and say that I am firmly in the helmet wearing camp. It doesn't matter if they are made compulsory or not, im still gonna wear one. I think it's especially important if you are commuting, simply because drivers are reminded that your head is fragile. It's a dangerous world for cyclists, so shouldn't safety be first? I've had a few crashes myself, (haven't we all?) and i have to say they were quite exciting. But i really don't think i'd be here if it wasn't for my old helmet.

As a last regarding compulsory safety equipment, are there many people who refuse to drive because wearing a seatbelt is compulsory? I don't think there's a difference.

Helmet wearing isn't uncool. Perhaps in the days i'm too young to remember, they were bad, but now, tale a look at the Giro Monza or the Bell Volt, or any Catlike helmet. They look kinda cool.

I don't believe in compulsory helmet wearing laws but i think it's silly to go out on the roads without a lid.