...to not make my 5 and 3 year old wear a cycle helmet?

[blindasabatenburg]

Am I failing to protect them sufficiently? Nobody wore helmets when we were kids and I don't recall anyonr suffering a serious head injury, though we all came off from time to time.

They could just as easily fall from a climbing frame at the park, but nobody would insist on a helmet for the park!!!

I can't believe, given the compelling and heartbreaking stories on here, that anybody could question the value of helmets.

For those of you who have suffered horrendous losses and injuries - I am so sorry. I for one, have read every word you've typed. I can't imagine who horrendous this must have been for you.

Whilst we are helmet wearers, I confess there have been occasions where I haven't be meticulous in checking that the helmets are properly fitted. From now on, I will ensure that my kids aren't injured because I failed to learn from your awful situations.

Not wearing a bicycle helmet when cycling is irresponsible, wether you are an adult or a child. In Australia it is illegal to ride a bike without one!

But how could we know exactly what might have happened had the person not been wearing a helmet?

With some you can. Eg a head first collision with a tree where the helmet breaks and the wearer has no damage.

It's reasonable to assume that a head first collision would normally result in some injury.

What sort of person refuses to cycle just because they have to wear a helmet?

But how could we know exactly what might have happened had the person not been wearing a helmet?

With some you can. Eg a head first collision with a tree where the helmet breaks and the wearer has no damage.

It's reasonable to assume that a head first collision would normlly result in some injury.

a friends 6 year old fell off his bike, while cycling on the pavemen. he was concussed, incoherent and in and out of consciousness for an hour or so.
the helmet was damaged and the paramedics said it was a good job his head was protected.

he made a full recovery.

I understand that in some cases it can cause more injury, but I bet these incidents are far and few between all the other cases where a helmet saved someone's life or simply just reduced injury.

why wouldn't anyone want to protect their kids and teach them to be sensible about safety is beyond me.

VixZen ROFL @ parachute article!

Doctors are fond of tellling cyclists that a helmet probably saved their life/prevented more serious injury. I might take their word more seriously if said cyclist was actually wearing one in the first place!

I think it is ridiulous to suggest it is inconvenient to take a bike helmet out on so many trips. It is lazy and I do feel judgemental when I hear things like this (and don't care if I do), my friends favourite about her DD is that it is only a 5 minute ride to school so she doesn't need one.

At the end of the day we are talking about a 3 and 5 YO who are probably cycling on the pavement (slowly compared to an adult) the majority of the time so the most likely injury would be minor however if they fell and hit their head then this may prevent a more serious injury. If you google it ALL the information suggests that helmets do prevent these kinds of injuries to the head. It is obvious that if there is a massive dent/crack in a helmet after a child hitting their head must have prevented the same happening to their head!

If you are hit hard by a car at higher speeds then your injuries are likely to be much more than head injuries so maybe the helmet is not so useful then but you could also get hit by someone opening a car door (as my DH did) and you could easily fall and hit your head.

The rotational injuries that may or may not be made worse by wearing a helmet are mentioned frequently but I googled it and found that every site said there is no real evidence to back this up (happy to be shown where there is hard evidence of this)

DS fell off his bike when he was riding relatively slowly in the park (fast walking pace) and some twat called their dog over and it ran right in front of the bike. You don't need to be going fast to lose control and fall off a bike.

It sounds like a lot if the 'arguments' against wearing one is bloody-mindedness from the 'you can't make me' brigade.

"But how could we know exactly what might have happened had the person not been wearing a helmet?"

In our case, the neuro-surgeon had the helmet so he could see exactly where the impact was and guage the approximate force. It was on the right side of his head, above his ear. The helmet was very thick there and was completely crushed. The neuro-surgeon was absolutely confident that had his skull sustained the full force of the impact in that location ds would have died when he hit the ground.

I don't care about statistics, they can say anything you want them to. I care that I hugged my son before I left for work this morning and he grunted "love you mum" back at me.

www.headway.org.uk/position-statements/cycle-helmets.aspx
Headway is the head injury charity.
My husband is a doctor in emergency medicine and has seen the most devastating injuries from people being thrown off bikes, not wearing helmets. One of the worse was someone cycling into the back of a stationery van with no helmet. Now needing 24 hr care.....
We always wear helmets.you never know (literally) whats around the corner.

Not wearing a bicycle helmet when cycling is irresponsible, wether you are an adult or a child. In Australia it is illegal to ride a bike without one

Which is why very few people cycle in Australia, which in a country with spiralling obesity is disastrous.

There is no doubt that helmet laws kill more than they could possibly save because they deter people from cycling (some stop, more never start), with consequent impacts on western sedentary diseases.

Many years ago a nine year old girl fell off her bike in the park in front of our house. She wasn't wearing a helmet. She was killed outright. Perhaps a freak accident, but the end result was the same.

