Conference noted::bicycle

     Maybe I'm coming across as a hard case here, but it might just
    come down to the simple question, "Wanna ride it? WEAR the helmet!".
    Granted, he/she will leave with it, but we know it may not stay 
    on the ole dome once outa sight. Who knows, they may get sick of
    dragging it along and it may end up on the noggin'.
    
     It is tough, but master locks are cheap and you don't have to worry
    about extra keys. If the case with the paperboy is legit', as his
    parent, I would seriously consider the hard line.
    
     Just another fascist,
    
                            Chip

    Whether or not it's "cool" to wear a helmet...Are you saying
    *any* helmet, or mainly the awkward and uglies.  Giro, for example,
    makes helmets that are both light and attractive.  Specialized
    makes a similarly light and attractive piece.  If you want to point
    to wearers that are "cool", try Greg Lemond (Giro) or the 7-Eleven
    pros (Specialized).
    
    I've heard two arguments against these helmets:
    
    o  They're expensive ($60-$80)
    
       This inspires the motorcycle argument -- if you gotta ten dollar
       head, get a ten dollar helmet.
    
    o  They're too light to do any real good
    
       Two weeks ago my cycling team was warming down after a race
       where we captured close to half of the prize list (does that make
       us cool?).  One of my teammates had his wheel drop into a crack 
       in the pavement, and he smashed face-first into a steel grate.  
       He has a broken nose, a concussion, and over 200 stitches.
       His Giro helmet was in pieces.  Its destruction probably 
       saved his life.
    
       When the six of us were warming up *before* the race, only two
       of us were wearing our helmets.  He wasn't one of them.  That's
       how hard it is to get a *grownup* to wear a helmet.  (I'll be
       interested to see how many of my teammates wear a helmet for 
       warmup at the next race!)
    
    I wish you luck in convincing a child to use one.  About the only
    suggestion I can make is don't *issue* one.  Instead, take the kid
    on a buying trip.  Let them try helmets on, and pick out one for 
    themselves.  They'll be more likely to wear it if it's *theirs*.

    	Have to start them early. I know you mentioned 10, 11 and
    	up.
    
    	Memorial day I was busting my butt helping our preacher tear
    	out his nast front yard. A fella and his son went by, the
    	father walking, the son riding (with a helmet). I made a
    	point of walking over the the father and telling him I
    	appreciated parents who started their kids out riding with
    	a helmet.
    
    	BTW, the boy was using training wheels.
    
    	Scott

    I assisted a friend son (7 year old) in buying a kids mountain bike
    last night.  His parent bought him a helmet at the same time, the
    new kids Rhode Gear. Is is the same design as many of the new
    shell-less models with some real "hot" lycra colors on the outside. 
    The boy was definitely excited about getting the helmet...look like a
    real racer.  Helmet retail price, before bike discount, is only $29.95
    at O'neils.
    
    steve

	Two of my kids are old enough (7 and 9) to be riding two-wheelers.
	A couple of years ago we got them both helmets (from Specialized -
	I think they were only $25) and made it clear that the rule was
	"If you're on the bike, you WILL wear your helmet!"  They know
	that I always wear mine and I've had no problem with them wearing
	theirs.  I'm hoping this will continue when they're teenagers
	'cause they started young.  

	As a bit of parenting philosophy, I don't believe this sort of
	thing should be negotiated with the kids.  I know other kids whose
	parents bought them helmets, but never insisted that they wear
	them, so of course they never do.  A lot of good that does!  We
	explained why they needed helmets, let them help pick them out,
	and made the rules clear.  It's no longer an issue - they
	wouldn't think of riding anywhere without them.

	chris

I tend to agree with .5   It's never too early to establish good safety habits.
My son started wearing a helmet as a passenger at 1 1/2.  He's now 3 1/2 and
*HE* insists on wearing his helmet even when riding his tricycle in the
basement.  Yes, I always wear my helmet and continue to encourage him.  I am
also a motorcyclist.  Earlier this spring I wanted to take the MC out of the
basement and up to the garage.  Told my son what I was planning.  He immediately
went upstairs and came back with my boots, gloves and MC helmet  :-).  I really
had *NO*  intentions of getting into gear for a 75 foot ride but I did  

                        :-)

Frank

    In the pediatrician's office last week I picked up a brochure from
    Troxel and Triaminic advertising Troxel helmets. They featured the
    kid's helmets but had sizes for all ages, ANSI-approved, under $20.00.
    They also had a sample helmet in the office. Looked like a good deal,
    and certainly the cheapest I've seen. (Other than that it's the
    Performance picnic cooler for $25 or a Bell Streetrider for $30 in the
    Campmoor catalog.)
    
    As for wearing them, helmets are like water bottles, gloves, bags,
    bells and spokey-dokes: just part of the fun gear that comes with
    bikes.
    
