Why would someone wear a helmet to play football and not to ride a cycle?

A Monday Afternoon rhetorical question asked after hearing Ben Rothlisberger was in a motorcycle accident this AM in Pittsburgh and reports are he wasn't wearing a helmet.

in motorcycle riding, the assumption is that you won't be.

Any serious biker I know always assumes that when they ride, they are going to but it. Thus, they wear the protective gear including a helmet. Thus, when said assumption actually does come around, they are protected and suffer a lot less than they otherwise would have.

Anybody who doesn't make that sort of assumption is simply foolish and asking for trouble.

those things are anathema to the denim, leather, beards, long hair and Harley Davidsons crowd. I don't know a single one who wears a helmet.

They are foolish and looking for trouble. Granted, here in Missouri wearing a helmet is the law. But even the most down and dirty biker I knew at Gladstone's never bitched about wearing a helmet. All it took is an accident, or knowing somebody who had an accident, for them to realize the value of a helmet and other protective gear. You go around here and observe the old school, old age bikers who are out and about and they have helmet, full leathers, and boots on. They realize, hey, that's how I got to be old.

It is the fools, the kids on the rice rockets etc who ride without gear. Sure they wear a helmet, but not much else, shorts, Tshirt, flip flops. And every year a bunch of them wind up dead or disabled in an accident where their injuries could have been prevented or modified if they'd had gear on.

Sure, it probably helps that we've got a helmet law, it also probably helps that we're a lot cooler than Florida. But I think it's also a difference in attitude:shrug:

after all, those kids on the crotch rockets nearly always wear helmets down here, while the bikers never do. And the crotch rocketeers also sometimes wear those plated jackets and pants. The best the bikers do is leather. If anything, in the absence of helmet laws, the crotch rocket riders exhibit more precaution than the hardcase bikers.

Oh, and I lived in Missouri for four years before moving here. It is SOOOO not cooler than Florida :evilgrin:

Down in Florida a cold day is what, when it hits forty:evilgrin:

Could very well be the force of the law that indeed prompted this. But it could just be the difference in biker cultures:shrug: Perhaps we need to do an anthropological study sometime? Think we could get a grant;)

I thought you were speaking metaphorically, as in "Hey man, that's cool."

As for the grant, get on it! Tell'em to send me lawyers, guns and money, and I'll hop right back into the biker bars I used to hang out in.

Those guys ALWAYS wear helmets and full protective gear including reflective jackets and pants with protective padding and armor in stragegic areas or they wear full racing leathers. I'm talking about for commuting but if you've seen the traffic in Tokyo, Hong Kong, London, Rome, etc you can sure see why. They take it very seriously.

Bikers here in America will tell you that a helmet will break your neck but that's mostly like the other urban legend that Loud Pipes Save Lives. Basically trying to rationalize irrational behaviour in my opinion.

The #1 rule of riding a motorcycle that it's not IF you're going to go down but WHEN. When you do go down (even at slow speeds) your head is going to hit something very hard and probably bounce around a couple of times. It's nature. Same with leather gear. You can die from road rash very easily thanks to infection.

That being said I really don't think the government should be passing helmet laws. It shouldn't have to. When I ride I always wear a helmet, mostly for comfort. Even with the largest windscreen you'll still get a bug or stone in the head or face now and again. It hurts and it's dangerous. I don't have a large windscreen on my bike so my helmet keeps the wind noise out and I open and close the shield for ventilation. It's never a bother and the couple of times I've needed them, they've saved my life judging by the damage the helmets received.

and they would again.

or seatbelt laws, or just about any other nanny-government bullshit. If people want to splatter their brains all over the highway, that's their choice

important for everyone.
i cant stand all the hypocrisy in the regulations.
all the regulations seem to be pandering or paying back some group or another. fuck it.

then I can understand making a law. But if the only person whose safety I'm affecting is my own, I say that's crap. No government should have the right to dictate what you do within the confines of other people's rights -- that is, as long as your actions don't adversely affect the rights of another peson, you should be able to do whatever the hell you want.

Does that affect our rights?

the answer to that is universal healthcare, not helmet laws.

for YOUR healthcare. With such a mutual system the needs of each person are met through the largesse of the masses -- a community taking care of each of its members, no matter the poor decisions they may have made in life.

