By
Elisabeth Rosenthal ONE spectacular Sunday in Paris last month, I decided to skip museums and shopping to partake of something even more captivating for an environment reporter:
Velib, arguably the most successful bike-sharing program in the world. In their short lives, Europe’s bike-sharing systems have delivered myriad benefits, notably reducing traffic and its carbon emissions. A number of American cities — including New York, where a bike-sharing program is to open next year — want to replicate that success.
So I bought a day pass online for about $2, entered my login information at one of the hundreds of docking stations that are scattered every few blocks around the city and selected one of Vélib’s nearly 20,000 stodgy gray bikes, with their basic gears, upright handlebars and practical baskets.
Then I did something extraordinary, something I’ve not done in a quarter-century of regular bike riding in the United States: I rode off without a helmet.
I rode all day at a modest clip, on both sides of the Seine, in the Latin Quarter, past the Louvre and along the Champs-Élysées, feeling exhilarated, not fearful. And I had tons of bareheaded bicycling company amid the Parisian traffic. One common denominator of successful bike programs around the world — from Paris to Barcelona to Guangzhou — is that almost no one wears a helmet, and there is no pressure to do so.
In the United States the notion that bike helmets promote health and safety by preventing head injuries is taken as pretty near God’s truth. Un-helmeted cyclists are regarded as irresponsible, like people who smoke. Cities are aggressive in helmet promotion.
But many European health experts have taken a very different view: Yes, there are studies that show that if you fall off a bicycle at a certain speed and hit your head, a helmet can reduce your risk of serious head injury. But such falls off bikes are rare — exceedingly so in mature urban cycling systems.
On the other hand, many researchers say, if you force or pressure people to wear helmets, you discourage them from riding bicycles. That means more obesity, heart disease and diabetes. And — Catch-22 — a result is fewer ordinary cyclists on the road, which makes it harder to develop a safe bicycling network. The safest biking cities are places like Amsterdam and Copenhagen, where middle-aged commuters are mainstay riders and the fraction of adults in helmets is minuscule.
“Pushing helmets really kills cycling and bike-sharing in particular because it promotes a sense of danger that just isn’t justified — in fact, cycling has many health benefits,” says Piet de Jong, a professor in the department of applied finance and actuarial studies at Macquarie University in Sydney. He studied the issue with mathematical modeling, and concludes that the benefits may outweigh the risks by 20 to 1.
He adds: “Statistically, if we wear helmets for cycling, maybe we should wear helmets when we climb ladders or get into a bath, because there are lots more injuries during those activities.” The European Cyclists’ Federation says that bicyclists in its domain have the same risk of serious injury as pedestrians per mile traveled.
Yet the United States National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommends that “all cyclists wear helmets, no matter where they ride,” said Dr. Jeffrey Michael, an agency official.
Recent experience suggests that if a city wants bike-sharing to really take off, it may have to allow and accept helmet-free riding. A two-year-old bike-sharing program in Melbourne, Australia — where helmet use in mandatory — has only about 150 rides a day, despite the fact that Melbourne is flat, with broad roads and a temperate climate. On the other hand,
helmet-lax Dublin — cold, cobbled and hilly — has more than 5,000 daily rides in its young bike-sharing scheme. Mexico City recently repealed a mandatory helmet law to get a bike-sharing scheme off the ground. But here in the United States, the politics are tricky.
Shaun Murphy, the bicycling coordinator of Minneapolis — which inaugurated the “Nice Ride” bike-sharing program in 2010 and expanded to St. Paul last year — has been pilloried for riding about without a helmet. “I just want it to be seen as something that a normal person can do,” Mr. Murphy explained to the local press this past summer. “You don’t need special gear. You just get on a bike and you just go.”
In New York, where there were
21 cyclist fatalities last year, the transportation commissioner, Janette Sadik-Khan, is always photographed on a bike and wearing a helmet. The administration of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has nonetheless rejected calls by Comptroller John C. Liu for a mandatory helmet law when
New York's 10,000 cycle bike share program rolls out next year, for fear it would keep people from riding. Still, the mayor says helmets are a “good idea,” and the city promotes helmet use through education and with giveaway programs.
In the United States, cities are struggling to overcome the significant practical problems of melding helmet use with bike-sharing programs — such as providing sanitized helmet dispensers at bike docking stations, says Susan Shaheen, director of the Transportation Sustainability Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley.
