Helmet or No Helmet?


A

Adroit

New Member
Correlation does not imply causation. Doesn't convince me in the least to stop wearing a helmet lol.
 
S

SpawnXX

Premium Member
It's probably because Michigan riders don't want to give the law ANY reasons to reinstate it. ;)
 
N

nismos14

I'm movin on
Elite Member
4 less deaths? Lol complete coincidence.
 
A

Adroit

New Member
nismos14 said:
4 less deaths? Lol complete coincidence.
Click to expand...
it says in the article that it compared first 8 months on 2011 with first half of 2012 (6 months?) I don't even know why anybody would publish results like that.. there are people out there that will falsely think that wearing a helmet is unsafe, very irresponsible on the part of the author imo.
 
S

Scott_Thomas

Insert title Here
Elite Member
I agree that it probably makes the riders a little more cautious. Also another possibility is the better field of view. I don't find my helmet hinders me greatly but it does make it more awkward to check all blind spots. I am not required to wear a helmet in PA, but I choose to wear it. Getting hit with bugs and rocks in the face sucks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2
 
H

Hoops 09Raven

New Member
Its the law here in Cali to sport a helmet, I dont think I will ever NOT wear it, should Cali ever repeal the current law. I also agree that my helmet doesnt hinder me. And getting hit in the face with bugs and debris sucks!!! It never fails when i raise my visor, lol.
 
J

JSP

Super Moderator
leem00 said:
statistics....statistics lie.....
Click to expand...

15% of studies showed that 75% of the time 50% of the statistics are incorrect. :D


Wear your damn helmets.
 
B

Brock Kickass

New Member
Wow! I'm totally convinced that an unprotected head is safer than wearing a piece of equipment specifically designed and tested to a very high standard for the express purpose of protecting my head from impact. I'm glad that useful stat was published!
 
U

UselessPickles

New Member
So, in the first 6 months of 2012 (of which only 3 months allowed helmetless riders), there were 85 fatalities.

In the first 8 months of 2011, there were 89 fatalities.

That's 95% of 2011's fatalities in only 75% of the amount of time.

How is this a reduction in fatalities? And how can it be correlated with the introduction of the law, when the law was only in effect for half of the time period for which 2012's fatalities were counted?
 
B

BKP

New Member
You know... I'm not convinced there should be a law at all...

I think this goes to self-responsibility... Go lidless at your own peril. Same with jackets, riding pants, boots, seat-belts, fast-food, cigarettes, etc...

I'm a *big* advocate of helmets and ATGATT in general... but, that's me... I think you should have the right to ride naked, if that's your thing...
...However, when you rack up -- just don't ask me to contribute to the medical bills...

(Socialized healthcare... phhhhhfffffttttt)
 
A

Adroit

New Member
BKP said:
You know... I'm not convinced there should be a law at all...

I think this goes to self-responsibility... Go lidless at your own peril. Same with jackets, riding pants, boots, seat-belts, fast-food, cigarettes, etc...

I'm a *big* advocate of helmets and ATGATT in general... but, that's me... I think you should have the right to ride naked, if that's your thing...
...However, when you rack up -- just don't ask me to contribute to the medical bills...

(Socialized healthcare... phhhhhfffffttttt)
Click to expand...
100% agree, I do take issue to articles like this that spread misinformation though.
 
0

0150r

New Member
Those 'statistics' are a joke. It's not enough data and doesn't provide enough details about it.

Things I see missing from the study:
- How many deaths were caused by head trauma? Non-head trauma deaths shouldn't be considered in a study like this. If you have a leg cut off and bleed out, a helmet won't make a difference.

- Should include people who received significant head injuries that didn't resolve in death. I know someone who fell off a golf cart at 5mph and received brain damage when his head hit the pavement. He didn't die, so his case for helmet studies (in-general since it wasn't a bike) wouldn't be seen. Another person I know had his father in a coma for several weeks because he hit a deer without a helmet and crashed. He'll be incapable of living alone because he lost too much brain function; but since he lived, the study wouldn't see it.

