I was knocked off my bike 7 years ago . fortunately i was wearing a helmet which took the full brunt of me landing on my head . The cycle helmet split in 2 . i would never consider cycling with out one.

My theory is that those who argue against safety headwear have already taken a few solid blows to the head.

Sorry but these helmet debates make me laugh. I had a car drive into the back of my bike and knock me about ten feet forward, the bike flipped and I bounced along the floor around another six feet hitting my head all the time. Then a bus drove over the top of me, but that's neither here nor there.

The thing was I was wearing a good bike helmet. My head wasn't damaged. So I put that down to the helmet and nothing else.

Funnily enough I was lit up like a Xmas tree, two lights front and back, one steady one flashing. Hi viz jacket, white helmet, etc. And passing a lit up bus. The driver that hit me claimed all sorts including my lights were off and he just didn't see me. And the police accepted that.

My advice is, get a helmet. Put the odds in your favour. :smiley:

no evidence that helmets help much

they probably cause more accidents by restricting vision & people fiddling with them ie lifting one hand off the steering wheel

no evidence that helmets help much

they probably cause more accidents by restricting vision & people fiddling with them ie lifting one hand off the steering wheel

I thought wearing a helmet out​ can cause blindness not brain damage! (sorry)

them damn steering wheels need two hands at all times, don't be fiddling with your helmet

ta so be checking them out feel the need to wear 1 now roads are so uneven HNY

"I'm always amazed how many people dont wear a helmet when cycling, even though £12 can save you from at best an instant death at worst serious brain damage"

You would be also 'amazed' at the lack of evidence supporting your assertion.

it's the riders choice, it seems to be the local chavs who ride without helmets round my way, hopefully improve the gene pool , the end of the day if you crash and hit your head on something I personally would prefer to have a helmet on than not , and imho parents should provide young children with helmets (kids skull are soft)

Just remember any compo payment for injury will ask was a helmet worn, and the payout will be significantly lower if no helmet was worn.

Agree with a broken arm but a Head injury no helmet can reduce a comp payment by upto 80%

I would like it to be compulsory for people under 16, to have to wear a helmet on a bicycle.
Some of the comments above are verging on the idiotic.

I was knocked off my bike 7 years ago . fortunately i was wearing a helmet which took the full brunt of me landing on my head . The cycle helmet split in 2 . i would never consider cycling with out one.

​Does this happen? It's not compulsory to wear a helmet so why would not wearing one affect the compensation? If I'm not wearing elbow pads and I'm involved in an accident that fractures my elbow, will any compensation be reduced? Similarly, if I sustain a head injury while driving and am not wearing a helmet should I expect less compensation? It doesn't sound right although insurance companies will try anything!

For the cost of a few overpriced coffees on a cyclists commute, is it worth risking your head and the devious nature of the insurance companies in compensation terms?

I'm talking serious injuries cases were a full time carer maybe required etc.
In these cases yes, wearing a helmet or not will have a big bearing on compensation calculations.

Cricketers are not required to wear boxes but it's the chance you take..
Remember stupid people don't always realise they are stupid

Imho under 16 compulsory, and for adults on the spot fines for those who choose not to wear helmets, as they says it's their own choice. Make a financial penalty.

I don't buy it. Do the same calculations affect drivers?

The tricky thing with helmets is that they clearly help to protect your head if you have an accident, for example if you fall off your bike. In the Tour de France, nobody would dare riding without one.

However, in traffic, the effect is much less clear. It seems that both the cyclist and motorists compensate by taking higher risks. So I guess the conclusion is that you should wear a helmet, but that is not an excuse to play Mr Invincible.

PS: Good deal, but the checkout process at Decathlon can only be described as painful. Why would they need my DoB anyway?

Sorry but these helmet debates make me laugh. I had a car drive into the back of my bike and knock me about ten feet forward, the bike flipped and I bounced along the floor around another six feet hitting my head all the time. Then a bus drove over the top of me, but that's neither here nor there.

The thing was I was wearing a good bike helmet. My head wasn't damaged. So I put that down to the helmet and nothing else.