But bicycling advocates say that the problem with pushing helmets isn’t practicality but that helmets make a basically safe activity seem really dangerous.
“The real benefits of bike-sharing in terms of health, transport and emissions derive from getting ordinary people to use it,” said Ceri Woolsgrove, safety officer at the European Cyclists’ Federation. “And if you say this is wonderful, but you have to wear armor, they won’t. These are normal human beings, not urban warriors.”
In fact, many European researchers say the test of a mature bike-sharing program is when women outnumber men. In the Netherlands, 52 percent of riders are women. Instead of promoting helmet use, European cycling advocates say, cities should be setting up safer bike lanes to slow traffic or divert it entirely from downtown areas. “Riding in New York or Australia is like running with the bulls — it’s all young males,” says Julian Ferguson, a spokesman for the European Cyclists’ Federation. And that’s in part what makes it dangerous. (Many European countries do require helmet use for children.)
In London, where use of a new bike-share program is exceeding all expectations, the number of riders in suits and dresses is growing, Mr. Woolsgrove says. And more Londoners seem to be leaving helmets at home.
We may follow a similar pattern. In her
study of nascent bike-sharing programs in North America — including Montreal, Washington and Minneapolis — Dr. Shaheen found that the accident rate was “really low.” A large majority of participants strongly agreed that they got more exercise since the program started. And helmet use in bike programs tended to be far lower than among the general public.
Another
study this summer found that only 30 percent of local riders using Washington’s Capital Bikeshare program wore helmets, compared with 70 percent of people on their own bikes, said John Kraemer of Georgetown University, the study’s author, who supports helmet use.
Before you hit the comment button and tell me that you know someone whose life was probably saved by a bike helmet, I know someone, too. I also know someone who believes his life was saved by getting a blood test for
prostate specific antigen, detecting prostate cancer. But is that sense of salvation actually justified, for the individual or society? Back in New York I strapped on my helmet for a weekend bike ride in Central Park. But I’m not sure I’ll do the same two years from now if I’m commuting to work on a mature Citi Bike system.
Mr. De Jong, who grew up in the Netherlands, observes of Amsterdam: “Nobody wears helmets, and bicycling is regarded as a completely normal, safe activity. You never hear that ‘helmet saved my life’ thing.”
Source The New York TimesRead all comments posted at the New York Times
here.
What do you think about current helmet laws? Should we be required to wear them in more places or should it be all to the user's discretion?
so if im just driving to my friends house,maybe i shouldnt wear my seatbelt. god forbid i hit a kid who is riding to HIS friends house and wouldnt you know it, he wasnt wearing a helmet kuz its just a short trip.
should cops and paramedics just not even show up?
I think if society is resposible for health care, like Canada, in Australia, the UK, France, NZ and any other normal country, and not like in the US, then it is fair to expect that people using public transit ways like roads and paths, wear a helmet.
* Cars have been legislated to be designed safer by manafacturers
* Seatbets are legislated and no one seems to argue with that
* Smoking has a heavy campaign against it
* your car has to be "saftyed"
* all drivers on the road require a licence
Basically, all of these are normal to society...
In my view, helmets fit into the same catagory....
Mandatory.... until your brother can do brain surgery, your mom is a brain injury rehabilitation specialist and your dad runs a funeral home.
If your experienced on a bike wearing a helmet is really up to you since you mostly understand your skill level and what can happen on a bike, what im worried about is new riders who dont want to wear a helmet because none of their friends do, and then start commuting without knowing the dangers of city biking.
I would rather see less people riding with helmets then more people riding without them. Just my honest opinion.
I was tempted to say, no its because I'm afraid of old people like you who shouldn't be driving anymore. f*cking old people.
Is this what we have to do to get people to ride? Disregard safety? What happens after an accident? Who will be held responsible for treating a patient with a brain injury? The person him/herself or the taxpayers?
I kinda like my brain how it is, so I slap a brain bucket on even when riding around casually. It's always been mandatory.
I'd rather have less people biking with helmets on than more people running around with no helmet.
You guys remember Mom always telling you to wear your helmet?
We should all take a moment and remember that sound piece of advice.
I personally never ride without a helmet, and find it very rare to see anyone else riding without a helmet. If you can afford a bike there's no question as to whether you can afford a helmet.
As to finnrambo, I think it may be time to invest in a nicer helmet! My Giro Prolight is great for venting, as is my Lazer 02, the second of which is only £60 or so.
