To think helmets should be a legal requirement for all cyclists...

[cocopopz]

I mean they are sharing the road with vehicles! It's all over the news today about the number of cyclist deaths (London) about making roads safer, however nothing said about cyclists being safer by wearing helmets, not listening to music, texting etc... I respect those things might not prevent the worst but surely should help? In most countries helmets are a legal requirement! Do you think this will ever change in the UK?

I guess for Boris this would mess up his London cycle scheme!!

This isn't a thread for bashing cyclists or drivers btw!!

'In most countries helmets are a legal requirement' - I don't think that is correct at all. Many European countries don't promote helmets at all. I did research this and it seems that there is no evidence to suggest that a helmet is safer. Most of the accidents in London would not have been prevented with a helmet, sadly they tend to involve lorries and the cyclist doesn't stand a chance. There is research that suggests that people drive more carefully around cyclists who have no helmet.

That said, I do wear a helmet as do my children. I see some dreadful driving and some dreadful cycling. People cycling down the side of lorries into their blind spot is just awful, I commute on my bike daily and always stay well back so vehicles can see me. I think a lot needs to be done to improve the roads for cyclists. I cycle down a very busy road with a cycle lane by the pavement, but every single day there are cars parked over it so I have to sit and wait behind each to filter into the traffic. I find if I stay out of the cycle lane (so save me weaving around these parked cars) the drivers get very angry and aggressive with me, despite it actually being the safer option. However to avoid their abuse, I do have to go in the lane and just keeping waiting behind every parked car. It frustrates me that they are getting away with this illegal parking.

I am not saying yabu, I did once have a fall courtesy of a random dog jumping out of a hedge, and I banged my head on the ground very hard and was grateful for my helmet. However I can see the other point of view as to why some people mightn't think they aid safety.

yes definalty and then no one would feel un cool or embarrased about wearing one as its the LAW

No, I think it should come down to personal responsibility. I don't believe in forcing things like this or wasting time and money making legislation on it when really it just involves people taking responsibility for themselves.

I'm a cyclist and I always wear a helmet. It will help protect against head injuries if I fall/am knocked off. Sadly though, the majority of cycle deaths are caused by crushing injuries when a cyclist is crushed against a wall/railings or is knocked under the wheels of a heavy vehicle. Helmets make no difference in these cases. There is no easy answer to cycle injuries but a combination of greater awareness by drivers, safer truck designs and separate cycle paths would help. Cyclists can also take greater care.

You aren't allowed to say that on MN coco. You will be told that you are being very unreasonable.

Some people say that motorists drive more carefully around cyclists that don't wear helmets apparently.

Personally, I wear a helmet and insist my DC do too, Why wouldn't you?

They introduced a law in Australia that cyclists must wear helmets. The result? The number of people cycling dramatically dropped.

At a time when our nation is getting fatter and fatter and unhealthier by the day why would we want to put yet more barriers up to active travel?

It's always amazing how people prefer to stick to talking about the world as though it worked the way that they would like it to, rather than how it actually works.

For cycling, the way the world actually works is:

• very few deaths are prevented by wearing helmets, because a little bit of plastic makes fuck all difference when you're hit by a twenty ton lorry turning left whose driver doesn't see you because they're knackered from a too-long shift. Being hit by lorries is what kills a large proportion of cyclists today
• there is good evidence that cyclists and drivers change their behaviour to be less cautious when cyclists wear helmets. This is not a surprise, as people do it all the time in relation to all sorts of risks. As one professor of risk memorably put it in relation to cars, if you want to cut accidents, take out the seat belts and the air bag and put a big fucking spike on the steering wheel facing the driver. Noone's going to be braking quickly with that threat there.

If you really are worried about cyclist deaths, stop worrying about helmets and try making a big push for more cycle lanes, safer lorry designs, tougher limits on driver working hours, improved road layouts, etc etc. You know, things that actually make a difference.

Wasting effort on cycle helmets is like wasting effort telling a heavy smoker to move to the country side for cleaner air. It ignores the pareto principle.