Funnily enough I was lit up like a Xmas tree, two lights front and back, one steady one flashing. Hi viz jacket, white helmet, etc. And passing a lit up bus. The driver that hit me claimed all sorts including my lights were off and he just didn't see me. And the police accepted that.

My advice is, get a helmet. Put the odds in your favour. :smiley:

Drivers don't wear helmets

Cyclists don't wear helmets. What kind of argument is that? What is the probablity of head injury for a average driver as compared to a cyclist, per hour spent in the traffic?

Car drivers have airbags, and a metal cages around them.
cyclists are vulnerable whether cautious or not, brake too hard on a wet road or pushed sideways into a pothole/metal grate, taken out by a car coming out of a side road, and eventually you will fall off / get knocked off.

So, what's the probability? If insurance company refuses/reduces compensation because cyclist should have done better at protecting themselves and worn a helmet, then the same logic could be applied to drivers, pedestrians and other road users. Helmets are not compulsory in this country, so unless it is clearly mentioned in the policy and agreed by policy holder, I don't see how insurance company could get away with this kind of targeted boll%#s.

Please, do me a favour and stop scaremongering. Cycling is very safe activity. Health benefits outweigh risks by a huge margin. There is much more to road safety than a few millimetres of styrofoam.

My theory is that those who argue against safety headwear have already taken a few solid blows to the head.

Do you ride a bike?
This week I have had dogs run out on me, skidded in mud, skidded 90 degrees on a greasy wet tarmac, Icy ground, ducked low branches, dropped off foot high steps, ridden over rubble, gone around corners with lose gravel, been over taken by far too many cars and big lorries who do not understand the highway codes advisory giving a cars width when overtaking horse and cycles, Had cars pull out on me. Had cars overtake me to then turn left..
I am not scaremongering. Cycling can be a risky activity and for that reason I choose to wear a helmet,
i really can't understand the reason why people don't want to wear a helmet, it's the same with car drivers refusing to wear seat belts, as with your story about a cyclist being told they'd have died with a helmet, a guy I knew from school got **** drove his car into a tree, doctor told him if he had a seat belt on he'd be dead. Is that a reason not to wear a seatbelt ?

There is evidence to suggest that by wearing a helmet you increase the damage you obtain.

From a personal perspective I wear a helmet and think its dangerous not too. I had a high speed crash and went over the bars, doing a sort of forward roll after landing on my head. Split the helmet completely in 2 and actually bending my frame beyond repair. My head had no inkrueis unlike the rash that my arms, legs and shoulders suffered.

Yep theirs evidence out their that car drivers give cyclist more room if they have no helmet on,
This debate will always get trolls arguing not to wear one, as my reasons above, I've had many chances of slipping and cracking my head, concussion this week.
Definitely prefer a cheap £12 helmet to take the hit than my head anyway, at one mile an hour or 30

Risk is a part of life. Some activities are safer than others. I'm not sure what kind of riding you do, but I spent about 200 - 300 hours a year cycling in a major city and rarely experience what you describe (apart from mountain biking, but it's a totally different kettle of fish). In most accidents cyclists injure parts of the body not covered by helmet: arms, legs (and also face!) I don't wear helmet in the city, because statistically the risks are extremely low as long as you ride defensively. Helmet may save your head in case of an accident, but will not prevent the accident from happening (and some studies show that helmet might in fact increase the risk of having one - check risk compensation). Stay safe in 2017!

I suppose the "no helmet" guys have similar arguments for not wearing helmets riding motorbikes?
I've hit the tarmac riding both cycle and motorbike and the helmet did it's job on all 4 occasions. That's enough evidence for me.

Yep I ride a lot of moorland, steep tech trails, Woodland, but also xc farm tracks canal towpaths, greenways etc. Mainly mountain bike but
I'm planning to commute this year once or twice a week , I see daily how even defensive riders are at risk of idiot drivers and agressive riders who pose even a greater risk to themselves, West Yorkshire is full of very busy roads that have not had any major redesigns since they were first created hundreds of years ago. Not Wearing a helmet is not an option for me, I ride out on the road for an hour at lunch time when I'm at home I am forever being overtaken on narrow roads and having vehicles move by within a few feet, last year in 4K Kms I have been cut up by taxis pulling over in front of me or turning left in my path, I ride defensively and I like to make eye contact with drivers to ensure they see me.