It often surprises me to not see more AM riders using full face helmets, or even xc/trail for that matter (okay its often inconveniently hot) but if you take an over the bars, your teeth may well end up on the trail with an open face helmet..
At the end of the day, I wear a helmet most of the time (guilty as charged, riding to mates/shops/wherever without one...). I've had a couple of nasty knocks to the head without a helmet (not cycling) and some nasty ones with a helmet... The worst was in a kayak. But hey, when the government is increasingly trying to control every little aspect of our lives, it's nice to have a choice and a little responsibility for myself.
Also, a bunch of people stated it was safer to ride in rural areas. To my experience, it's much safer to ride in urban areas as there are many cyclists around and most people keep at eye out for them as they're used to their presence (more population = more cyclists). In rural areas, the fact that there could be a cyclist in their blind spot doesn't even cross most driver's mind it seems...
Oh and “Nobody wears helmets [...] You never hear that ‘helmet saved my life’ thing.” No shit sherlock, if nobody wears a helmet how do you expect somebody to say that a helmet saved his life...
Te last thing I want to see is more fixed-geared-with-coffee-cup-holder cyclists flying around with no reflectors, helmets, or lights, and headphones in so that they can't hear traffic.
What I do want to see is an educated motoring and cycling population in the Northern Hemisphere that encourages safe riding. I don't wear a helmet when riding to the gym because I'm afraid I'll fall. I wear one because I have friends who have been hit by distracted drivers.
“The real benefits of bike-sharing in terms of health, transport and emissions derive from getting ordinary people to use it,” said Ceri Woolsgrove, safety officer at the European Cyclists’ Federation. “And if you say this is wonderful, but you have to wear armor, they won’t. These are normal human beings, not urban warriors.”
By all means it's in everyone's best interest to use a helmet, but having a mandatory law, regardless of the situation would be very irritating. I strongly feel if I were required to wear a helmet, for what I feel would be a no risk commute. If the law was enforced I would most likely choose another form of transportation if storing the helmet when I reach my destination was in any way a pain. That would be my choice, therefor I would be responsible. Personally, when I ride the streets... if aggressive or not, I always watch for cars and never assume they see or will make room for me. I ride completely defensively and adjust my routes according. Perhaps in bigger cities, ideal routes for commuting and such could be more slim and the chance at collisions is much greater.
Every city park and every pay-to-play park I've EVER been to has a helmet requirement, or you ain't getting in.
City park-wise, the cops threw me out one day for standing there with my bike and the lid on the handlebar!
Honestly, it isn't anyone's right to "make" us protect our brains, but it IS their right to regulate private locations and public areas as deemed necessary, regardless of the cool factor or public opinion.
Valmont was designed properly, with wonderful city sponsors, and good rules.
They are a model to be followed, in more ways than one...
Honestly, helmets are needed due to many reasons - operator misconduct or error, outside influences, drivers, other riders, etc. - so wearing one is simply common sense for me.
Seriously thinking about bringing a krypto chain lock for smashing mirrors soon.
HAHA! This has to be one of the dumbest comments iv'e read on PB. And thats saying a lot.
Secondly, in Canada or atleast Ontario where i live, Helmets much like seatbelts should be manditory at all ages, especially in a socialist health care system. I hate the government as much as anyone could, i believe OHIP is the biggest waste of money in the country, but since we ALL use the standardized public heath care system we should all be resonponsible. Being in the medical field i loose a patient a month in the summer to death caused by car vs bike vs head vs ground and the tax payers dont pay that much to fix a dent caused by your head. Preventable head trauma costs us the tax payers huge amounts of resources from time, money, beds, machinary, visualization, not to mention the personal grief on family, freinds, employers or even the person who hit the rider. (in this case focusing on car vs bike). Every head injury prevented by a 50 dollar helmet in ontario can save the ontario tax payers thousands of dollars and lesson the strain on our already mediacore system.
I am all for the freedom of the person, except when it comes to publically funded domains, hell i personally think fat persons should be taxed more as they will cost us all more in the long run with diabetes med, chl meds, hospital stays and so forth.