    Rob (the one without the spokey-dokes)

	re: .7

	Helmuts don't get approval from ANSI. The ANSI sticker indicates
	that they have been made to a particular set of standards. 

	The Snell is an organization that actually tests and approves 
	helmuts. When you see the green Snell sticker on a helmut it
	means a lot more than ANSI.

    Spending a lot of money for a helmet doesn't mean that you will get
    the best protection.  Those expensive Giro helmets may look cool, but
    they don't test all that well.  The Bell Quest got top rating in C.U.'s
    latest test, and you can get it for $40.00.  It has a steel ring inside
    the shell to help hold it together in a crash.  The Bell Streetrider
    for kids also tested tops in its group of kids helmets.  It looks more
    like a motorcycle helmet than most.  My 16 year old son prefers to wear
    a hard shell Bell Windjammer which I picked up for $15.00 to be used
    for off-road riding(Where penetration is more of a concern than on
    road) even though at 16 oz. it is twice as heavy as the Quest, because
    he thinks it looks cooler.  I guess that I am lucky that my kids all
    wear their helmets without any fuss.  My biggest problem is that I
    catch my wife riding off to work without hers, because she thinks it
    messes up her hair.  I am glad that my 12 year old daughter values
    her head more than her hair.  As for the five year old, he never
    forgets his helmet or his seat belt for that matter.  Now if only
    the nineteen year old was as sensible.  I borrowed his pickup last
    Saturday, but I never got out of the driveway because the seatbelt
    was unuseable.  I just couldn't get myself to drive that truck
    without a seatbelt(Shudder).
    
    				Don

    From the June issue of the Fallon Community Health Plan Newsletter:
    
    Fallon Sponsors bicycle helmet program
    
    Fallon, Fairlawn Rehabilitation Hospital, the Central Massachusetts
    Safety Council and the Massachusetts Head Injury Association are
    sposoring a bicycle helmet poster campaign this summer.  During June,
    July and August, poster and pamphlets urging use of bicycle helmets,
    and offering helmet discounts, will be on display at Fallon locations
    as well as area hospitials and supermarkets.
        The poster campaign is designed to increase awareness of bicycle
    safety, especially through the use of helmets.  More than 300,000
    children each year are trated in hospital emergency rooms for
    bicycle-related injuries, one third of which involve head trauma. 
    Bicycle helmets can reduce the risk of serious head injury by as much
    as 85%, when they are used.
        Fallon urges parents to wear bicycle helmets themselves and to
    prchase helmets for their childrenas soon as they are able to ride a
    bike.

    I don't know how well this is going to work, but ...
    
    In the state of Victoria in Australia, helmet wearing becomes
    compulsorary on the 1st of July this year.  This is being widely
    publicised via TV and newspaper ads.  The schools are involved in the
    campaign, of course, and are also doing bulk purchase deals,
    effectively acting as the retailer.  (I wonder how good their liability
    insurance is?)  The main thrust of the publicity is that it is not cool
    to go without a helmet.  In spite of this I still see kids, mostly
    early teens and mostly slightly overweight and 'tough' looking boys
    (how's that for a generalisation), riding bikes with their helmet
    hanging from the handlebars.
    
    There are all sorts of arguments against compulsorary helmet riding, of
    course, but we seem to have got used to compulsorary seat belts in
    cars, so maybe this new legislation will get general approval.  The
    police have stated that they will enforce it rigorously and that they
    expect to raise lots of revenue for the state.  If they only enforced
    the general road laws for bike riders maybe some of the car drivers
    would treat us as legitimate occupiers of road space.  But maybe that's
    too much to hope for.
    
    One of the major beefs was that the original draft of the law specified
    that the helmets had to meet Australian standards.  The standard was
    written by a committee who had no idea of what it's like to ride a
    bike.  It's more suitable to motor bike use - very heavy and very
    little ventilation - great when you are riding hard in 100 degree heat! 
    Now the law states that the helmet must be 'approved', what ever that
    means.  My Bell Quest, which does not meet Australian standards, seems
    to be 'approved'.
    
    Another problem, which relates directly to very young kids, is that
    some informed opinion states that a helmet can actually cause more
    damage than it prevents.  Something to do with the combination of heavy
    helmets and weak necks.
    
    Just under two weeks to go until the big day.  Lets see how much change
    there is.
    
    Richard.

