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.

If one wants to go down an evidence based route, the compulsory wearing of helmets by car passengers and drivers would save more head injuries than mandating helmets for cyclists. But nobody is clamouring for that. It's a weird world.

It's not it's a different accident crash damage scenario. A driver in the front seat and passenger will in most all instances these days have their heard cushioned by an air-bag, even back seat passengers will rarely damage their head as it will more than likely hit the headrest of the seat in front, that metal cage protects the occupants very well. Not only is it cocooning them the metal body is absorbing crash kinetic energy forces

Its the ones outside that need extra assistance!

This woman was a New Zealander. Helmets have been compulsory in NZ since 1994- over 22 years. Therefore she was going against her own training and upbringing and made the conscious choice not to wear a helmet.

I feel really sorry for her family. Her behaviour was unfathomably idiotic.

Totally opposed to compulsory helmets here. I live in NZ. Since helmets were made compulsory cycling has just about stopped. It is considered either a sport, or a method of transport only a crank or an idiot would use. Such cyclists as remain are considered an obstacle, and there are regular calls by motorists to ban them.

In fairness, I never met a NZ cyclist who didn't have an enormous chip on her shoulder.

not trying to be snobby but i really don't get the trend for taking selfies anywhere at any time, however weird/inconvenient/unsafe etc. what on earth is wrong with just one or two selfies for a twitter profile etc? that is as far as i would go. i don't understand this obsession at all

sorry. just read that last post through and realise it sounds really judgy and horrid.

LikeDylanInTheMovies I think you are being unreasonable.

This poor woman's husband is grieving and thinking of what may make some sense from this senseless death. Maybe he is hoping to prevent such a death for another, person affecting another family.

I hate bikes and find them really dangerous things to be on. I used to have a motor cycle and that was bloody dangerous to be on too. I came off it three times and ended up selling it. But my nearest and dearest love their bikes and always wear cycle helmets.

If cycle helmets really are not safe to use then maybe people should be campaigning against them.

I know that we have to weight up one thing against another, risk analysis etc but we have made choices as a society about what we think of as safe. It is compulsory to wear seat belts (in a car that has them) and I think that makes sense. And if having to wear a seat belt means people go in cars less, so be it, just like if wearing a helmet means people cycle less so be it. Surely if it is safer to wear it then it is best to make everyone do it.

I worked with Henry Marsh (the neurosurgeon quoted in that Telegraph piece) many years ago. If he has read the research and concluded that helmets make at best a marginal difference then I'd be inclined to follow his practice. His practice when it came to risk management (and I am a professional risk manager) was very impressive, he really understood how to calculate and talk about risk. He said "I see lots of people in bike accidents and these flimsy little helmets don’t help.”

If it's just a bit of cushioning for the 'little bumps' that helmets provide protection for then I can see why a foldable reusable hat would be a good alternative to the bulky uncomfortable and often badly fitting standard helmet. I can also understand the research showing that cyclists without helmets are put at less risks by drivers, and that areas with more cyclists have fewer accidents.

Yy to the posters pointing out the large number of children who scoot or cycle with helmets hanging off their heads in a way that offers zero protection in an accident.

If helmets are actually harmful why aren't cycling charities or associations campaigning against them?

Is there no empirical evidence to say that wearing a helmet is safer than not?

Nooka Re:

"If he has read the research and concluded that helmets make at best a marginal difference then I'd be inclined to follow his practice. His practice when it came to risk management (and I am a professional risk manager) was very impressive, he really understood how to calculate and talk about risk. He said "I see lots of people in bike accidents and these flimsy little helmets don’t help.”

I am sorry if I am being dim but what was this man's practice, to wear a cycle helmet or not?

If flimsy helmets are no good then the law could be that helmets must meet a certain standard. If they are unsafe left undone, as they are of course, then the law could be they must be done up etc.

Either you are safer with one, properly worn or you are less safe. The chances of your being in exactly the same position with or without one would seem to be slim (to me).

