Yeah, duh. Baldies are stuck behind the cue ball. Having luxuriant locks means that I have never even noticed that a bike helmet made me hotter, though it made me look dorkier. Which I suspect is the primary objection, down deep.
Probably Harry Hurt’s study (still looking). Dude’s the god of motorcycle helmets (can anyone not brain-damaged argue against motorcycle helmet laws?) and he found that the lateral fall with the head higher than a biker’s left one with as much damage with less velocity. My fall was from a near stop (on a sidewalk–it was it or an off-ramp).
Well the logical extension of the arguments above would apply to motorcycle helmets the same - including the same claim that unless running into a wall the force of impact is no more than gravity’s effect - roughly same height on each sort of bike so same roughly 10 mph no matter how fast the motorcycle is travelling at, 80 mph or at a full stop.
But more importantly there are lots of people waiting for organs … why cut off such a major source? in case needed.
Back to bike helmets - that fall from 3 feet with head as first contact, hypothetically the force of impact at any travel speed - eschereal’s point is a good one. Accidents at lower speeds (and in recumbents) at less likely to result in head first contact than those at higher speeds. 'Bents though make me nervous as I think they are less visible in traffic, even with flag sticking up.
dropzone besides my baseline looks there is also the fact that I am often riding in my Bert and Ernie cycling jersey … it may not be possible for me to look any dorkier!
in case needed.