Or are we to assume that everyone who engages in unhealthy actions should, by law, be forced to give them up? That is, after all, the idea behind helmet laws. So, should smoking be illegal? What about alcohol? How about fast food?

Certainly, the scourge of obesity results in a far greater weight (ahem) on the healthcare system than a few motorcycle accidents. Why not pass a law banning people from eating unhealthy foods? Does that sound rational?

argument. I do agree with you but wanted to make sure you know that everyone pays.:toast:

that "everyone pays" with a link or scientifically-sound study??? You have IMPLIED that EVERYONE pays more $$$ which you have not yet proven.

This is a question of rights, safety, and unnecessary laws. Those of us whom wish to regulate the behavior of others feel comfortable with cops pulling un-belted/un-helmeted/soon-to-be-smoking minimum-wage earning driver over & taking their few $$$ in the name of "progress"...I am NOT one of those Americans.

:nopity:

not a lifestyle change, and studies show that they save millions in healthcare. And they save lives.

No comparison.

and I bet not one of them has given up cycling because he can't feel the wind in his hair. ;)

and the outlaw gangs follow helmet laws at all times because they don't want to give the cops an excuse to pull them over.

My husband owns two bikes (sold the third last year) and he ALWAYS wears a helmet when he rides. He assumes everyone else on the road will NOT see him and drives defensively.

Never thought it would happen to him. There's no helmet law in PA and he has said in the past he's always careful and rides with a group. Stupidity of the young who think they're invincible.

Youth is wasted on the young. And while I'm no longer "young" I can say, based on my life experiences, that Mr Twain was right.

... if there was a wayback machine, I'd rob a bank to get one :)

but it ain't kwe-ell on a bike. Brains on the pavement is all the rage, you know.

here in Massachusetts, helmets are mandatory for motorcyclists, but voluntary in New Hampshire.

Every summer you hear of at least one rider who upon immediately crossing the MA border, pulls over, takes the helmet off, and later gets in an accident and dies because he didn't have it on.

Like BH said, you'd think someone who wears one on the job would know.

nt

I don't even like to go a block without a bicycle helmet if I'm riding my bicycle; ditto with my seat belt.

I'm sorry this happened but I am TIRED of pro athletes getting hurt or killed in accidents when they are not wearing helmets or seatbelts. This should be a MAJOR part of the story when they report it. I remember when Derek Thomas was killed; someone on a forum I was on said it "wasn't the right time" to discuss whether he was wearing a seatbelt! HUH? It's exactly the right time - so no one else will do it.

I have been all across the country on various motorcycles and almost always ride sans helmet.

But NEVER in traffic.

Every time my head has hit the ground/pavement I was wearing a helmet.

Normal instincts of self-preservation. Maybe the persistent vibration damages some critical neurons.

The story I tell is that I had four friends in High School who loved to ride their cycles. They're all dead. Most from no fault/mistake of their own, but because motorcycles are so damn dangerous and utterly unforgiving of error -- anyone's error.

Didn't you know? :sarcasm:

who were the games MVP's for the Steelers. Super Bowl Large, One for the Dumb!

in Pennsylvania. I used to be anti-helmet in my younger days of riding and laughed like hell when the seatbelt laws became mandatory. I always said "now the cagers know what it's like for us to be forced to wear a helmet".

Now a little older and wiser, I wouldn't dream of riding on the road without a helmet, but I still drive a lot without a seatbelt (when my kids aren't in the truck with me... I ALWAYS make them buckle up and do so myself to set the example), only to quickly throw it on if I see a cop!

multi-multi-multi million dollar enterprise, how come his contract didn't REQUIRE him to wear one? There's plenty of other off-field restrictions placed on star athletes, why not that one?

it will probably become standard in NFL contracts. not just to wear a helmet, but probably to ban riding altogether.

AS it should be.

Remember, the Steelers still owe him ten million bucks, just in signing bonuses, even if he never wears a uniform. that's a lot of money.

he allowed to ride a motorcycle at all? I've heard where movie stars practically aren't allowed to pick their own noses while in production.

employees from riding motorcycles and any other risky activity and if they injured themselves doing anything forbidden...it would void the contract and they would receive squat.