- The 8 months vs 6 months is a big factor too, especially in a cold state like Michigan. Hardly anyone rides the first 4 months. So what you are really looking at May-June compared to May-August which is twice as much time during the actual riding season.
 
D

dart1963

Super Moderator
Elite Member
Adroit said:
it says in the article that it compared first 8 months on 2011 with first half of 2012 (6 months?) I don't even know why anybody would publish results like that.. there are people out there that will falsely think that wearing a helmet is unsafe, very irresponsible on the part of the author imo.
Click to expand...

it's called an agenda... these "bikers" quote odd statistics to prove their point... then, an idiot goes and gets himself killed in a "protest of helmet laws" while not wearing a helmet.....


and Jay, it's simpler than that.... 95% of ALL percentages are made up on the spot (see what I did there? lol)
 
D

Deleted member 9794

Well screw statistics, lets look at history:
michigantrafficcrashfacts.org

PDF of 10 year statistics (2002-2011)

Info:
MOTORCYCLES
2002 - crashes=3,030 - fatal=81
2003 - crashes=3,187 - fatal=81
2004 - crashes=3,276 - fatal=81
2005 - crashes=3,589 - fatal=121
2006 - crashes=3,386 - fatal=120
2007 - crashes=3,821 - fatal=127
2008 - crashes=4,082 - fatal=127
2009 - crashes=3,451 - fatal=105
2010 - crashes=3,362 - fatal=125
2011 - crashes=3,175 - fatal=113

So....they reference that:
the first 8 months of 2011 there were 89 fatalities, so there were 24 in the following 4 months.

the first 6 months of 2012 there were 84 fatalities, so there is a lot of room for that law to turn out bad.


Also:
MOTORCYCLE HELMET USE AND INJURY SEVERITY

2011:
Helmet wearers
Total crashes=3106
Fatal crashes=98
Ratio=3.15%

None-Helmet wearers
Total crashes=73
Fatal crashes=5
Ratio=6.84%

While the number of crashes may be reduced, the risk of fatality is doubled when not wearing a helmet. Also, my personal opinion is that the number of total crashes for helmeted riders is greater because there are more people that wear helmets...which is a good thing!

ATGATT
 
D

danieljardim

New Member
It's funny this subject was brought up. I was having a conversation with my brother in law about ATGATT. Here in jersey he has to wear a helmet but in florida where he is from he doesn't need so he doesn't wear it. On the heat of the "conversation" he quoted.

"There is only one difference riding with a helmet or not. Without a helmet you have to be ready to die."

Made me laugh but is true.
 
M

MistahT

Mistah T
Elite Member
danieljardim said:
"There is only one difference riding with a helmet or not. Without a helmet you have to be ready to die."

Made me laugh but is true.
Click to expand...
A family friend used to be a nurse and worked ER in New York. She said people without helmets died on the scene. They called people WITH helmets "organ donors" since they would live long enough to make it to the hospital - or become vegetables. She said, in her opinion, if you ride do it without a helmet because being a vegetable is a huge strain on the rest of your family.

I do not agree with her statement. She didn't see the people helmets saved slide across her table. Even if there is not a helmet law in Maryland, I will ALWAYS rock the lid.
 
M

Marthy

World Most Bad A$$ 6R
Elite Member
I would like to compare that to wearing a condom when you ride with a stranger. If you read the box it clearly says the wearing a condom reduce the risk of contracting HIV and is safe at 99% as a birth control.

I also been told (never bother double checking the fact) that you odd of contracting HIV in a unprotected intercourse are around 20%.

So if you ask 100 guys to have intercourse with a hooker, I would imagine that 99-100 of them will wear protection.

Then ask 100 riders helmet or no helmet? I will imagine that 50-60% will wear one. I'm very generous here I think...

So in my book, the 40% or so clearly care more about there dick than there head... just saying!
 

S

SpawnXX

Premium Member
Come on guys, give the guy that established this statistic a break... I heard he was suffering from head trauma. :thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Top