No Bike Helmets on Kids... grrr!

ora_43

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 8:17 am

Raisin wrote:

ora, maybe all that applies to adults riding bikes. But I think young children should certainly be wearing helmets, especially since they are more likely to be falling off, and since much of the time they are riding for pleasure, not purpose.

I agree. And I think even adults should wear helmets, I just think it should be put into context.

I don't think parents of kids who are out riding around with no helmets are being less responsible than parents of kids who are at home watching TV. Just less responsible than those whose kids are riding AND know bike safety.

And I think that a parent who teaches bike safety but doesn't insist on a helmet, is doing more to keep their child safe than a parent who insists on a helmet but doesn't teach about safety stuff like how to avoid accidents in the first place.

(btw I don't think pleasure vs. purpose has to do with it - riding for pleasure also has a purpose, it keeps kids in shape.)

ally

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 8:26 am

ora_43 wrote:

Raisin wrote:

Kids are unlikely to get head injuries from watching TV. I think if parents can't enforce road safety, their kids are probably better off watching tv and that would possibly be the responsible choice for them.
I also think that bike safety and helmets are inseparable so I don't understand what 'teaching bike safety' without insisting on a helmet means. A person can ride as responsibly as possible but may still be knocked over by a drunk driver or someone who was busy texting. They might hit a hidden pot hole etc...

ora_43

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 8:37 am

ally wrote:

No, but they're likely to get out of shape and suffer brain damage of a different kind (literally, watching TV can change your brain). Statistically speaking, childhood obesity is a bigger threat to American kids than are bike accidents.

Never mind the different affects on social life and personality.

Quote:

I also think that bike safety and helmets are inseparable so I don't understand what 'teaching bike safety' without insisting on a helmet means. A person can ride as responsibly as possible but may still be knocked over by a drunk driver or someone who was busy texting. They might hit a hidden pot hole etc...

A lot of the accidents where people were "saved by a helmet" could have been prevented by the bike rider. Or by better infrastructure.

People were talking about helmet culture in Europe vs. America. In Holland, kids are far more likely to have access to a safe biking area, separate from the street, in good repair, than are kids in America. But less likely to wear a helmet. So... are American parents really making more of an effort to keep their kids safe?

I'm not saying that helmet wearing wouldn't be even safer, just that it's inaccurate to link helmets and safety to the point where other things equally likely to prevent injury are ignored. If anything, it's better to have good infrastructure and no helmet - if you hit the pavement head-first at speeds high enough to cause brain damage, a helmet won't protect you from getting neck or back damage.

techiemom

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 8:54 am

Both my dh and ds have had accidents on their bikes and the helmets have definitely saved them. My son's bike got stuck in a groove in the road (man-made!) a few months ago and I guess that's why I really want something done this year.

I looked up Safety Town and it looks like a great idea but we don't have such a facility. I've looked up biking in Toronto and it seems the way to go is the city-supported Can-Bike. I think that's probably the organization that came out to our shul. By the way, here is some information on fitting bike helmets that they have off their site: Fitting a Helmet

My first step will be to call Can-Bike and see what the costs will be. Then maybe with the help of my own principal I can round up some support for a workshop during chol hamoed Sukkos...

Rodent

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 8:57 am

Gosh, it makes me so angry. Seriously, I'm with the amother that said that people have skewed priorities!

Our kids don't even ride around in our fenced courtyard without a helmet. When they're older if they are ever caught riding a bike without a helmet (coolness or whatever) then the bike will be confiscated. Safety comes above all else.

When I was 11 a class member was using his bike on his driveway (no helmet because his parents thought he'd be safe there) and for some reason he went off the end onto the road, straight into the path of a passing vehicle. He was in a coma for ages and is now permanently brain damaged, he'll always need some form of assistance. It's such a waste and whilst he would have still been injured with a helmet, the extent of those injuries wouldn't have been in the same ballpark.

