First off let me say i wear my helmet all the time and dont plan to change. My roomate argues though that he read a statistic that says helmets cause more harm in crashes over 20 mph then they do good. Can any one show me any information to support that?

 

Ask your buddy.
Seems that he's using the same logic used by people who don't like seatbelts and airbags.

 

he's an idiot...problem SOLVED!!![&:]

j/k (maybe not)...i have NEVER heard ANYTHING like that....in fact...low speed crashes are statistically more dangerous than high speed crashes (yes there is a source for that but i don't know where)....so to say that it would do more harm in a low speed is absolutely idiotic...

does he have any stats to prove his point...?

 

LMAO thats complete BS.... you should have asked him to show proof?

 

[ Scientific Study ]
1) Jut forehead forward and with 20 yard head start, run as fast as you can and run head into brick wall (use skate board and downhill if necessary to achieve 20mph+)
2) Repeat procedure except use dot/snell approved helmet this time
[ /Scientific Study ]

Post results of which caused more damage

 

yea he said he can't find the report he did, i know he did i watched him do it. the only statistic or statment i found to support him was at bikersrights.com and toward the bottom they had a supposed quote from snell.
We Asked a Number of Helmet Companies, which of their helmets would provide the best safety benefits Snell "A helmet that can take one of our headforms through these 2 impacts unscathed could probably handle a single impact somewhat greater than 17.3 MPH, but certainly no more than 23 MPH." - Ed Becker, Snell
I understand his logic that there is more weight on you head and it creates more force and potential strain, but i dont see how in a crash over 20 mph would be more benefical to not have a helemt on. Any how i know there is plenty of information out there to support helmet use and i could care less about that i am just interested in information agaisnt helmet use.

And NO I am not debating wheather or not i should wear a helmet i always and do and always plan to.

 

bwahahahahaaha....that's some funny stuff.....post the results if you can still speak....bwhahahahaah....[sm=lol.gif]

 

Motorcyclist magazine did a test in 2005 on helmets. The current issue has an update on that article with some background on the debate with SNELL. As a result, SNELL has updated their standards and testing procedures.

I'd recommend you read those two articles then you can engage in a battle of wits with your unarmed friend.

 

I tried to find the article and their site confuses me if you could post a link that would be great!

My other argument is if helmets are so bad why do they require them in races?

 

Here's a link to the original article that stirred up the bees. The new article is in print. Perhaps you can find the link to it and post.

http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/ge...helmet_review/