Complusory helmet law
Comments
-
funny how every time the helmet issue is raised, we, as cyclists start debating amongst ourselves the pros and cons of wearing one.
i personally wear one just as a matter of choice. cannot see how it could be made compulsory tho, who's going to fine a little kid who nips out on his bike to see his mates? or the old fella who pops down to his allotment? or the old lady who does her shopping at her local store 1/4 mile away?
i think the idea of a compulsory bill, is purely down to insurance claims, 'he wasn't wearing a helmet so shouldn't have been on the road' case dismissed.
it has been well documented that the wearing of helmets won't save a life if involved in a serious accident, just as a motorcycle helmet would not save a life in an impact crash of 50 mph, or even less.
the wearing of seatbelts was frowned upon when introduced, yet most people wear theirs now without a seconds thought, even tho, in some cases more damage is done by the belt cutting into the wearers neck as is done in the accident itself.
it is a very strong argument for wearers and non wearers alike, but if (god forbid) it does one day become compulsory, those who don't wear them by choice will feel harder done by than those who do.0 -
Here in the U.S. many of the States have had motorcycle helmet laws because the politicians thought the people wanted them(I guess). Then some states repealed the law
because, apparently, people didn't want them. In truth it was small pressure groups who get some bug up their *ss about just about everything and the politicians listen because, well, they're politicians and don't have a clue. Anyway, the Great State of Ohio has enacted and repealed their motorcycle helmet law at least 3 times(that I know of - don't ride one). Go figure. Sorry. Rant over. :oops: :oops:0 -
Its a matter of choice.
Just like smoking.
Just like drinking.
Going to the pictures
Crossing the road.
Eastenders or Corrie.
Whatever.
You make a personal risk assessment and choose. We are all big boys and girls.
0 -
I don't wear a helmet because I've never been convinced that I need one, or that the benefit of wearing one is worth the energy and money involved in buying and putting one on. If there was a good argument for wearing one I might change my mind - but if there is a good argument I've yet to see it.
Though I have banged my head in the kitchen a few times :?0 -
This is key. The stats from Aussie states that introduced compulsory helmets showed sharp falls (I seem to remember 20-30%) in cycle journeys like-for-like. Plus no reduction in major injuries/fatalities, for what it's worth. The data should be quite easy to find and if I get time I'll track them down. I'd guess that reduced cycling has a greater effect than the protection benefits, if any.bompington wrote:The evidence certainly seems to suggest that compulsory helmet wearing does not improve things, or possibly even makes them worse e.g. by reducing the number of people actually cycling.
Elsewhere on bike radar this has been discussed extensively, but factors that may compensate for any skull-protection benefit might include:
1) drivers treat helmet-wearers with less caution
2) helmet-wearers treat themselves with less caution
3) helmets catch on street furniture more often (larger size + ridges on helmet) and cause neck injuries (including fatal or paralysis)
However, I still wear one for all club rides/sportives and most commuting. This is partly because I'm in control of 2), partly because of a reasonably high average speed, and partly because it just feels like common sense!!0 -
i work in a bike shop when i get asked about helmets i say it's up to you but from personal experience i'd get one just in case. yes they don't stop injuries but for some accidents they are worth their weight in gold.0
-
I'm pro helmet but i still think it should be left to choice. I definantly think that it should be heavily encouraged with youth riders though. I remember when I used to cycle to school and it was "geeky" to wear a helmet and "cool" to ride without one, at least at a young age helmet use should be heavily encouraged until more informed choices can be made other than what looks cool0
-
I actually feel more unsafe wearing a helmet. I ride quite carefully and if I have a helmet on I feel as if I am tempting fate and will have a crash. (Laurent Jalabert said something similar. About the only thing I have in common with the great man). Although tragic on the occassions it has happened, hardly any pros have died from head injuries and they're probably more likely to touch wheels with each other and crash than I am on quite country roads. And if a truck hits you at 50 mph you're probably going to be a goner any way.
I also don't like people telling me what I should do with my own head.0 -
Its pointless bringing in this law where i live as nobody will adhere to it. Though i think it should be personal choice for adults. Most "proper" cyclists i see around here are wear one (except guys over 70 on their steel bike from 1970s and if they are still riding they must be doing ok!). Most chavs on their stolen appollos wont and no £30 fixed penalty will make them.