My father heard the commotion and looked out to see the girl's uncle carrying her body to her home. He was obviously distraught and in shock, so never thought to leave her there. My dad never got over seeing that sight. I rememember coming home from work and seeing the yellow chalk marks ofn the footpaths in the park, made by the accident investigation team. It was horrific to think they were there because of such a tragic accident.

Anway, when I had my own children helmets were not optional, they were compulsory.

Anything that minimises the risk of brain damage or death can only be a good thing.

I have to admit I cycle without one, sometimes, but never ever would I let the kids not wear theirs.

Why on earth would you?

In my highly unscientific and statistically imsignificant study:

On my walk to work I saw approx 30 bikes
4 people weren't wearing helmets (including the one man cycling at full pelt towards an oncoming car who was flashing and honking before the cyclist pulled in, so I'm not counting him as he obviously has a death wish).

Numerous little kids on scooters, only one not wearing one and he was the smallest and most reckless (pavement next to the min road).

If people won't cycle because of a helmet law, then maybe that's just Darwinism in action. I ask my friends and colleagues if they don't wear, why. Noone has ever said that they believe that helmets are more dangerous to wear. Its usually 'it will squash my hair' or 'I dunno, never got round to buying one'.

PatPig the stats I looked at showed that cycling reduced the 1st year of the law being introduced but then started to increase significantly.

Its ridiculous to blame it for health problems, the governments are trying to look after these peoples safety, it is not down to them to ensure they eat healthily and exercise. Pathetic!

goosey I'm so glad for you!
TBH if your story doesn't convince people to put a fucking helmet on, nothing will.

I think the attitude of those idiots who'd rather risk a serious injury to their chidren (and not themselves, mind you) then admit they are wrong could be be summed up as "bite off your nose to spite your face".

what makes my stomach churn is that these adults are in charge of very young chidren, who have no choice, but possibly (hopefully not!) suffer the consequences of their parents' irresponsible attitudes.
scary
( I also shiver when I see young kids in a car without the correct child seat, especially if they sit in the front passenger seat. ignorance is not always bliss!)

The Australian study is very biased. Seriously, how many people would stop riding a bike just because they had to wear a helmet. That simply does not make sense.

The question is not whether helmets provide some protection, but whether, if better more rigorous research was carried out they could be developed to provide better protection from serious head injuries. This is why I'm uncomfortable with the casual assertions that in "x situation a life was saved (or could have been saved) by a helmet" - it means we don't look at the issue properly and the current research is woefully inadequate. If helmets don't provide optimal protection the only other choice is not to not wear one, it's to develop ones that do. I'm certainly not saying don't wear one - they're the best we've got at the moment - but we shouldn't be complacent.

You'd think was a massive ask, shoving a hat on your head....it's a HAT on your HEAD. And it could save your child's life. Hhhmmm but oooh my personal freedoms and liberties and what if and stats. Not sure why it isn't compulsory tbh.

You'll be asking me to wear knickers next! Ooh the cheek, the inconvenience!

PatPig the stats I looked at showed that cycling reduced the 1st year of the law being introduced but then started to increase significantly.

No that is not true. See here: www.cycle-helmets.com/

Its ridiculous to blame it for health problems, the governments are trying to look after these peoples safety, it is not down to them to ensure they eat healthily and exercise. Pathetic!

That must be one of the most ridiculous comments on this thread.

Modern western governments are certainly concerned with people's health and exercise rates.

Have a look at www.healthyactive.gov.au/

The costs to governments of people not exercising is billions and billions of dollars.

moomins or get dressed properly when leaving the house

Actually, that IS an inconvenience, most days I want to do the school run in my dressing gown.
maybe I should

The Australian study is very biased. Seriously, how many people would stop riding a bike just because they had to wear a helmet. That simply does not make sense.

Why does it not make sense? Most cyclists do not wear helmets. They could, but clearly they do not want to. Given that people do not want to wear helmets, obviously some of these number would further choose not to cycle.

It's not reasonable to assume that all cyclists are so passionately committed to the cause that they would continue cycling regardless of legal changes.

It was reported in the New Zealand Medical Journal (NZ also has a helmet law), that cycle injury rates increased as a result of the law, and cycling fell by a half. journal.nzma.org.nz/journal/abstract.php?id=5046

The same results occur everywhere these stupid laws are introduced - fewer people cycle, and as a result cycling becomes increasing marginalised and unsafe.

I think if people had to wear parachutes to go on an aeroplane flight, fewer people would fly. Same thing with cycle helmets. They present the message - 'this is a dangerous activity, requiring specialist safety equipment'. That is very off-putting, and it's no coincidence that countries where cycling is seen as every day and normal, no different from walking down the street (cycling is safer than walking, on a per distance basis), that helmet wearing is rare.

I will no more force my children to wear helmets to cycle than to walk or go in the car.