Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
M O R P H E R – folding bicycle helmet
LAST month I attended the British Inventions Show.
The stand-out product was the stand by the entrance.
It took me about one second to sense that this was a good idea.
I met the inventor, Jeff Wolf OBE, who explained his head was saved by a regular helmet ... yet few cyclists trouble to wear them. It set him thinking:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/morpher-folding-helmet-technology
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Thérèse these are expected to become available in May. The funding for the tooling-up is partly crowd-sourced. You'd have to wait for an article in any event, but if you're prepared to both pay and (then) wait, they're offering significant price reductions to early contributors. However if you're considering paying in advance for a Morpher, read the caveats beforehand (I have no financial interest in Morpher apart from having ordered one. I would also like to see Jeff's project succeed).
-
Permalink Reply by Grant on
-
Depends whether you think cycle helmets are actually effective in reducing serious injury. The evidence is mixed, to say the least: http://cyclehelmets.org/
There is quite a lot of evidence that helmet promotion has negative public health consequences, mainly because it tends to exaggerate the risks, and so put people off, an activity with considerable overall health benefits.
-
-
No helmet can prevent all head injury, but I think *wearing* most kinds of helmet is better than wearing none. The trouble with bicycle helmets is that, most of the time, they're a nuisance to keep pack or store. I haven't always worn one because of their bulk ... at the end of a ride. It seems to me that the MORPHER addresses this problem and reduces the excuse not to wear a helmet (the clever unfolding, latching and folding also appeals to my gadget side).
-
-
I too have seen accounts of the cyclist airbag.
It's a sophisticated technological solution that is necessary expensive – and likely always will be. If I was certain to have a bicycle accident, the airbag is probably what I'd want to be wearing, despite the high cost.
In the world of uncertainties the answer is less certain. For example, I'm sure that Swedish engineering makes the airbag highly reliable, unlikely to deploy accidentally and highly likely to deploy when needed. However, in the final analysis, would it be as reliable as a simple helmet, including the folding one, where the chin strap is securely fastened?
Effectiveness are balanced by cost, risk, reliability and probabilities. The big picture is that many cyclists don't bother to wear any kind of helmet, something that the MORPHER addresses.
-
-
I strongly object to your assertion that the only reason cyclists who don't wear helmets is that they don't bother.
Many people who ride bikes have taken the time to read the evidence for and against whether helmets make a significant contribution to cyclist safety, and some have concluded that for their personal riding style a helmet makes minimal or no difference, and does not justify the negative effects of helmet promotion.
I don't want to get into the helmet debate here - there are hundreds of pages all over the web cover this ad neauseam. I just want to state that the case for helmets is by no means clear cut.
My decision not to wear a helmet took a look more "bother" than just slapping on the magic hat because everyone else does so it must make a difference. I wish half as much faith, effort and ingenuity was put into promoting safer roads in the first place as is put into plastic hats - then we might really gain something.
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Harvey on
-
You're right in that there's quite a passionate debate out there about the use of cycle helmets, and the effect that they have on keeping us safe.
There are two key points to consider in that. Firstly - the effect that wearing a helmet has on the way we behave as cyclists, the way motor vehicles behave towards cyclists with/without helmets, and the likelihood that wearing a helmet has any impact on the chance that a cyclist will or will not be involved in an accident. This is one I don't want to get into - as you say, there is a whole load of debate out there about the effect helmet wearing has on behaviour and perceptions of safety.
The second but most pertinent issue here, which often gets lost in debate about the above, is the role a helmet can play if you are unfortunate enough to come off your bike (for whatever reason) and land on your head. There are a number of studies that show that you are significantly more likely to suffer serious head/brain injury if you land on your head WITHOUT a helmet on. Helmets are proven to offer significant protection to your head and thus reduce the risk of serious head/brain injury. So - on that issue, the fact that a helmet can offer valuable protection in the event that you do come off and land on your head - there is a clear rationale for wearing a helmet.
Promoting safer roads is definitely worthwhile, but no matter how safe they are, people will still fall off bikes, often onto their heads. I'd encourage you to wear a helmet.....
Stay safe
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Paul, I've put a lot of thought and research into this helmet issue too. Not just with cycling, I refuse to wear one when playing cricket. I'll see your second point and raise you the fact that any supposed safety benefits to an individual cyclist from wearing a helmet are far outweighed by the disbenefits to cycling as a whole.
Stay safe yourself...
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Some years ago, my brother was cycling to work when he was hit by a car. The driver had such poor eyesight that it later turned out he could have been registered as blind. My brother was not wearing a helmet and suffered massive head injuries which killed him a few hours later. I sat with him and his wife as he died. I saw what head trauma looks like. If he had been wearing a helmet he may have survived, he may not have, but a helmet would at least have given him a chance.
-
-
-
How does that work with cricket then? The behaviour theory around cycling is that those wearing helmets are more prone to risk taking - which I get, in that helmets give you a false sense of security. Clearly it's unwise for people to be taking risks on the road...
But playing cricket - would a lack of helmet whilst facing a mitchell johnson ball not inhibit your game somewhat? I'd be terrified without a helmet on...
You're a brave man!
-
-
-
This reply is to Michael below. The forum does not allow >8 levels of reply.
Michael
My heart breaks for what happened to your brother. But you don't know a helmet would have made a difference, and the standards for helmet design mean that although it is not certain a helmet would have prevented catastrophic brain injury, it is very unlikely.
What certainly have made a difference is if we culturally showed abhorrence to anyone attempting to drive if they were not physically able or skilled enough to do so.
Imagine if the social pressure that has been put behind cyclists wearing plastic hats had been put behind drivers not having accidents!
It worked for drink driving, it could work for poor driving. But not if we continue with this collective hallucination that motor vehicles are just a dangerous force of nature independent of human control, and all we can do is protect ourselves from them as best we can. -
-
-
I'm a pedestrian/cyclist/driver and I don't usually wear a helmet as I find it uncomfortable and restricting as I look around a lot. I would certainly wear one if touring though. As a driver, I really get upset by cyclists who don't use lights or wear dark clothing. The lycra gang are pretty aware but there are a disturbing number who are almost invisible in winter's gloom.
-
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