Just like the new dog laws - the responsible people (people who choose to wear or not to wear one) will be the ones to face added cost of meeting the new standard and the iirresponsible ones (see appollo boy above) it wont make a difference to.0 -
As I understand it you're supposed to replace your helmet periodically especially if it gets a knock - well even if you get everyone to wear a helmet how are you going to ensure it is fit for purpose?0
-
Hi, I know its boring but I studied this in med school and the data collected suggested a 63% reduction in serious head injuries if you wore a helmet, I've been convinced since!!0
-
Except that no one can find any difference in the number of head injuries before and after helmet use became common, despite a lot of research. This is true even among pro cyclists who will be lucky to get through a season if their crash total stays in single figures.rhodrigwyn wrote:Hi, I know its boring but I studied this in med school and the data collected suggested a 63% reduction in serious head injuries if you wore a helmet, I've been convinced since!!
Medical experts may know plenty about head injuries, but they know fcuk all about what happens when you fall off a bicycle.0 -
rhodrigwyn wrote:Hi, I know its boring but I studied this in med school and the data collected suggested a 63% reduction in serious head injuries if you wore a helmet, I've been convinced since!!
I've seen this figure bandied about all over the internet but have not been able to find a source for it.
Do you have a source for it?0 -
thomas et al 1994, spait et al 1991. Prof JS Sibert et al 1995. Maimaris et al.
Some of these look at the effect of compulsory wearing of helmets in children that was enforced in Canada.0 -
rhodrigwyn wrote:thomas et al 1994, spait et al 1991. Prof JS Sibert et al 1995. Maimaris et al.
Some of these look at the effect of compulsory wearing of helmets in children that was enforced in Canada.
But you know that children aren;t like adults don't you?0 -
Both children and adults are subject to head injuries. Like all of you, I have read lots of threads on this subject. I firmly believe that, if the law allows, adults should have the right to ride without a helmet. What I do not understand are the riders who try to claim that riding without a helmet makes no difference to their safety. Of course it does. In nearly every pro race there are crashes in which helmet use saves a rider from more serious injury. Remember Cadel Evans' helmet last year? I too would like to see more study on this, if for no other reason so that we don't have to have the same debate repeatedly.0
-
What a stupid statement.Crown Jewel wrote:Both children and adults are subject to head injuries. Like all of you, I have read lots of threads on this subject. I firmly believe that, if the law allows, adults should have the right to ride without a helmet. What I do not understand are the riders who try to claim that riding without a helmet makes no difference to their safety. Of course it does. In nearly every pro race there are crashes in which helmet use saves a rider from more serious injury. Remember Cadel Evans' helmet last year? I too would like to see more study on this, if for no other reason so that we don't have to have the same debate repeatedly.
In the 100 plus years before the pros wore helmets the number of serious head injuries would not even amount to a statistic. Or perhaps you think they didn't crash before 1990?0 -
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/119214580/PDFSTART
The abovementioned Sibert et al (as pdf download). Makes interesting reading, primarily about children but stastistics covering adults too. Not one study they cite shows that helmets can be a bad thing. Even before reading this I've always been pro helmets for children. I like to think adults are more sensible and aware :roll:
I personally always wear a helmet when on the MTB but almost never when commuting. I've had a helmet save my life a couple of times, but always because of something I chose to do (riding way beyond my limits).
If it was made law I'd probably do it though. Would it really be such a big problem to warrent all the invocations of "the nanny-state" and "personal freedoms"? If these were useful arguments against such a proposal, they would be (and frequently are) equally useful in campaigns promoting car usage, etc. It's the kind of argument that should be reserved for more important things.0 -
...0
-
Having been called stupid, I'll nevertheless give it another try. I did not say that helmets prevent accidents. Of course they don't. What I did say is that they reduce the risk of injury in some accidents; I don't know in how many, which is why I agreed we need more study of this. And bike riders have certainly been crashing since the day bikes were invented. That fact, while true, does not diminish the points I have made.0
-
They certainly reduce the risk of banging your head on open cabinet doors when working in kitchens - but I don;t know of any proposal to introduce a compulsory kitchen helmet law.0
-
It was mostly aimed at myself (hence the confession that followed).
