To think that in this awful accident, a helmet was not the only precaution this cyclist should have taken?

[LikeDylanInTheMovies]

<a class="break-all" href="//;www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/04/carmen-greenway-bicycle-crash-helmet-law-london" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Husband of woman killed in Isle worth Husband calls for helmet law after wife dies following bike crash

What an awful thing to have happened, I feel terrible for husband and children and I'm sure if she could wind back the clock she'd have made different choices.

However in incidents like this, making helmets compulsory on its own is not a panacea, given that she was taking so many other risks (taking selfies, riding one handed, riding in drink, all at night).

In less tragic circumstances I get absolutely livid when I see cyclists like this, they give those of us who ride responsibly and legally a bad name. More worryingly they put us fellow cyclists at direct risk with their antics when traveling in cycle lanes. As it is sadness is my prevailing emotion.

I always wear a helmet on the road, but I don't think it is a magic forcefield that will save me. I have a duty to protect myself and others, just like any other road user.

Giving full allowance for the fact that her husband is deep in grief, but am I being unreasonable to feel that his campaigning efforts are misdirected? if he wanted to campaign on cycling safety, he should have perhaps included advocated better education/training for cyclists alongside his call for compulsory helmets.

t4nut
When my husband got run off his bike by a white van, I actually saw the dent this made in his helmet from the helmet hitting the road. I don't want to imagine that dent being his head! So yes, helmets make a lot of a difference and probably saved his life!

Well the other argument is that research shows wearing the helmet increases friction on contact with a surface leading to increased risk of spinal rotational injury. So its a toss up - risk a head injury/concussion vs risking quadriplegia.

Can't view the original article so can't comment but I just wanted to say - The amount of cyclists out there not wearing helmets makes me so angry!

My dad had a huge accident nearly 28 years ago. He was knocked off his bike by a truck and nearly died. As it is, he's brain damaged and paralysed down one side. His whole life, and the life of his wife and daughter, changed that morning. I met the surgeon who operated on him a few years ago who told me how my dad had a hole in his head that he could literally fit his hand into. If he'd not been wearing a helmet, he'd have died. By all accounts my dad was pretty amazing pre-accident. I'll never know because I was only a month old. I'm just grateful that he wore that helmet and he's still here - he's a completely different person thanks to the brain damage but he's still my hero

Thank you rumbelina so am I :-)

The other argument against is how other road users treat helmeted and bareheaded cyclists respectively: the evidence shows that bareheaded cyclists are given more space.

A helmet won't protect you from a car

No, in fact, it may make the car drive closer to you, and impede your view of the road.

I don't wear a helmet. I come from a cycling city where maybe 5% of cyclists wear helmets, but car/van/lorry drivers are very cyclist-aware and actually use their windows and mirrors at junctions.

Additionally, where cycling helmets are made compulsory, accidents do fall, but only by the same rate as cycling falls - people forced to wear helmets decide instead not to cycle. That isn't a positive outcome!!

Birdlet , and for you and especially your Mum. I can imagine a lot of what she's been through over the years.

Her teenage sons could come across this thread. A bunch of people on the internet saying how sad it is that their mum is dead but.....if only she hadn't been doing x, y and z. That'll be nice for them.

But I do think people who choose to wobble about on a little frame among vehicles weighting tonnes are generally hard of thinking...

I think the many, many people who never walk or cycle anywhere but just go straight from car to sofa and so make themselves morbidly obese are pretty stupid, but I'm not usually rude enough to say so... Overall cycling is much more beneficial for your health than it is dangerous.

I think cycle helmets are a good thing but agree with the 'not a magic hat' comments. They don't replace safe cycling, being visible or engineered solutions such as separate cycle lanes and they don't offer much protection against high speed collisions or crush injuries. So many people slap one on (themselves or their kids) and then cycle badly (weaving in and out of traffic clad in black on dark nights is a favorite round here).

I'll never understand the arguments against wearing helmets.

I think it is more likely that you have not understood them. You could make a start by reading Mrs Hathaway's excellent post above.

Also agree with the "good idea but not a magic hat" assessment. A friend of mine was once knocked off her bike by a lorry (entirely the driver's fault) and ended up with a completely unharmed head, a broken leg, and the driver shouting at her that she "should have been wearing a helmet". Ah yes, the amazing helmet that both protects your entire body with a forcefield and magically makes drivers check in their mirrors for you.

I regularly cycle my commute and only fell off once (the first day I ever did it - didn't let it put me off haha) - my helmet cracked in half. I had a very sore head for the rest of the day but thankfully was fine. I would never get on my bike without one and will not allow my children to either.

That said, I agree 100% with the op!

AFAIK if your helmet cracked in half, it wouldn't have protected your head. They're meant to compress, not crack.