    Boston Globe - Tuesday June 26, 1990 page 21
    
    reprinted without permission:
    
    "HOUSE APPROVES CHILD-HELMET BILL"
    
    A bill that would require children ages 1 to 4 to wear helmets when
    their parents take them out for a bicycle ride passed the state House
    yesterday. and its sponsor, Rep Barbara Gray (R-Framingham) predicted
    that the Senate and Gov. Dukakis would approve the measure.  "Children
    who are riding on the back of their adults' [bicycles] are particulary
    vulnerable, because they have no choice in the matter, Gray said."  The
    bill, which passed 159-1, does not specify penalties for parents who
    ride their bicycles with bare-headed toddlers aboard, she said. The
    proposal is a holdover from last year's session, which it passed the
    house but died in the Senate amid fierce politicking over various
    larger legislative issues, said Gray, who in the past has pushed for
    laws mandating the use of vehicle safety belts and motorcycle helmets."

         So, I wonder how long it will take the suicidal group of
         1-4 year olds in this state to start a movement to repeal
         the helmet law just like their parents did with the
         seatbelt law?  :-)

         This law brings up an interesting point. How often have you
         seen mom or dad riding with a kid wearing a helmet on the
         back? The child almost always has a helmet on. But how
         often have you seen mom and dad riding with no helmet?

         Makes sense huh? Kid's OK but mom is institutionalized for
         brain damage. Gotta wonder what people are thinking
         sometimes......

         JC

    A law without a penalty provided is useless.  No cop will waste his
    time writing tickets.  However, if kids are killed in accidents with
    cars, the drivers will be axonerated because the parent becomes
    negligent.
    
    ed

     If this philosophy goes the same way as drug-abusive moms, we could
    see parents in violation of the kiddie-helmet law brought up on
    charges of manslaughter, child neglect or even homicide should
    the unthinkable happen - a child killed (or seriously injured).
    
     And rightfully so, in my opinion.
    
        Chip

    My 11 year old brother recently received a mild skull fracture after
    falling from his bike.  The kid didn't have the decency to wait until
    we got him his helmet for Christmas.  :-}
    
    Since I'm a late shopper, do you think it would be better to buy a
    helmet at an easy to exchange place like Lechmere's or should I go to a
    bike shop and assure myself of the best helmet?
    
    Also, a more specific pointer to the Consumer Reports article would be
    appreciated.
    
    Elaine
    

    
    The kneejerk reply is to say, "Go to a bike store."  I know
    I would.  The selection will be better, and some designs may
    fit your kid better than others (and have better appeal, which
    is as important in encouraging use).  Also, you'll have a salesperson
    who *should* be lots more capable of explaining the relative virtues
    of the helmets, and generally how to use them.
    
    Sorry about the "premature" fall...
    
    Good luck,
    -john

    Find one  that  fits,  and  that  he's willing to wear. I would be
    tempted  to  ignore  Consumer  Reports, because they don't seem to
    make  sense  on  evaluating  bicycles.  Insist on a helmet that is
    Snell  certified.  That's  a  slightly  tougher test wuite than is
    required  for  ANSI  certification.  Almost  all helmets available
    these days are ANSI certified, and many are Snell certified, so it
    shouldn't be hard to find one.

--David

Wherever you go for the helmet, I'd recommend giving him a gift cert.
I've found that the helmets fit quite a bit different from each other.
Doesn't sound like motivation oughta be a problem after the skull 
fracture!
                          ken

    I agree with .18, make sure that the helmet is certified.  I recently
    read a Consumer Report about helmets (within the last year) and
    although some issues can be debated, there are a few points that I
    would agree when it comes to kids helmets.  Don't buy anything that has
    an open forehead section.  Also, stay away from helmets that cover the
    childs ears (I didn't hear that car come by...).  Also, make sure that
    you can adjust the straps and that it is adjusted so the helmets fits 
    just over the eyebrows (rule of thumb).  I cringe every time I see a kid 
    (or adult) wear a helmet that sits to the back of the head, exposing their 
    forehead.
    
    Eric

The Consumer Reports article bothered me mostly because they 
recommend a soft-shell (foam) helmet over a thin-shell helmet.

I have a thin shell and fell better about having something over the 
foam.

Also, it is almost impossible to buy a helmet today that is not 
either SNELL or ANSI approved.  While SNELL is slightly tougher, I 
think it's most important to get one that will be worn whichever 
label is in it.

	~Mike

	It was the May 1990 issue of Consumer Reports that had the helmet
	ratings. See note 900.27 for a quickie summary.

	Your milage and skull thickness may vary.

	-tom

    re .21
    
    It most certainly is possible to buy a helmet with neither ansi nor
    snell certification!  Recently we were shopping a close-out sale for a
    new helmet for my wife.  They had a Bell (I don't recall which model)
    which wasn't certified.  Admittedly it may not have been a current
    model, I was surprised that Bell had such an item.  As always, buyer
    beware!
    
    Barry

    You are right to shop carefully, however even the old Bell Biker's
    passed the ANSI tests, that was in the days before the stickers were
    "the thing to do" or required by anybody.
    
    However, according to the Bicycle Helmet Manufacturer's Association,
    helmets over 5 years old should be replaced anyway.
    