It just seems odd drives would go closer to a cyclist with a helmet on. I give cyclists the widest possible birth I can, the only thing that would influence that would be whether I could see them or not, and as I see many on the roads with no lights at all, that would be another major issue for me.

Or rather as I don't see until the last minute many cyclist on the roads with no lights on...

Hi Italian, Henry Marsh is a cyclist as well as a neurosurgeon and he doesn't wear a helmet. It's not so much that helmets cause harm and more than helmet legislation does not seem to reduce head injuries/ hospital admission and also appears to actively decrease cycling. Plus research has shown that drivers perceive non helmeted cyclists as potentially unpredictable and so give them a wider berth, which obviously keeps them safer (from accidents involving cars anyway).

In my experience the most protective factor as a cyclist is cycling in areas with lots of cyclists, where car drivers are used to allowing for them going slower and give them more space. I've observed in areas where cyclists are a rarity they are generally ignored by drivers, so given very little space or consideration. I certainly woudl not cycle where I live now, whereas I cycled everyday in London.

I suspect that safety would be more improved by compulsory education for both drivers and cyclists and requirements about lights and visibility. One thing that would be great would be if schools changed their uniforms from dark to light coloured coats (would likely help with pedestrian injuries too).

Thanks nooka, this is all gving me the chills, and not in a good way.

My dd cycels to school each day and wears a helmet because we thought it would be better for her.

I almost wish now she did not cycle as it seems that there is not much one can do to be safe. She does cycle in a group but, yes, her school uniform is dark.

Maybe a flouresent high vis jacket would be a good idea but not sure whether to ditch the helmet, or simply ditch the bike!

This poor woman's husband is grieving and thinking of what may make some sense from this senseless death. Maybe he is hoping to prevent such a death for another, person affecting another family.

I fully appreciate that Greyhound and said so in my original post. I am a cyclist who chooses to wear a helmet at all times, but I understand it isn't a magic hat that will protect me from anything stupid or dangerous on the bike. I get more worried by crap, dangerous, illegal and inconsiderate cycling than I do whether a person wears a helmet or not. I'd say a safe and assertive rider without a helmet, is exposing themselves to less risk than a dangerous idiot in the best helmet money can buy.

I am inclined not to be hard on him because of the circumstances in which he has made this assertion, but he is starting a debate on this topic. However I still think the man in question has a completely unrealistic understanding of the level of protection afforded by a helmet and is wholly neglecting the root cause of the incident that caused his wife to lose her life (unsafe riding).

Whilst heeding Henry Marsh's opinion on helmets, it should be remembered that many, many more people advocate wearing helmets when cycling, including other medical professionals. 'Neurosurgeon says don't wear helmet' is always going to be a bigger headline than 'lots of other neurosurgeons say wear a helmet'. In making that decision it is important to look behind the noise generated by his intervention.

When I was sixteen (that was in the 80s), I fell off a bike and almost cracked my skull as I hit the curb. Having just had recovered from an encephalitis, it certainly didn't do me any good and exacerbated the problems I'm fighting now (migraines, bad headaches and constant fatigue). I do believe that the impact caused some lasting damage, fortunately I have frequent mri checks so it can be monitored.
I read the article and while I felt immensely sorry for her family, I couldn't resist the thought that the lady was a good candidate for Darwin award and died because of her own stupidity.

No one is saying ditch the helmet though Italian, although I really would look at least at a high viz sash. The more visible someone is the less likely a car driver will miss seeing them. Cycling in a group is good and maybe look out for cycling proficiency or other cyclist education opportunities?

Cycling brings lots of health benefits and for young people an independence that's very hard to get otherwise. There are also of course risks.

LikeDylan I agree that different nueros will have different views. I was just very impressed with that particular neurosurgeon's approach to risk so therefore take his views with that in mind. He was also a very outspoken chap when I knew him (and still throwing chairs as I recall) so it could of course just be that he likes to cycle with this cowboy hat on!