What's not been picked up here so far (apart from in OP) is that she was cycling back from the pub after a few drinks. So alcohol, lack of helmet, dark and selfieing are all potential factors in this tragedy.

Maybe a helmet would have helped...I think they should always be worn, though I'm not sure about it being compulsory.

I rather think that the alcohol and selfie taking are rather more to blame in this case, though, and consideration of these actions would be an equally preventative measure to any further similar tragedy, along with helmet wearing.

I am against them being compulsory, because the evidence about them is still quite ambivalent. We should focus on promoting safe riding and safe driving, which are the most important factors in keeping people safe.

We were always a bit sceptical about helmets until DH took a purler while out on his bike. His wheel slipped on a loose stone, and he went over sideways, hurting his arm and shoulder. It wasn't until that evening that he noticed a bruise on his head, and when we looked at his helmet we could see that it had taken such a bash that it was a write off. It definitely saved him from a really nasty bump, and potential injury.

However, we also know a woman who died because she was wearing a helmet, so nothing is black and white.

Oh God yes, the drunk selfie-taking cycling sounds infinitely more reckless than not wearing a helmet.

Sorry about the grammar bypass.

I've just come back from a holiday in Amsterdam and I was astounded that no one wears helmets while cycling over there. It's kind of drummed into us in the uk, to be more safety conscious.

Not even children or babies riding in a carrier seat wore any kind of protection. And there are so many of them and they travel really quite fast, I'd like to look into the accident figures to compare with the U.K.
I suppose it's just a cultural difference.

I had an accident recently on my bike - I swerved to avoid a pothole and hit the kerb. My shoulder blade and collarbone are bruised and not broken, but the ligament and muscle damage has been extensive and is still very painful after nearly a month. I wasn't wearing a helmet, and a helmet would not have prevented the damage done. However, I was very, very lucky to have hit a grass verge with my head and not the kerb or the road.
I am counting my blessings with every pain and twinge as it could have been so much worse.
I'm not riding my bike yet (too sore!), but won't be getting on again in the future without a helmet.

I am so cross with myself for thinking that it won't happen to me, I'm always fine etc etc. Now I know better - like the woman in the news, I could have left my children without a mother.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but utterly useless in the here and now.

I'm not sure that compulsory helmet laws are the answer, but the same arguments were used in the past about motorcycle helmets and I can't imagine these days anyone thinking that a motorbike ride sans helmet is a good thing.

It will, however, be compulsory for me.

The problem with helmet advocacy is exactly as stated above, that they're viewed as magic hats and all the many many other things that impact on cyclist safety are ignored. Helmets are only good for the accidents that happen (and that's only possibly; if your body is crushed under the wheels of a lorry you'll probably not survive even if your head has the polystyrene 3 cm covering it) and it's a well-known fact (at least when it comes to motorised vehicles ... )that preventative measures and a safe road environment matters more. As soon as a bike accident happen people want the mandatory magic hats and woe betide if you suggest there might have been other causesof the accident that should be addressed. The lack of the helmet didn't cause the accident. Drunk cycling, bad brakes and no lights are things that should be addressed in information campaigns and from the police in order to prevent accidents, and safe bicycle lanes and roads without potholes, sudden walls and cerbs, adequate lighting etc etc etc have to be addressed in funding and traffic planning. But then where would you paaaaaaark omg just use the magic hat.

/daily bicycle rider, no helmet

In general, people seem to be much less likely to wear helmets in places where cycling is more common: you see a lot more cyclists in, say, Cambridge than in Leicester, but a much lower proportion of them wear helmets. I think people are less likely to wear them if they feel that cycling is safe and 'normal'.

The lack of the helmet didn't cause the accident.

Exactly, banivani . The emphasis on helmets in this case is wrong.

Motorcycling helmets are a clearer advantage as the speeds involved are so much higher: 70mph more like 110 on our A-road compared to 20ish mph for a pushbike. The increase in forces and therefore damage is exponentially proportional to the increase in speed (ie it squares instead of doubling).

There's a fabulous cycling helmet that self-inflates when it senses an accident: it crucially also has the kind of neck bracing that would definitely get in your way when cycling along normally.

The call for compulsory helmets in this particular case (although to this point I've been careful to talk more generally) feels a bit like the call to lower the alcohol limit when there's been an accident where someone was already over the limit.

As in ... er, no. Accidents caused by drivers between the current limit and the proposed limit: those persuade me in favour of a change.

Bicycle bells were fairly recently made compulsory. No substitute for road users constantly being aware of their surroundings, but a good tiny start.

AtMyHouse You were very lucky not to have been involved in a collision then. As a lad me and mates used to scour a local car scrapyard for odds and ends., One thing we all noted was the bent steering wheel of cars that had accidents. I tried to pull one straight one day and couldn't even move it, of course it was bent that shape by the chest of the now late driver;(