For those of you who think this is an "infringement"...it is very common in corporate america for executives to sign agreements that put in such stipulations. I know a fellow who had to give up flying his own plane when he took on an executive level position.

increases the leaverage of the impact, me thinks. the closes I came to being injured in an industrial accident was when I didn't quite duck far enough, almost broke my neck when the hardhat hit a pipe.

if helmets are optional shouldnt seatbelts be as well?

its obviously not about safety but all political gamesmanship. i guess its to be expected in a stupid republican run rathole like florida.
i dont know about anywhere else.

mandatory, but motorcycle helmets are not. It doesn't make much sense to me.

impact. For another the weight of a helmet is know to cause a persons head to make contact with the road and anyone who has taken a spill off a cycle can tell you that when helmets hit the road hard they tend to have an basketball effect, they bounce just like a basket ball. Also most injuries to a cycle rider are neck, back and limb injuries not head injuries. Nine out of 10 neck injuries are the result of paramedics taking the helmet off, which is why Florida has a law that paramedics can not remove helmets the hospital has to cut them off. Another little known fact is Bell helmet recommends that if you drop your helmet on the ground it should be replaced as it can cause hairline cracks and weaken the helmet, so helmets aren't all that protective if you think about that fact. People really need to read up on things before repeating myths and business propaganda. Best way to avoid injuries are learning how to avoid and how to react to road hazards. Also knowing what to do if you know your going down or hitting something, like cars. Inexperience kills.

Edited to add my experince facts. I started riding cycles when I was 14 and am now 49, 35 years experince. I have surrvived 4 motorcycle/car accidents and not sure how many falls, I do know that if you tuck your body close to the gas tank and put your handle bars down on the pavement you can avoid road rash in the space created by the handle bars, if your using stock bars, that don't apply to race bikes as the handle bars aren't wide enough. BTW, I have never been on a Ninja type cycle so those are out of my experince range.

his speed likely was no faster than 25 mph.

Seen cars and bikes fly down Second Ave where crash occurred. At that time of day traffic probably was moderate.

There are helmets and gear designed for high-speed impacts. Fully engineered, and they increase survivability tenfold.
More piffle on that "helmet will drag you down" nonsense. And while you're correct that most injuries are spine and limb injuries, most FATAL injuries are head injuries. Spine ones only paralyze you.
More piffle on the injured neck from paramedics myth. Florida's legislated a problem that statistically doesn't exist. Again, I should add.
Experience can go quite far, but most fatal motorcycles could not have been avoided by ANY action on the part of the rider.
You are simply lucky thus far. That's it. Skilled, likely. But in this conversation, only luck has protected you.
I ride, both bikes and ambulances. I'll take my experience over yours on the latter aspect.

5. There is not liability for neck injury by wearing a safety helmet; helmeted riders had less neck injuries than unhelmeted riders.

Conclusions of the "Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures" (the Hurt Report). This study examined nearly 4,500 crashes occurring in the Los Angeles area and was sponsored in part by NHTSA in 1981.

Conclusions

How much bad weather riding have you done? I got my information from dealers, riders and easy rider magazines. Why is it that when challenged by easy rider did bell execs refuse to wear a helmet and let someone hit them on the head with a sledge hammer? Why is it that Bell helmet doesn't perform crash tests on their helmets? The test Bell does perform is x-ray and pull tests, they try to pull the helmet apart with the face opening. The day I trust government studies bought and paid for by business is the day I vote for a puke. BTW, easy rider has debunked all of these helmet myths over the last 30 years. If you don't ride then don't try to impose your opinion on helmets, thats like not driving a car but you have safety ideals for car drivers. BTW did you know that theres more head and neck injuries in cars even with seat belt use? I don't hear anyone calling for helmet use in cars.

the same arguments were used to support tobacco companies and oppose wearing seat belts.

for those who do. Like I said Easy Rider magazine has debunked all of this in the last 30 years as false information. Just like your statistics, that was debunked because the government got the high number of neck injuries without helmets by including paramedics reports, rider wasn't wearing a helmet when we arrived, people tend to take helmets off after an accident, yet that is never reported in the statistics. Also police reports same thing, rider wasn't wearing a helmet when we arrived, next you need to check out the number of tickets handed out for none helmet use. I bet you they will not show the same numbers, thats what Easy Rider found out and why they say the numbers are far less then those used. Having been in 4 cycle accidents I have those type of reports in them because I was sitting on the side of the road without a helmet, it was usually being used to prop me up. 2 of the 4 accidents were sitting at lights and having cars rear end me, guess what, the helmets wieght caused me whip lash which is in the medical reports.