[As a side note I do understand the whole safety vs risk thing etc and how we can go too far. When I was little (under school age) my parents had read an article talking about how head injuries were the main issue in car accidents and questioning why helmets weren't worn. They decided to be ahead of the times and made my brother and I wear helmets in the car on long journeys! Embarrassing! Not helped by them not even being bike helmets but more like open face motorcycle helmets. I refused once I was about 6 (my brother about 8) but we got some weird looks in that time, I kind of look back now and think it was kind of funny in how over the top it was].

jewels

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 9:00 am

I think that most parents who tell their child to wear a helmet also teach their children the basics of bike safety. I didn't just give my son his helmet and tell him to wear it I also taught him to never ride his bike in the street, walk his bike when he needs to cross, slow down when he sees people near him etc. Im sure that I'm not the minority. They kind of go hand in hand. Would you teach your children not to play with matches because fire is dangerous but then leave them out where a kid could find them? It's not enough to just teach safety rules, you kind of need to make sure that children are protected just in case they don't follow the rules.
Like I posted before my son is a very careful very safety conscious kid who never ever rode his bike in any way that would be considered unsafe. He still would've been severely injured if not for his helmet. He was listening to all the rules but nothing would've helped him if he hadn't been wearing that helmet.

ally

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 9:00 am

ora_43 wrote:

ally wrote:

Quote:

A lot of the accidents where people were "saved by a helmet" could have been prevented by the bike rider. Or by better infrastructure.
People were talking about helmet culture in Europe vs. America. In Holland, kids are far more likely to have access to a safe biking area, separate from the street, in good repair, than are kids in America. But less likely to wear a helmet. So... are American parents really making more of an effort to keep their kids safe?

I'm not saying that helmet wearing wouldn't be even safer, just that it's inaccurate to link helmets and safety to the point where other things equally likely to prevent injury are ignored. If anything, it's better to have good infrastructure and no helmet - if you hit the pavement head-first at speeds high enough to cause brain damage, a helmet won't protect you from getting neck or back damage.

Re: the bolded - Do you feel the same about seatbelts? Most car accidents can be avoided...but they still happen and I'm pretty sure increases in seat belts has been statistically proven to reduce fatalities (yes I know, except for that guy that was trapped in his car that was going to explode and if had been wearing a seatbelt he wouldn't have got out...). I guess I see helmets the same way. Of course most bike accidents could be avoided, but the probability is that they will still happen.

Regarding infrastructure, I don't think you can compare safe infrastructure - which is a communal responsibilty but obviously requires large amounts of capital etc... - to personal safety habits. Also, I guess I am not really thinking about Europe but Israel where noone wears a helmet and there is most definitely no safe biking infrastructure here.

Finally, re tv: When calculating risk, you need to account for the probability of the accident occuring as well as the severity of the outcome. While biking accidents may be 'less common' than obesity, they are 'more risky'.

ora_43

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 10:06 am

ally wrote:

To a large extent, yes, I do feel the same way. Look at how truckers or SUV drivers tend to drive compared to everyone else (disambiguation: like careless jerks). Sometimes feeling safe can lead to actions that decrease safety.

Again, I'm pro-helmet. And I'm pro-seatbelt. But I think these things need to be thought of rationally, mathematically, not just as a "well EVERYONE knows that it's safer to .... " And that people need to be aware of the other side of the coin.

AFAIK, traffic fatalities per mile driven are up, not down. So there are a lot of people besides that one guy who managed to escape the explosion who haven't benefited from increased seatbelt use. But you can't find their stories the way you can find stories of seatbelts saving lives because they're so much less direct - how can you prove that the Honda Civic driver killed by a careless SUV driver would have lived if the other woman's kid were in a less secure carseat and she had therefore been just that much more alert? You can't. Even if it's true.

Quote:

Regarding infrastructure, I don't think you can compare safe infrastructure - which is a communal responsibilty but obviously requires large amounts of capital etc... - to personal safety habits. Also, I guess I am not really thinking about Europe but Israel where noone wears a helmet and there is most definitely no safe biking infrastructure here.

If you're comparing individual responsibility, you can't. But if you're comparing the "safety culture," like Ruchel was talking about, then you can.

Quote:

Finally, re tv: When calculating risk, you need to account for the probability of the accident occuring as well as the severity of the outcome. While biking accidents may be 'less common' than obesity, they are 'more risky'.

I agree that severity is also a consideration. But more severe doesn't automatically mean more dangerous. A 1 in 100,000 chance of something terrible isn't always worse than a 1 in 10 chance of something that's just regular bad.