Doesn't look like our polar opposite views are going to change, as you say ride safe.
Ps. I've never understood downhill bikers not wearing gloves , as you say hands are the first thing to touch the floor

http://www.cyclistsdefencefund.org.uk/cycle-helmets-and-contributory-negligence/recent-cases

A bit of a lengthy linked article but in essences judges in this country have to consider if not wearing a helmet contributed to the injuries, they would not automatically make a deduction for compensation based on not wearing a helmet if one would not have made a difference to the injury. For example, if your leg got crushed by a car and had to be amputated, clearly a helmet would never have prevented that, and therefore it would not be logical to reduce your compensation for that injury. However, running a case to a trial is very expensive for solicitors, who have to bear the cost of a case themselves in a 'no win no fee' agreement with a claimant. To exploit claimant solicitors' reluctance to go to trial, insurers will try low-ball offers and making deductions on the basis of not wearing a helmet, even if it cannot be conclusively proven that wearing one would have helped.

Interesting comment that not wearing a helmet leads to cars giving cyclists more room. I've a better solution: buy a cheap action camera from ebay / amazon (£15ish) and mount it on your vented helmet, preferably pointing backwards. Yes, you look like a bit of a pillock, but as I'm already an overweight 45 yr old man dressed in lycra, it's no big deal. What is amazing is how much extra room you are afforded when drivers realise they are being filmed. I've also got a camera on the handlebars facing forward too. And yes, there are arguments that the camera or mounts could do some damage but the cheap ones don't have particularly strong mounts and they will break off way before they can penetrate your skull. And if there is an accident, you've got some photographic evidence to back yourself up.

Cold, solely due to the patronising "I'm always amazed how many people dont wear a helmet when cycling" deal introduction.
It's personal choice, you're probably "amazed" when you see a pedestrian at night not wearing high viz too?

If you're going to wear a helmet when cycling, get one that meets Snell B-90 or B-95 and provides a meaningful level of protection, unlike the majority which only meet the significantly less stringent EN1078 standard. There's a list of helmets which meet B-90 or B-95 at http://www.smf.org/certlist/std_B-90A_B-95A_B-90C_B-95C.

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2023.pdf is well worth reading, as it also offers advice on effective use, care and maintenance of cycle helmets.

Yeah, no evidence at all... Unless you count this systematic review of 22 studies, which clearly outlines the benefits (63–88% reduction in the risk of head, brain and severe brain injury for all ages of bicyclists compared to non-helmet wearers).

"Helmet may save your head in case of an accident,"

You're arguing against helmets but that line is what it comes down to.

I came off my bike a few days ago, broke and fractured my leg, shredded my arm hand and hip. Came off at about 20mph.

I've always been really lucky with the few falls/scrapes I've had over the years, mainly when off roading. I've seen a guy take a very serious head injury from coming off a bike (don't know if he survived), even that didn't persuade me to wear a helmet. I found picking up a bit more of a serious injury has given me a new appreciation of how fragile the body is - I like to learn the hard way.

Never been a fan of helmets but for some reason my opinion has changed.

That's in the event of a crash. It doesn't take into account whether a crash is more likely if you're wearing a helmet (which several studies seem to indicate). Wearing a helmet seems a sensible precaution to me - and I usually (but not always) do so. But we shouldn't manipulate the stats to support a particular point of view.

Speedy recovery spaceinvader
Go and try some on I've got a couple of helmets I can't even tell I've got it on, it's that light, usually when I set off I have to touch my head to check it's on , they were £45 so very cheap

who needs a helmet anyway? Waste of money. just don't use earphones or phones on the road for safety.

Number one on the list is Rivara and Thompsons' work, which has been discredited due to fundamental methodological errors and even authors distanced themselves from it. Please consider your sources carefully.