BTW nearly 90% of cycle accidents are caused by 2 causes, inexeperince and cars not seeing cycles. Try this little experiment, disconnect the passenger head light on your car then loosen the drivers side light so it will bobble as you drive, then go for a short drive after dark and count the number of times cars pull out in frount of you.

when riding a cycle. odds are up if you get in accident that there will be greater injury. but still it is a high probability that an accident won't happen. they are willing ot take a risk. just as we do ever moment we step into a car. a risk of accident. the odds are so not in favor of it. or anything else we decide upon that may cause us injury or death......

It was his choice, and he lives with the consequences of his choice. It is
how we learn and grow, if we survive our own stupidity. What, would you
have his freedom removed? What kind of liberty is that? "Give me liberty
or give me death." Clearly patrick henry is no longer in vogue.

by requiring him to wear a helmet while he's doing his job? I think I asked a fine question. I don't want to take away his freedom but I also don't want to pay for his extended stay in a hospital or a lifelong stay in medical care after permanent brain damage. I sincerely do not believe Patrick Henry applies here.

In fact. I want to pay for yours too. And mine. Something kinda like single-payer health care. Don't bitch because other people get it. Bitch because you don't.

In a professional setting, it is certainly common to wear protective gear, like earplugs on a factory floor,
or steel-toed boots with insulated rubber soles. So his football hat, is not the same at all, as in his
unpaid, free time as a private citizen.

In his private citizenship, it is a risk we all take, and if you really want to go down the path of
outlawing things that cause injury and death, its all about limiting freedom and liberty, and between
them i take liberty. It really is about patrick henry, 'cuz at the end of the long economic rationalization,
you're talking about taking away someone's liberty, and then none of us are free.

Table 1: Top 15 causes of death in USA in 2002
Risk is 1 in
Annual Lifetime
Diseases of the heart 415 5
Malignant neoplasm 515 7
Cerebrovascular disease 1786 23
Chronic lower respiratory disease 2273 29
Accidents 2703 35
Diabetes mellitus 4000 52
Influenza and pneumonia 4348 56
Alzhemier's disease 5000 65
Nephriotis, nephrotic syndome, nephrosis 7143 92
Septicaemia 8333 108
Suicide 9091 118
Chronic liver disease, cirrhosis 11111 144
Primary hypertension, hypertensive renal disease 14286 185
Parkinson's disease 16667 216
Pneumonitis due to solids or liquids 16667 216
http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/Bandolier/booth/Risk/top15usa.html

If we consider the above table, and you want to make sensible laws to limit our freedoms, then
you should increase the taxes on heart-disease causing foods, foods with processed salt and chemicals,
and sugar drinks. If you don't do this, given the much higher risk, and the known causative nature
of such foods, then defending the public from people dying in motor cycle crashes is just stupid
and illogical based on fluffy thinking. The nanny state shoudl stay out of personal choice, and rather
provide guidance, but ultimately not meddle in the choice. WE need our moral ability to choose
restored so we can learn how to be moral again!

I just ate a plain double cheeseburger and a filet sandwich and a large chocolate shake, is that bad??????????

:-) Did it hurt! mmmmmm :9

"live with the consequences of his choice." That is, the costs of a lifetime of care for people crippled by motorcycle accidents, and the insurance premiums all drivers pay. I suggest that yes, bikers can ride helmetless, or nude, for all I care, as long as they sign a waiver that they will be responsible for lifetime medical treatments for their injuries. PA used to have a helmet law and every year hundreds of black leather clad bikers would come to demonstrate at the capitol by driving their hogs round and round the block where the capitol building is located. (Don't they wear leather even in hot weather to protect themselves in spills? I would find a helmet less oppressive than leather in July.) Now the state law is that riders must wear helmets until they've had two years of experience OR have taken a safety course.