    Putting that gobbledygook together, it might be wise to conclude that
    those helmets may have been safe when manufactured but should not be
    worn any more.
    
    ed

    I can't  remember  where  I put the note, but I asked Bell when to
    replace  my  Bell  Tourlite, and they said that the shelf life for
    their  helmets  is  8  years, and they would examine my helmet for
    free  to see if it needed to be replaced. So at least some helmets
    are good for 8 years or one crash, whichever comes first.

    I'm really  surprised  that  Bell  made a non-approved helmet. I'd
    never heard that before.

--David

>    I'm really  surprised  that  Bell  made a non-approved helmet. I'd
>    never heard that before.
>--David

    Does anyone know when the standards were formed?

    

    Getting back to the Issue at hand....
    
    
    I have to agree that the best thing to do is fing a helmet that this
    kids will wear. But, fit has to be taken into account as well. The
    effectiveness of the helmet can be greatly reduced if the fit is not
    right. 
    
    There are a couple of brands that come to mind. 
    
    Bell has two that would be good for different reasons.
    
    The V1 pro is a great choice for durability. It will take a lot of
    careless handling, save being dropped onto concrete or something. I
    often see kids with these on.
    
    There is another that I can't remember the name of that comes with a
    bunch of stickers. The kids can decorate them however they want. The
    advantage here is that they may like it better and therefore wear it
    more often.
    
    The other brand that comes to mind is Giro.
    
    These guys are pricey. But, you can't beat them for quality and fit.
    There are some lines that come in 8 sizes. There should be no problem
    fitting the helmet to the child. However, they won't be as rugged as
    some others.
    
    I would definitley look at the consumer report article. There were some
    very informative points. Obviously they are not catering to the same
    audience as Bicycling Magazine would so you should expect a little less
    from the technical side. It does, however, give a great overview of
    brands and prices.
    
    Good Luck,
    
    JC

    Give or take a year, the stickers started appearing on helmets in '85.
    From note 22 (10 feb 86) it appears that the USCF started requiring
    "approved" helmets in the 86 racing season.  At that time not all of
    the helmets which passed the tests had stickers but the manufacturers
    were quick to add them, I think some would even supply stickers to
    be added by dealers for their previously sold helmets.
    
    In '82 or '83, Bell was saying that their helmets had passed tests. I
    don't recall whether the test had been designated a standard yet.
    
    I think the Bell Tourlite is too heavy for a kid.
    
    ed

>
>         How do we get today's kids to wear helmets.
>
      My 15 year old son wears a helmet because I told him to and because it
      is a condition of him getting a mountain bike.
      I wear a helmet because I have a wife and 3 kid, bought same time as my
      sons.
      I am working on my other son..19yrs old. The daughter 17/18yrs old and
      my wife. If you have an argument for me to use for these other 2 then I
      will need it for when the cycling season starts.
      Rgds,
      Stephen

      Slightly related to bike helmets.. In Germany before wearing car seat
      belt became mandatory. The insurance companies successfully argued that
      anyone injured while not wearing fitted seatbelts accepted their (part
      of) injuries as being self inflicted.
      Something like this could solve the helmet question. In most countries
      now motor cycle helmets are mandatory. I would expect the insurance
      companies to respond in the same way.
      Rgds,

	re: .29

	1. Helmets are cheaper that the hospital costs if you have a head-
	   injury crash.  Assume you are lucky enough to need a hospital
	   room instead of a morgue.

	2. Wearing a helmet is more pleasant that dealing with 1 or 2 years
	   worth of headaches after a severe concussion.

	I could ask my wife for some more reasons, (she learned about 1, and 2 
	hard way), but I think I made my point.

	Barry

    The Snell standards have been around since the mid sixties.  Motorcycle
    helmets have been tested and appropriate stickers applied since then. 
    States tried to require Snell compliant helmets with mixed results
    since some states have dropped the helmet laws as well as seat-belt
    laws.
    
    Helmets for bicycle riding did not appear until in 78 or 79 when the
    Bell Biker appeared.  Before then I saw hockey and rock-climbing
    helmets used by those who were determined to protect their head.
    The opinion expressed by the bicycle helmet industry at the time was
    that no bicyclist would want to wear a helmet heavy enough to meet the
    Snell standard.
    
    I like the German approach that any head injury sustained without a
    helmet is considered "self inflicted" and thus not liable for coverage
    in an accident.

>Note 1576.32              Getting Kids to Wear Helmets                  32 of 32
>    
>    I like the German approach that any head injury sustained without a
>    helmet is considered "self inflicted" and thus not liable for coverage
>    in an accident.
>
      This was/is the attitude towards car and seat belts, mentioned in my note
      above. They are not that far towards bikes and helmets. As soon as
      helmets are considered common then I would expect the same logic.
      Rgds,