Following this logic, pedestrians and drivers should wear helmets too. May I point your attention to the fact that there is a comma, not a full stop at the (abrupt) end of the quote?

If you go out cycling without your helmet your a dick. :confused: . Lots of heat from me. I remember people moons ago saying seat belts were dangerous.

Tell that to all the people who have fallen off their bikes and ended up with cracked helmets instead of cracked skulls.

there's no comparison

I remember some safety chief in London also saying helmets for cyclists were largely a waste of time, they might stop a few scratches if you fall off but they won't stop a lorry running over your head

Cycle helmets are useless, says brain surgeon
Leading neurosurgeon tells the Hay Festival cycling helmets are 'too flimsy' to be beneficial
A leading neurosurgeon has controversially claimed that cyclists who wear helmets are wasting their time.
Henry Marsh, who works at St George’s Hospital in Tooting, London, said that many of his patients who have been involved in bike accidents have been wearing helmets that were ‘too flimsy’ to be beneficial.
He made the comments while speaking at the Hay Festival during a discussion with Ian McEwan, whose 2005 novel Saturday featured a neurosurgeon.
He cited evidence from the University of Bath that suggests that wearing a helmet may even put cyclists at greater risk. The research showed that drivers get around 3 inches closer to cyclists who wear helmets because they perceive them as safer.
He said: “I ride a bike and I never wear a helmet. In the countries where bike helmets are compulsory there has been no reduction in bike injuries whatsoever.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/10866273/Cycle-helmets-are-useless-says-brain-surgeon.html

Remind me to take a parachute next time I fly..

(uninformed/ ruder term) people think cycle helmets give you similar protection to motorcycle helmets

completely false

If you are a rock climber would you wear a helmet , you slip of the rock face you'll likely die anyway, what about BASE jumping/ parachuting, you land on your feet,
Horse riding wear a helmet,

Pedestrians aren't on the road going however many miles per hour. Drivers are in a big metal cage built with safety in mind. Entirely different.

​Also, the text after the comma is a different argument.

Are pedestrians and drivers not involved in road accidents and immune to head injuries? Could you back this up with some statistical data, please?

A pedestrian is walking, not cycling at 5-35kmph, drivers are sat in cars and at no risk of falling off their seat/saddle like a cyclist has.

Like it or not cyclist are at a far greater risk than other road users. (Small, harder to see, not to mention car drivers have distractions of mobile phones and entertainment, sat nav systems)
A car is designed to take the impact of a collision, a person on 2 wheels will likely hit the deck.

As you have mentioned previously risk needs to be managed, I wear a helmet to manage the risk of bashing my head on a foreign object. I do not wear a full face mask mountain bike helmet as I do not intend to ride extreme downhill riding with big drop offs and jumps, but at the same time, I am at risk of being struck by tree branches or slipping in mud, ice, gravel , hence I wear helmet, knee pads and gloves..

Statistics on the subject are likely to exclude non reported accidents or minor head bumps or crashes that did not require hospital treatment, namely because the person had a helmet on and it did what it was designed to do. take the impact, hence an A&E visit was not deemed neccassary by those involved.

So, they are not involved in road accidents and are immune to head injuries?


Please share real world evidence that supports your assumption. The data I've seen contradicts statement above, but unfortunately is based on statistics which you seem to disregard.

I can't believe Muppets are arguing on here, my stepdaughter came off her bicycle and went headfirst into a wall. She was airlifted to hospital and had fractured 2 vertebrae in her neck, a shard of which very nearly went into the spinal cord. If she hadn't been wearing a helmet she would mostly likely not be here, the helmet took a good whack and is similar to the one on sale here, its cracked in a few placed and there's a delve where you can see the main impact. looking at it if her skull had hit the wall it would have cracked like a egg, the neurosurgeon said it would be a very different story if she wasn't wearing a helmet.