Then again it's beginning to look like it could just as easily apply to people who insist of equating pro riders with everyone else, which strikes me as ridiculous on almost every level. If it's such a good example of why helmets are unnecessary for us mere mortals then studies about children should be just as applicable to adults. It also ignores the fact that pro mountain-bikers have worn helmets since too far back for me to remember.0 -
Warpcow,warpcow wrote:It was mostly aimed at myself (hence the confession that followed).
Then again it's beginning to look like it could just as easily apply to people who insist of equating pro riders with everyone else, which strikes me as ridiculous on almost every level. If it's such a good example of why helmets are unnecessary for us mere mortals then studies about children should be just as applicable to adults. It also ignores the fact that pro mountain-bikers have worn helmets since too far back for me to remember.
a crash is a great leveller. Your ability to ride a bike faster than everyone else does not make your head less prone to injury than anyone elses. If they managed for over 100 years without helmets and no problem it re-enforces my earlier statement that helmets are a solution to a problem that never existed. I have been riding for over fory years and can't recall a single serious head only injury among club-mates or the countless cyclists I have known or known of. I have known a few who were killed and seriously injured, but those were in accidents with vehicles where the injuries were such that head protection would not have helped.0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:What if you don't want to? Why should you be forced to? What compelling argument convinces you that it is neccessary
How about the fact you indulge in a free health service?
Would you opt out of treatment if you didn't wear a helmet and got injured?
That is compelling.
Most people miss the point here - who cares about accidents as it is your risk to take. Like eating too much, drinking too much or getting off your head. It's your health, and your choice to take a greater risk. I agree no one should be able to make you (IF there were no consequences for others).
It is selfish to expect others to then pay for this risk.
This is the only real argument to suggest you should HAVE to wear a helmet.0 -
I wear them in races, so it doesn't bother me wearing one at all times. Most of my rides are in a group, and obviously on roads that motor vehicles use. Because of this I choose to wear one. One error of judgment by a club mate or someone in a car is all it takes really. If other people don't wear one that's up to them.
I also wear one because my girlfriend caught me riding without one before and told me off big style :oops: It's not worth the ear ache!"A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"
PTP Runner Up 20150 -
Scrumple wrote:disgruntledgoat wrote:What if you don't want to? Why should you be forced to? What compelling argument convinces you that it is neccessary
How about the fact you indulge in a free health service?
Would you opt out of treatment if you didn't wear a helmet and got injured?
That is compelling.
No it'd not - it's crap - once you stop opting people out where do you stop? I start with motorists who break the speed limits and idiots in stupid sports cars.
People assess their own risk - we can easily accomodate those who get it wrong or who were foolhardy or who were victims of a 1 in a million chance that they never saw coming.
I've assessed my risk and act accordingly - no helmets for me - and that's after 37 years of cycling with no hospital visits. If I get a head injury now am I really going to break the NHS bank? I think I've paid enough taxes by now.0 -
"If they managed for over 100 years without helmets and no problem it re-enforces my earlier statement that helmets are a solution to a problem that never existed. "
Smokin Joe, what is your evidence for this? Do you really claim that no bike riders without helmets have ever been injured in such a way that wearing a helmet would have protected them?0 -
People have worn armor in battle for centuries. Particularly helmets. FWIW I don't think that there is much difference between crashing your bike and slamming your head into a concrete curb and hand to hand combat in which a crazed Viking warrior is trying to bash your head in with some huge club. I'll take the helmet either way. Can't hurt, so to speak.
That said I don't favor legislating or mandating the use of them. Up to you. Do what you will.
Although there was a situation were I was glad(in the end) that someone ordered me
"God D*amn it Noward, you want to get killed, get that helmet on *sshole". Or something to that effect. Ahhh yes, those were the days. Young, stupid, and invulnerable.0 -
Dennis, I agree. Up to each person. My only point is that if we choose not to wear a helmet we shouldn't pretend that we aren't taking on some risk. I don't know how much, but clearly some.0