If your son/daughter was driving 5 miles over the posted speed limit, they should be left to die if he/she is crippled for life & you can't pay???

There's no way I'd climb on a horse's back without wearing a riding helmet; it's just not done in the UK. I wear one to ski too.

There's a term for people who ride without headgear: organ donors.

Not long ago, I was thinking of getting a motorcycle and told my brother about it. He said, "You should speak to Theresa about this." "Why?" I asked. "Most of her patients are motorcycle riders." His wife is a physical therapist for a hospital. Ha, ha, bro. He likes to call motorcycle helmets "brain buckets." Funny sense of humor, my brother. Word to the wise.

the repeal of the helmet law - till he crashed his bike and was saved by the helmet he was wearing because it was mandatory at the time. He was livid today about Ben's accident and the fact Ben wasn't wearing a helmet because the law was changed.

stooooopidity

I like Ben, but foregoing a helmet is a bad decision that sets a bad example for the many children (of all age) who see him as a role model. I hope he is alright, and I hope this is a false alarm that serves as a wakeup call.

If you know anyone who rides a motorcycle without a helmet, please let them know the following facts from a landmark helmet safety study by the University of Southern California with funds from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:

The typical motorcycle accident allows the motorcyclist just less than 2 seconds to complete all collision avoidance action.

Seventy-three percent of the accident-involved motorcycle riders used no eye protection, and it is likely that the wind on the unprotected eyes contributed in impairment of vision which delayed hazard detection.

Where about half of motorcycle riders observed in traffic use safety helmets only 40% of those motorcycle riders involved in accidents were wearing helmets at the time of the accident.

The use of the safety helmet is the single critical factor in the prevention of reduction of head injury; the safety helmet which complies at a minimum with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 218 is a significantly effective injury countermeasure and helmets that exceed that minimum safety standard afford even better brain-injury avoidance.

Safety helmet use caused no attenuation of critical traffic sounds, no limitation of pre crash visual field, and no fatigue or loss of attention; no element of accident causation was related to helmet use.

Helmeted riders and passengers showed significantly lower head and neck injury for all types of injury, at all levels of injury severity.

The increased coverage of the full facial coverage helmet increases protection, and significantly reduces face injuries.

Helmeted riders had less neck injuries than unhelmeted riders. Only four minor injuries were attributable to helmet use, and in each case the helmet prevented possible critical or fatal head injury.

That is what ER nurses call motorcycle riders who don't wear helmets. We just hope that they have signed their donor cards when they are brought in DOA.

Hospital humor is about the blackest that I have ever heard.


Except for my friend whose family owns a chain of funeral parlors. Creeeepy funny.

was "Business of the Week" last week in the local newspaper. And the little town near where we live had a "Seniors Expo" last week and the funeral home had the largest display at the "Expo." I guess you have to have a sense of humor if you are alive.

chain all hit the same gym I do. I'll see Pat in the morning, and ask him how's business. His invariable reply is, "Really dead, man."

Mike usually says, "Never got a complaint from the client yet."


I told them they'll never get their clammy hands on my bloated corpse.

ER nurses in our area raise funds for helmets on kids on bicycles....they were instrumental in getting a law passed for youth bicycle riders mandatory helmet wear.

So far no luck with adult riders though.

Paramedics also have a good term for motorcycle riders without helmets...DRT (dead right there)

wear a helmet?









Organ donors.


I am a lifetime biker and former AMA competitor, roadrace, flattrack, TT, half-mile. I would get a new helmet if it was just dropped hard. I guess my head is worth something to me.

...Ride their bikes to work. :evilgrin: Full gear, I should add.

Somewhere in one of these posts I should say I don't care for mandatory helmet laws. However, I reserve the right to cluck disapprovingly at you, and withhold sympathy beyond basic humanity level when you get hurt.

I am really a big scaredy cat about getting injured.

I like to think of it as "thinning the herd".

Sid

... only a motorcyclist could have even a chance of explaining that.

I don't ride any more, and when I did ride, I wore a helmet 95% of the time -but there is something about riding without one - believe me, a helmet detracts from the sublime experience of gliding through the air in a real and tangible way.

