To wonder why wearing a cycle helmet isn't made law?

[sensuallettuce]

I struggle to make my kids wear a cycle helmet as they perceive it to be very uncool ( and don't listen to me suggesting it may be more uncool to be dead or brain damaged .)

I lived in New Zealand for a while where it is law to wear one which seems to take away the "option" for school kids esp - everyone wears one - there is no debate.

Driving through town today I passed a lady on a push bike wearing a sam brown and loads of reflectors on her backpack but no helmet - so its our responsibility to see her rather than for her to protect herself.

AIBU to wonder what the reason is for it not being law to wear a helmet on a bicycle as it is on a motorcycle in this country? Even if not just for kids?

Wearing a helmet saved DH from getting a serious head injury or worse. As it is he ended up with concussion and temporary memory loss. His helmet - where he'd hit the concrete - had a huge crack in it, now imagine if that had been his skull.

so its our responsibility to see her rather than for her to protect herself.

Sorry, this made me laugh. How hard done by drivers are eh...gosh, what a chore to notice a reflector and not run over the poor woman

It hasn't been made law because probably if it was the law it couldn't be enforced.
Cycling on pavements is against the law, so is jumping red lights, but it doesn't stop cyclists doing those things.
Itis often the cyclists wearing helmets that do stupid things

*notan - not sure why you crossed out that bit.

fwiw, drivers regularly mowing down perfectly legal and safe cyclists is against the law, but it doesn't stop drivers doing that.

I cycle every day, and though research indicates what it does it would appear to me to be counter-intuitive to not wear a helmet. Or my big ugly reflective jacket. (though 'sorry didn't see you there mate' is a tiresome refrain.)

Totally disagree notthan

Certainly on the roads when I commute into central London it is the cocky non helmet wearers thinking everyone will just move out of their way when they cycle dangerously

1. Wearing a helmet is perceived as being cool in our household. They wear them on the tour, Chrissie wears one, and and all our friends wear one. The kids want to wear one too. They'd never cycle without one, because we don't.
2. There is actually no evidence to say they do much good in anything other than a low speed fall.
3. If you're going to wear a helmet wear it properly. Not perched on the back of your head where it will offer no protection to your forehead.
4. WTF? The world is divided into good cyclists and bad cyclists who can be differentiated by headgear? Indurain was pretty good, never wore a lid. Anyhow I'm a cocky helmet wearer..........

Oh hurrah, now we've got a "who's more irresponsible, cyclists or motorists?" thread.

I think a lot of the frustration of motorists with cyclists may come from not having enough experience of cycling in traffic themselves. Not having been there themselves makes it harder to predict cyclists' behaviour. For example, cyclists would swerve around a puddle. Or a cyclist may ride in the middle of the road if they have to turn right, knowing that it would be so much harder to do that from the left edge of the road. This behaviour may then surprise a motorist who doesn't expect it, and then we've got a potentially dangerous situation.

Cycling is second nature to me and as a motorist I hardly ever come across dangerous cyclists (apart from those without lights) and I wonder if that is because I can predict better what they might do and adjust my driving accordingly.

Where's the like button Creeping?

I struggle to make my kids wear a cycle helmet as they perceive it to be very uncool

There is also very little evidence that it is at all useful. And IMO it makes cyclists behave like dickheads (maybe they believe they are invulnerable with a helmet on?)

I think a lot of the frustration of motorists with cyclists may come from not having enough experience of cycling in traffic themselves.

In my case its because many of them see owning a bicycle as carte blanche to tear up the rules of teh road, pedestrian ways nad basic consideration.

In the UK we tend to want all statutory policies backed up with research that shows there is a good reason for putting them in place.

I haven't read the whole thread but I wanted to applaud this comment from Birdsgottafly. Long may this be the case.

You've been cycling daily in traffic since the age of six then, Whatmeworry?

The behaviour you describe reminds me more of adolescent behaviour than general cyclists' behaviour. Are the cyclists you come across by any chance secondary school pupils or young students?

"And IMO it makes cyclists behave like dickheads "...really Whatmeworry? Any evidence of this? I ask as a very careful, helmet-wearing cyclist.(and also as a car driver.)

If I'd had a helmet at 10, I'd still have front teeth. (not really sad, it was 25 years ago, I'm over it. But it is annoying having horrid crowns!)

My kids wear helmets, even riding in the park, because it's a good habit to get into IMO.

Hi, the reason that cycle helmets aren't made law is because they don't work. Nowhere with a helmet law or massive rise in helmet wearing because of propaganda campaigns can show any reduction in risk to cyclist. There are only two proven effects of such laws and propaganda: a reduction in the number of cyclists, and obscene profits for the helmet manufacturers.

Since cycling confers such huge health benefits, regular cyclists live longer, are fitter, healthier and slimmer than the general population, by discouraging some people those laws and propaganda have a large and negative effect. In the middle of an obesity epidemic largely caused by people taking less exercise, anything which discourages people cycling is just stupid. When there is no demonstrable benefit, it's frankly insane. Is it coincidence that the countries with helmet laws are the fattest on earth?

Check out cyclehelmets.org for the facts rather than the helmet proponents fantasies.

seem to recall your opinions about cyclists from a previous thread, and they weren't helpful ones then iirc

I see - so only agreement counts as "helpful" does it?

no, whatme - not making absurd, and/or over generalized and prejudicial claims about cyclist would be 'helpful'.

Taking a step back and trying not get emotional about it - and looking at the research - it seems that there isn't a clear cut for wearing a helmet or not. This sums it all up quite nicely. www.ridein.co.uk/cycling-danger-myth-or-reality/

Wearing a helmet won't necessarily protect you from a crash - in fact it probably won't, especially if a car is involved.

I worry about my kids when they're out on their bikes but I don't want them to grow up too risk averse. I've ridden a bike for 30 years and never had a bad crash - as have most bike riders in the UK.

great post creeping - DH says being a cyclist has made him a conscientious motorist and vice versa. I cant drive yet but hope to be more aware of pedestrians and cyclists because I ride

Everyone saying helmets are only useful in a low speed fall or no-car collision - isn't it still worth wearing for those reasons though? No, it won't help if you're flattened by a truck but as many anecdotal examples on this thread show injury was prevented, or could have been prevented, because cyclists were wearing helmets.

Personally not convinced it should be made law but I shall always wear one and will make my children one

My DH did a bike tour last weekend and one of the others on the tour was a consultant neurologist. He had a helmet on with a guard across the front of his face even tho they were on normal terrain - he works with people with severe brain injury & he said he'd seen too many cyclists come in to the unit who hadnt been wearing a helmet so he always wears one.

I do wonder if with the medical people they only see the accidents results and due to them not coming in contact with all the thousands of people that don't wear helmets and do not get injured whether there world on illness is slightly scewd?

Cycling kilometres in the UK were the same in 2003 as 2008 (5 billion kilometres) and cycling casualty numbers have remained the same from 2003 to 2008, suggesting that the 10% increase in voluntary use of helmets in the UK from 2003 to 2008 did not result in any discernible reduction in injuries per cyclist, despite claims that helmets substantially reduce injury to the head.

www.cycle-helmets.com/england_helmets.html

That is an excellent link, IvyKaty.

It is hard to get more up to date figures - and cycling has increased quite a lot since 2008 due to petrol prices increasing and people switching to pedal power, so the figures may have altered (I don't know as the bikes sales may have increased and helmets may also have been purchased along side the bikes or even more so?)