I don't think myself and most other sane people need to believe any daft internet monkeys telling folks its safer not to wear one. :laughing:

Rant over :smiley:

Do you seriously ride a bike or have you recently fallen off a bike and got concussion from knocking your head

When I seriously ride my bike (in the mountains) I wear a helmet. However, most of time it's not needed as I'm engaged in commuting - extremely safe and healthy activity that statistically requires several lifetimes to knock one's head.

Extremely safe commute, I see the way car drivers treat cyclist in West Yorkshire it is anything but safe.

I'm pretty sure most (all?) of the people who argue against bike helmets (with all their 'lack of evidence' this and 'no studies' that) will not personally have been involved in a cycle collision that resulted in a head injury. I have!
So here's the question, based on my own experience, that I use to challenge people about whether they really don't believe bike helmets offer a level of protection: We're going to ram you, head first and at about 20mph, into the back of this stationary bus...would you like a helmet to wear or not?
Sure, there will be some for sake of 'winning' the argument that pretend they wouldn't take a helmet...but frankly I don't believe them!

You have got some strange understanding of what cycling is all about. Most folks don't ram buses most of the time. However, there is a non-zero chance that what you propose might happen to a cyclist. There is also non-zero chance that the ceiling falls down in your house. Let me then drop a brick on your head while you are reading this message. Frankly I don't believe you would like to sit in front of your computer with no helmet on. Let's embrace paranoia!

Seems a good deal as my helmet is getting pretty old.

As for the debate about wearing or not wearing I would not go out without one. I have cycled for a LONG time and the fist helmets were those skull cap ones and although they did not offer the protection today's helmets offer it was something. As one person said "Even a cap will keep your brains in one place should the worst happen" I think its the "Better than nothing" idea BUT you will always find people who want to do the opposite of other people. It could be not wearing seat belts, drinking and driving, wearing black clothes when cycling :confused: or anything else. Its peoples choice and each person is different - thankfully

Eh? Go have another read - at no point did I say that this is what cycling is 'all about'.


Indeed. If it happened most of the time then stopping cycling would be a more appropriate solution than wearing a helmet.


Most folks don't get in serious car crashes most of the time...if it was legal to do so would you recommend not wearing a seatbelt? Or not bothering with airbags?
Most people don't have lots of bed things happen most of the time. The fact that they still take precautionary measures against bad things happening through protective equipment or insurance isn't a sign of paranoia...it's common sense.

The idea behind my hypothetical question is to uncover whether anti-helmet proponents really do believe helmets are useless by removing the uncertainty of an accident happening...i.e. if you knew for sure you were about to be in an accident would you want a helmet or not. It doesn't take a scientific study to realise that wearing a helmet is a good idea if you sustain a head injury. If the anti-helmet contingent could just admit the obvious and acknowledge that they're happy to take that risk anyway it would move the discussion on a bit!

Your whole argument for helmets hinges on this.


No. Common sense would be to check the statistical data, read up studies done on the subject and assess the risk, not base the choice on a single incident with absolutely no scientific value. As I stated before, my friend has an accident and was later told by A+E doctor that her injuries would have much worse if she wore a helmet. All deceased riders in TdF in recent years wore helmets. Although these don't matter much, the incidents show that helmets may not help and in some cases make things even worse. But I digress.


If you want to hear this, then here we go: yes, I'm happy to take the risk! Just as I'm sitting now in front of the computer and accept some miniscule risk of a sudden ceiling failure. Your argument, although logical, is based on a false presumption. The risks are not completely unknown and based on statistical data we can compare relative risks of getting head injury while cycling, driving, walking, having a shower etc. If you assume that accident will happen, then by your logic, you should be wearing a helmet while sitting in front of the computer (and while undertaking millions of other activities).

I slipped in the shower a few years ago and banged my head. Luckily I survived, but now I always wear a helmet while showering. It's common sense :-)

When I was 14 I rammed my bike into the back of a stationary car. I was doing considerably more than 20mph and not wearing a helmet.

I hurt my leg quite badly (I have no idea how bad the damage to the car was).

What I learnt from this is that I should look where I'm going and not ram into the back of stationary vehicles at any speed.

I wear a helmet anyway. No idea if it's of serious benefit or not.