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.

I've yet to see a campaign aimed at cyclists promoting safe driving. I can imagine it would the hell out of the ignorant Lycra brigade. The amount of muppets with an overbearing sense of entitlement because they are cycling makes my blood boil. I drive some narrow backroads and meeting a group cyclists riding spread across two lanes just as you drive a bad bent where you can see fuck all is not unusual. Cycling in hard shoulder which is notoriously dangerous because of spilt oil and gravel while there is a broad cycling path just a curb away. Kids with no helmet and dressed all in black on the road. I could slap the fucking cunts of their parents. Ignoring the red traffic light and almost hitting me and my daughter as we were crossing the road on green. I sincerely wished that idiot a meeting with an articulated lorry. Typing into their mobile phones or listening to music so loud they can't even hear a fucking ambulance approaching. Daddy swerving across lanes, ignoring all rules of the road with a child swaying in a shopping basket in front of him and unsecured.
But if anything happens, the first thing that those over entitled morons squeezed in those elastic dresses which make the middle-aged office rats look like Michelin man start screaming is bad bad driver!
And I'm seriously pissed off because I respect them and their right to be on the road, dutifully wait till it's safe to overtake them and try to think for them when I see someone who couldn't suffer a brain damage because his grey brain matter died of exposure to two fancy wheels. But they take the piss every day, putting themselves in danger by ignoring all rules they should follow and are completely ignorant to what's happening on the road.

In addition to a sash, I would recommend a high viz backpack as the rear of the sash is often obscured by a dark school bag.

Another high viz product I like and you might think of for peace of mind:

spoke reflectors they are incredibly effective in car headlights.

In addition to mainlights on my bike I also have these running on flash at night Led mini lights Even when I'm cycling during the day I use the rear one of those on flash throughout winter.

Katie,

I take it the "kaboom" is the sound you hear when the wheels of your 4x4 crunch another NZ cyclist.

Given that a typical NZ sentence for killing a cyclist is community service, are you surprised cyclists get a bit chippy?

Road safety campaigns should concentrate entirely on motorists. It is they that cause almost all accidents on roads, let alone death. Targeting cyclists is a waste of resources. In Holland and Denmark they understand this perfectly well.

What happened to this woman was a simple accident brought on by her doing a number of unwise things. It doesn't benefit anyone to try and extrapolate any general principle from it except "People sometimes do daft things".

Yep Rumbelina - friends son has impressive dent in his helmet after falling off at relatively low speed.

That helmet needs replacing. One incident/accident per helmet, it won't be effective now.

Those spoke reflectors look really good.

Yeah... I run over cyclists in my Remuera tractor and come on Mumsnet to gloat.

Cyclists need to behave intelligently, like everyone else. In NZ the sentence you get has a lot more to do with whether you're a Maaori or a Pakeha than with what vehicle you're steering, but that's off-topic, so I'll shut up.

yy and thrice y to everything MrsHathaway said, as well as Dylan's I get more worried by crap, dangerous, illegal and inconsiderate cycling than I do whether a person wears a helmet or not. I'd say a safe and assertive rider without a helmet, is exposing themselves to less risk than a dangerous idiot in the best helmet money can buy.

I read this thread in one go, and was only surprised to see that it took a good 70or 80 posts for the bike haters to start with their red light jumping / lycra lout stuff. Up till then, it had been an intelligent and thoughtful thread with interesting positions and commentary.

For the record, I am a safe, law/light-abiding rider who wears a helmet (+ as bright clothes as I can find and lit up like a christmas tree). But I understand that my choice to don a hat also has the side-effect of making other road users feel they can pass me that bit closer than they would if I was bare-headed - although the advised 1.5metre distance is largely a pipe dream. It's not a great set of options either way, is it?

Cyclists, I'd settle for.

Lights on your bike at night.

A yellow sash or similar bright coloured reflective garment.

and.

READ THE FLIPPIN HIGHWAY CODE.

That'll suit me fine:)