Australians are that vain/bothered/upset/lazy about wearing a helmet that they would rather not cycle then? How odd.

I can't understand the families you see cycling together where the kids have helmets but the adults don't bother.

As a driver (and occasional cyclist) I really don't get the driving carefully around non helmeted cyclists. It's just a cyclist. Helmet or no helmet to me. I probably wouldn't check if they were wearing a helmet or not before giving them a very wide berth TBH.

I am not sure we are talking about preventing deaths, rather head injuries WRT helmets though.

In most countries helmets are a legal requirement!

Mr Google says they are a legal requirement in Australia and New Zealand only.

Mandatory helmets in the red bits.

I think cyclists would be safer if people didn't drive into them.

I cycle to work and I always wear a helmet. I also insist that dd wears one whenever she cycles. I do this to reduce the risk of a head injury. I'm under no illusions that it makes me invulnerable though.

I would be against making wearing them compulsory. A cyclist not wearing a helmet risks no one but themselves so a law is inappropriate. Besides, if the evidence is ambivalent, the law of unintended consequences could get in the way, as has already been suggested.

I think at the bear minimum it should be the same as for horse riders where children have to by law. Personally though, I'd like it to mandatory for cyclists and horse riders, irrespective of age.

amicissima's point is what worries a lot of cycling campaign groups - insisting on helmet wearing makes cycling look inherently dangerous and puts people off, whereas no one worries as much about safety in cars because no one wears helmets!

Cycling is widespread in Germany where we often holiday but hardly anyone wears helmets.

Agree with KnittingRocks, cyclists wearing helmets does make people think cycling is dangerous and therefore puts people off cycling on the road. The best way of making cycling safer is to get more people cycling. The more people who cycle, the more money will be put into cycle paths, motorists will be more aware of them, etc.

I hadn't used to wear a helmet, but I do since having kids. Not because I think its safer necessarily but because I want then to wear helmets so i'm setting an example. They cycle on the pavement/cycle paths and a helmet would make a difference to them. Like others said, sadly a helmet wouldn't save the majority of cyclists in an accident on the road though.

Bike vs. Car, car wins every single time.

That said, bicyclists need to follow the traffic laws. Over here they have a death wish. Running lights, taking up entire lanes, jutting in front of traffic. Really, they're idiots trying to own the road in a bike that leaves them too vulnerable to be in any sort of negotiating system about how "owns" that traffic lane.

homehelpmegawd

" As one professor of risk memorably put it in relation to cars, if you want to cut accidents, take out the seat belts and the air bag and put a big fucking spike on the steering wheel facing the driver. Noone's going to be braking quickly with that threat there."

Your professor made me lol, brilliant!

YY no braking quickly to avoid a child that has run into the road? Don't understand the spike thing.

Helmets make your head bigger (proportionally much more so, for young children). It's quite possible you will hit your head while wearing one, when you otherwise would not have. They may also contribute to rotational injuries, which are potentially much more serious than a bump on the head. I wouldn't dream of telling someone not to wear a helmet, but it's food for thought for anyone who automatically assumes they're a 100% force for good.

Here's an excellent blog post on the subject which I just came across today. (It's not mine!) (This one's mine.)

People need to be free to make up their own mind.

PrincessBabyCat – when an experienced cyclist is "owning" the traffic lane, it is often because they feel it's the safest thing to do. Using the road is a constant negotiation, hopefully with the mutual consideration The Highway Code emphasises.

In Victoria, Australia a study showed that introducing mandatory helmets had a detrimental effect on the population as a whole.

Compulsory helmets meant less people cycled, especially children. Less people cycling meant that the health of the population declined, more obesity, heart attacks and strokes.

The greatest benefit to the greatest number of people is achieved by leaving helmets as optional. However counterintuitive it may seem.

Sparkling, he meant the spike would mean people would drive slow enough to be absolutely certain of stopping if a child ran out in front of them not to a speed where they could probably stop, as generally happens.

Oh Doc ok. Still a bit of a weird theory IMO.

Not weird at all: we take more care if we think we're in danger.