I have fallen off my bike for the last 2 weeks running (I should probably give up!), but it was mountain biking on a weekend and I know for a fact I would have had a hospital trip without my helmet, but because of it I was able to get up and carry on.

Most important thing to buy when cycling imo

This doesn't look too derpy on my tiny head, and fits comfortably. Lots of holes for air to access and dry out my sweat. Clever adjusting strap holds without chafing.

Are you trying to make some sort of condom/bike helmet analogy?

ROSPA: "Head injuries, ranging from fatal skull fractures and brain damage to minor concussion and cuts, are very common injuries to cyclists. Hospital data shows that over 40% of cyclists, and 45% of child cyclists, suffer head injuries. A study of 116 fatal cyclist accidents in London and rural areas found over 70% of the cyclist fatalities in London had moderate or serious head injuries in London, and over 80% of those killed in collisions on rural roads."

A computational simulation study of the influence of helmet wearing on head injury risk in adult cyclists: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24005027

out of interest how did the doctor know that a helmet would have made it worse?
did they find out the exact impact angle speed etc then proceed to fit a helmet to the guy and smash him with an equivalent force using a hammer before seeing how much of a change occurred to the injury?

Here are some other quotes from that article:
"This may be his opinion but there are a lot more neurosurgeons and surgeons who would counter that argument"
"A Department of Transport study has shown that helmets could prevent 10-16 per cent of cyclist fatalities"
"James Cracknell, the Olympic rowing gold medalist, was nearly killed while cycling in 2010 after he was hit by a petrol tanker.
He has said that he only survived the accident because he had been wearing a helmet and has described those who do not wear one as 'selfish' as their actions can impact their loved ones"

You're not quite following how this works Brilly....if you're in favour of helmets then every word you say has to be backed by an international scientific study (even if it's bleeding obvious). If you oppose use of helmets then any third party hearsay and flippant comments about wearing helmets in the shower are perfectly admissable.

[end of heavy sarcasm...just letting you know if you didn't catch it] :wink:

Too bad the access to full article is not free. I wonder how they simulated risk compensation.

No wonder that A+E admissions show that head injuries are common. The same report you're citing from, says that vast majority of cycling injuries is not reported. These can be dealt with using basic first aid. Therefore hospital data is a very poor representation of all injuries.

Let's put things in perspective. In 2014 average Briton rode 58 miles and spent 6.9 hours on a bike. That's nearly 3.8 billion miles and almost 450 million cycle-hours a year for the whole population. Therefore death occurs every 33.4 million miles ridden or every 4 million hours spent cycling, on average. Serious injury happens every 1.1 million miles or every 133 thousands hours. I consider this very safe. About 2/3 of Britons don't ride bikes at all, mainly due to overinflated impression of dangers involved. Heavy promotion of helmets unfortunately reinforces this paranoia.

No idea, experience perhaps? This has just the same amount of scientific value as "helmet saved my life" story.

Most rock climbers wear helmets.

Any rock climber who hasn't slipped on a rock face isn't really trying. Yet most of them are still alive.

Have you ever been rock climbing? You do know they use ropes?

exactly, your point is that the posts are nonsense when you are just spouting the equivalent nonsense
bit pointless but maybe you can shout louder or stamp your feet a bit

I'm glad we can now move past useless posts and happy to hear your argument.

This debate most certainly highlights the "Paradox" of the bicycle safety helmet.

Went in today and tried one on, the straps seem to be weirdly orientated so they are twisting as they come to your chin. Just bear that in mind. Great price otherwise

Helmet arrived battered without any protection like a box or even bubble wrap. Absolutely filthy.

Will not be buying from them again.

Great price but shocking service.

Thanks, ordered.

Mine arrived in carrier bag as protection against the knocks in transit.

Looked battered. Defeats the purpose but Decathlon customer service really didn't give a hoot and blamed the warehouse staff.

Made them pay for the return postage.

Good price but atrocious product & customer care.

Did you have a helmet on?

Of course I did, I can't figure a valid reason for not wearing one. Never sure why people object such as the trolls above