Science and bicycling meet in a new helmet design

[elect]

New helmet is supposed to solve a problem identified in studies of NFL injuries.


https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/04/science-and-bicycling-meet-in-a-new-helmet-design/


I'm sharing this, quite interesting

 

[elect]

I'd like also to discuss the comment of a user which claims that statistics showed that wearing an helmet doesn't actually increase (statistically) safety

https://arstechnica.com/science/201...a-new-helmet-design/?comments=1&post=37196465


The problem with bicycle helmets is that there is very very little scientific evidence that they actually prevent serious head injury, much less death.

The most comprehensive study, out of Australia (NSW, I think) showed no reduction in deaths or head injuries when helmets became mandatory (and there was significant compliance); the most detectable change was a significant drop in the number of people cycling.

To hear all of the anecdotes about people claiming that the helmet "saved their life", you'd think that there should have been *thousands* of lives saved. But no.

The reason is simple - in order to make a helmet that bikers would actually wear, helmet makers had to come up with a very lightweight design; unfortunately, the design is so lightweight that it provides very little protection.

Basically, if you fall off of your bike while it is not moving, you will be protected by your helmet. A helmet will not protect you in an accident with a car.

In a 20 mph bike crash, it's unclear whether you are safer with or without a helmet because of the rotational issue mentioned in the article - a helmet expands, basically, the diameter of your head, increasing rotational forces on your head and neck in many cases. On the other hand, a helmet will protect against abrasions and road rash on those parts of your head covered by it - although with a direct risk of increased rotational injury.

Note that seat belts have been clearly demonstrated to improve safety, as have airbags and, to a lesser extent, motorcycle helmets. But if a cyclist wants actual protection against a motor vehicle crash, he should wear a motorcycle helmet - that's the only way to get any protection more substantial than just wearing a hat.


What do you think, guys?


Also: https://usa.streetsblog.org/2016/06/02/why-helmets-arent-the-answer-to-bike-safety-in-one-chart/


Edit: Actually there are studies that show that helmets make a difference

https://arstechnica.com/science/201...a-new-helmet-design/?comments=1&post=37197131

Edit2:


Just a note which I don't think has been metioned: MIPS are unimpressed by the wavecell technology and have been unable to recreate the test results:

https://road.cc/content/tech-news/25804 ... ety-claims

 

[PDoz]

Leatt also have their own version of mips / wavecell / whatever marketing you prefer to buy into - they call it 360 degree turbines. I'd love to see some science comparing outcomes with each system!

The helmet debate has been extensively covered on this forum, and whilst I'm one of the cynics who questions compulsory bike helmets laws, I've just invested a small fortune in full face mips / leatt helmets for my family......it's such an emotive / irrational issue. Even more irrational is I KNOW I'm riding faster when wearing my mips full face lid - so I KNOW I'm accepting a higher risk ....yet I'm encouraging my daughter to wear her leatt in full face mode so almost certainly putting her at higher risk as well.

Looking forward to seeing some real science rather than just marketing department press releases.

 

[elect]

Leatt also have their own version of mips / wavecell / whatever marketing you prefer to buy into - they call it 360 degree turbines. I'd love to see some science comparing outcomes with each system!

The helmet debate has been extensively covered on this forum,

Where?

and whilst I'm one of the cynics who questions compulsory bike helmets laws, I've just invested a small fortune in full face mips / leatt helmets for my family......it's such an emotive / irrational issue. Even more irrational is I KNOW I'm riding faster when wearing my mips full face lid - so I KNOW I'm accepting a higher risk ....yet I'm encouraging my daughter to wear her leatt in full face mode so almost certainly putting her at higher risk as well.

For curiosity, which ones did you invested into?

Since you mentioned full face mode, I expect those helmet where you can "mount" the extension part to cover your mandible, or?

 

[PDoz]

Where?



For curiosity, which ones did you invested into?

Since you mentioned full face mode, I expect those helmet where you can "mount" the extension part to cover your mandible, or?

This was the last helmet discussion

https://electricbikereview.com/forums/threads/should-wearing-helmet-be-optional.24577/

Use the search function if you want more. Try to look beyond individual experiences / beliefs and research the science - it's fascinating comparing the european countries where cycling was catered for with community changes vs the australian experriment where they plonked stack hats on little kids in the 80's and made cycling unfashionable / cardiac disease and obesity normal.....

As for MY purchases

My daughter got a leatt dbx 3 - so a convertible , light, " enduro" style helmet. It doesn't meet the down hill certification standard for racing - the chinpiece is designed to deflect / crumble on impact - which opens up a whole different discussion about helmet standards / injury choices etc. Perhaps I'm being a bit naive here, but leatt started as a company when a trauma specialists son suffered a spinal injury.....they started with neck braces and have evolved. Personally, I like facial protection but will choose living with facial injuries over spinal , and perhaps suffocating with a 5 point facial fracture over living with a c 5 quadraplegia?

Unfortunately MY head didn't fit the leatt so I have a bell super 3 r mips. Definitely not my first choice, but it fits and is the best I could find in my size / shape with reasonable weight / ventilation / yet still convertible.

It came down to something that we'd wear vs hopefully getting enough facial protection for the speeds we travel at. I like the functionality of a convertible lid - for longer climbs / hotter days we remove the chin piece - still having a better lid than most conventional buckets ( including decent temple protection ...but that's another story)

We still have conventional mips equiped normal lids for super hot days , or casual rides at sedate speeds. Both helmets are marginally hotter than our conventional lids even when they are in open face mode - so when it's over 30 c I back off the pace and wear the old brain box.

 

[elect]

This was the last helmet discussion

https://electricbikereview.com/forums/threads/should-wearing-helmet-be-optional.24577/

Interesting thread, although it's more about asking if the wearing shall be made mandatory or not.

As for MY purchases

My daughter got a leatt dbx 3 - so a convertible , light, " enduro" style helmet. It doesn't meet the down hill certification standard for racing - the chinpiece is designed to deflect / crumble on impact - which opens up a whole different discussion about helmet standards / injury choices etc. Perhaps I'm being a bit naive here, but leatt started as a company when a trauma specialists son suffered a spinal injury.....they started with neck braces and have evolved. Personally, I like facial protection but will choose living with facial injuries over spinal , and perhaps suffocating with a 5 point facial fracture over living with a c 5 quadraplegia?

Unfortunately MY head didn't fit the leatt so I have a bell super 3 r mips. Definitely not my first choice, but it fits and is the best I could find in my size / shape with reasonable weight / ventilation / yet still convertible.

It came down to something that we'd wear vs hopefully getting enough facial protection for the speeds we travel at. I like the functionality of a convertible lid - for longer climbs / hotter days we remove the chin piece - still having a better lid than most conventional buckets ( including decent temple protection ...but that's another story)

We still have conventional mips equiped normal lids for super hot days , or casual rides at sedate speeds. Both helmets are marginally hotter than our conventional lids even when they are in open face mode - so when it's over 30 c I back off the pace and wear the old brain box.

One thing that bugs me is how a convertible makes actually sense, since I guess in case of accident the attachment juncture is the "weak point"