I'd consider riding out in the country without one occassionally, here in Dallas you have to have some kind of death wish to ride without one.

while riding his cycle. He felt very strongly that helmet laws were an infringement on personal freedom, but he died from a severe head injury that could have been prevented. I don't think the freedom was worth the price he and his family paid.

he couldnt have died wearing a helmet. that is a risk on motorcycle. helmet doesnt guarentee a person will live thru an accident. just ups the odds.

same driving a sports car. ups the odds as opposed to a hummer

;)

Football requires it and oddly enough many states don't.

which is why many cyclists don't wear them. I almost always wear mine (the only time I don't is if I have an unexpected passenger who has no helmet, I give them mine).

I look at it this way - even if it were true that a helmet will "bounce like a basketball and hurt your neck", think about this: without a helmet, the only reason your bare head won't bounce like that is because it will crack open.

As for lacking vision/hearing, I can hear way better with my helmet because it cuts out the "whoosh" noise of wind going past my ears, and have never had a helmet that cut into my field of vision.

Really, really stupid.

You not only hurt yourself, you hurt people who depended on you, your teamates, your family, your fans. You got pissed off at Terry Bradshaw when he warned you about driving a bike in city traffic, and for you do do it without a helmet was just..well .. idiotic.
My prayers are with you but youve lost lots of respect with this. You let lots of people down here.

choses to ride a cycle. or jump out of a plane. or ski. or buy a sports car

why do people have to be so cruel and dismissive of the man, and disrespectful. i dont get you guys, and havent for a while, on why so many want to just attack and denigrate. does it make yawl feel so much wiser ergo protected from dangers? as if you will survive forever? does it just feel good to kick a person while he is down?

anyway, i dont need to. i think this is about the ugliest of who we are. i am not a fan of it.

He was a franchise player that people had millions of dollars invested in.
He was warned by countless people of the risks he was putting himself and all those who depended on him, in.

life to all these people, he does to himself. "you" cant suffer a fool well? well who the hell are "you" that we all must walk on shells so "you" don't have to suffer all of us imperfect human beings. the arrogance. i don't know anything about this man. but if he was a good, honest, talented hard working man of passion, i would suffer him above and beyond a person that limits those around him so readily.

you don't know htis man, you don't know his heart, you have no place judging and dismissing and denigrating, yet you do. and then you justify as if it is believable. it isn't your place. it is simply mean, and disrespectful

Its my right to chastise his stupid irresponsible behavior.

Like I said, I dont suffer fools well. You obviously do.

i feel good enough about my self that i dont have a "need" to dump on another so that i can feel superior. i dont need to be superior. i see we are all perfectly imperfect and you are giving a wonderful example of your own imperfection. how you treat this man, in time of pain and horror and sadness is a reflection of who you are. you talk about him being a fool, but really it has nothing to do with that. it shows what kind of a man you are

I would choose not to wear a helmet. They get hot and heavy, leading to fatigue. Peripheral vision is hindered. Sound is muted.

stop the problem. The problem is cars hit motorcycles, solution, make riders wear a block of plastic on their heads to protect them, which after spending 8 to 12 hours with a helmet on ones head really is a pain in the neck.

and BTW not everyone who rides a bike is riding in traffic, or even for transportation. Some people ride for FUN, for the wind-in-your-hair feeling. Ever wondered why many bikers refer to cars as "cages"? If their primary goal were safe transportation to a destination, they'd be driving a Volvo, not riding a bike.

As far as the medical costs argument--compare the cost of motorcycle accidents to the cost of alcohol-related accidents, crime, and disease. The CDC estimates 100,000 deaths per year from alcohol--does that mean we should ban it? The nanny-staters say yes; I say NO.

This is not some pre-Enlightenment feudal system where the State owns us and is entitled to direct the details of our daily lives "for our own good." This is supposed to be a free country, dammit, and if somebody wants to take a very small incremental risk in order to enjoy the wind in their hair on a recreational bike ride, more power to them.

The incremental risk of riding a bike helmetless vs. helmeted is FAR smaller than the incremental risk of riding a bike in the first place. Check out the death-per-seat-mile figures for bikes and cars, and you'll see that the magnitude of the overall risk delta between helmeted and helmetless is quite small compared to that.