Ima2NYM_LTR

Tue, Sep 06 2011, 11:57 am

If I may give a recent example.

DS's younger sister was a counselor at an overnight camp where counselors were allowed to bring their bicycles. About a month ago, she and some other counselors were on a bike trip when she fell and hurt herself.

Her father and step-mother get a call from the ER telling them that SIL was in the ER due to a fall from the bike and, in the words of the ER doctor "This would have been a very different type call if she had not been wearing her helmet"

BH she left for her year in Israel yesterday with no more than a few scars (albeit nasty looking) on her shoulder and leg. Had she not been wearing her helmet, she might not have gotten the chance to go to EY to learn for a year- or ever again

ally

Wed, Sep 07 2011, 1:01 pm

ora_43 wrote:

ally wrote:

Quote:

If you're comparing individual responsibility, you can't. But if you're comparing the "safety culture," like Ruchel was talking about, then you can.

Quote:

Obviously, the more education on road safety, the more aware people are of the dangers and the more likely they are to be careful. In Australia, they have been running some pretty heavy safety campaigns for the past 10-20 years, with the result of plumetting road toll. The campaigns are pretty broad - they cover speeding, drink-driving, helmets, seat belts etc...But more than that, the entire culture is safety oriented. I really believe they have for the most part, succeeded in minimising the 'cool factor' involved in drink driving, not wearing helmets etc...even among teenagers.

However, I don't see the 'educational' aspect of road safety as separable from the 'personal action' (helmet, seatbelt wearing) component. At the end of the day, you will never be able to remove the human element. Everyone, at some stage has driven when they were tired, distracted, rushed, talking on the phone. the more someone drives, the more confident of their 'safety' they become and the more risks they will take. That is just nature. That's how most accidents happen. There will never be a road toll of 'zero'. The only thing you can personally control, is if you assume that an accident will happen, how protected are you? Thats why, no matter how safe a driver I think I am, I will never own a motorbike.

the world's best mom

Wed, Sep 07 2011, 1:29 pm

ora_43 wrote:

AFAIK, traffic fatalities per mile driven are up, not down. So there are a lot of people besides that one guy who managed to escape the explosion who haven't benefited from increased seatbelt use. But you can't find their stories the way you can find stories of seatbelts saving lives because they're so much less direct - how can you prove that the Honda Civic driver killed by a careless SUV driver would have lived if the other woman's kid were in a less secure carseat and she had therefore been just that much more alert? You can't. Even if it's true.

Statistics show that .01% of accident victims would have been better off without the seatbelt. In other words, 99.99% are better off with their seatbelts. I've always felt very strongly about this issue, as my mil always reminds me that I may be endangering mine and my children's lives by using seatbelts and carseats. She told it to me again after my ds and I got out of our upside down car with minor scratches. It makes me so mad.

amother

Wed, Sep 07 2011, 3:27 pm

world's best mom, can you back up your statistics? Sestbelts can cause injuries like whiplash and sternum collapse but the other injuries would have been more severe like death. It seems you just quantified some nonsense you made up. I was not able to locate your "statistics." I doubt they are true.

As to ora_43, I have been trying to decipher your meaning. Is the point to your message that female drivers are more alert if they use worse car seats and therefore all other drivers are safer? What about said female drivers kids?

Personally, I opt for the safest carseat, pay attention to the road, demand helmets and safe riding practices and I don't make up statistics which obviate the good advice given in these forums.

amother

Wed, Sep 07 2011, 4:03 pm

I just went through the evenflo Manuel. It speaks about routing the seatbelt properly through the carseat. Cosco requires the model number of the carseat.

Common, is there really a place in these manuels even discussing seatbelt statistics. Commonsense, dictates that the other manufacturer is not pro or con seatbelts but is advocating proper use of carseat restraints. Whether wearing seatbelts can cause accidents one percent of the time is about as likely to be found in the Manuel as the contributory cause of underinflated tires to car accidents.

I have checked real statistics in US, India, and UK. Nothing supports what you said. Unfortunately, you did make it up. I can't find any support or even quantification of your facts. If you are so pro-seatbelt why pretend there is even a small percentage of support for not wearing them.

Stop quantitying nonsense.