4 ms·
I've seen research in the past that suggested wearing helmets on average was neutral or negative (something to do with adding weight to the head?) but can never
by sambe 10y ago
I've seen research in the past that suggested wearing helmets on average was neutral or negative (something to do with adding weight to the head?) but can never find it when this topic comes up. Do you have a reference for the Finnish research?
Around the time I read about this research I also read that Switzerland and UK had been reluctant to regulate it in part due to conflicting research. Are you sure it's as clear as you make out?
- ptaipale 10y agoNothing in English that I could find now without spending more time. One thing about bicycle helmets is that they really need to have that shiny surface. Without it, i.e. with just a polystyrene surface, the friction of helmet vs. road surface will be so high as to cause a risk of neck injury when the head stops faster than the rest of the body, even if the helmet protects the head per se. Without the helmet, the head will just crack, of course. Mostly the negative impacts of bike helmets involve human stupidity, i.e. that if helmet is required, people will ride less.
- hx87 10y agoI'm not sure what a smooth helmet surface will do the coefficient of friction between helmet and road if the road itself is still very rough. The benefits will probably hit diminishing returns long before the helmet is actually shiny.
- ptaipale 10y agoI didn't mean the surface actually has to shine. But there's a reason for that hard smooth-surfaced plastic outside the EPS or whatever softer material.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]