If the article had nothing to actually do with helmets i apoligize, but the guy is trying to sell telsa's first ever electric motor
I'm not a super political person, just food for thought. Also as a side-note I personally wear a helmet every time I'm on a bike, be it moto, downhill, or even riding my bmx 2 blocks to the corner store.
the tax payer is hit with the bill everyday, from over powerfull teachers unions to over paid city grass cutting employees, we are screwed from the begining. Much like your self, i dont trust the government for much of anything. However infringing on our freedoms for the good of the whole and in this case its probalby like 5% or less of the total population, might not be a bad thing. Theoretically if one major head trauma that could be prevented by a helmet costs the government 10 days of hospital stay, 24 rotating shifts for nurses, one mri, one ct scan, one ambulance drive, 2 hours of radiologist billing, , 4 hours of surgery plust countless hours of rehab to fix the issue, i dont see it being a problem.
Personally and i have no stats to prove this i feel wearing a helmet is more important than wearing a seatbelt when driving. Many a patient of mine have been in motor vehicle accidents with and without seatbelts and the outcomes are reletivly similar. I am sure the same thing can be said for helmets as im sure in some cases they do more harm than good. That being said, Car vs Bike, the bike will NEVER win. The freedom of not wearing a helmet is implimented to only save tax payers money for preventable hospital stays, nothing more, nothing more than drinking age, weed, hell prescriotion meds, everyday a portion of the popultion of ontario puts there hands in the government for medical assistance and eductiion and on a dialy basis they fail them, further promoting a downward spiral of taxation and lack of accountabilitly .
Unfortunalty we are all in this together and much like the unions it all built around the lowest common demonator of soceity. thanks for wearinga helmet, you never know, one day you could save my kids life, but not needing a hospital bed. Dr STEVE
In fact helmets for motorists are also very justifiable if you take the view that "if we save one life at any expense it's worthwhile". Like it or not the impact of irritation, delay and disincentive to ride across hundreds or thousands of potential cyclists really can be tallied up and compared to the cost of an injury or two.
Adults should have the right to take on reasonable risks at their own discretion. If not then downhill is plainly an irresponsible pursuit...you could have stayed home and been much safer.
When one car t-bones another car - the occupant of the t-boned side of the car dies/is injured when their head smashes through the window and hits the bonnet/hood of the car intruding into their thigh. Hence side curtain airbags.
I only mention it as it's the sort of accident you refer to where a helmet could help in a non-bicycling situation.
I've also used the Velib in Paris and a helmet would make it a LOT less practical, I didn't have one (was travelling) and felt no less safe than walking.
It's a numbers game. You never know when you're gonna slam (keep in mind that slamming on a bike is worse than tripping while walking etc). You take calculated risks in everything you do, and It's our own responsibility to use common sense to mitigate them. I always put a bucket on, if it's DH/XC/commuting, don't matter to me. But I like my brain. Maybe others don't.
Does that comparison take into account all the injuries that WOULD have happened had all the cyclists who have ever crashed WEARING a helmet been injured? I'd reckon that if you counted those, the number of injuries prevented by helmets would be immensely higher than injuries caused by "Ladders and Bathtubs". That's almost like saying, there are less motorcycle accidents because they are safer to drive. No, there are less motorcycle accidents because there are LESS motorcycles.
In the end, when you are in the hospital bleeding out the back of your head from that curb, at least your pompador and/or fauxhawk will be perfect. It's your head after all.
Firefighters, paramedics, doctors, and especially the Ice Chest makers need to work too.
Ice chest makers???
Yeah so they can make more ice chests to put all of your donated organs in when you scramble your brains in a fall.
My helmets saved my life, both my Kevlar and my Bike helmet.
It's about encouraging people who don't have helmets or even bikes to ride. I, and by the sounds of it everyone else here, wear a helmet on and off road because I know the dangers. I would hop on my bike without a helmet though to call in on a friend or go to the shop. It's convenient.
The article had me at smoking. It's really been targeted by governments, perhaps disproportionately, and the social stigma is just ridiculous. I quote Bill Hicks in saying ''I've got news for you. Non smokers.......die every day.....HAHAHAHAHA''. And the same is true for cycling. I just value a free and stigma-free society over an ultra safe one
As an urban cyclist, as well as a mountain (and road) biker, I wear a helmet, always. To be honest, the subject of mandatory helmet laws is a tricky one, and one that I myself am not completely decided on. I understand the the idea that encouraging biking is for the good of everyone, in terms of health, and any way we can encourage that is good. And yes, I agree that the number of fatalities and major injuries due to not wearing a helmet are low. However, if and WHEN an accident occurs where a head injury is involved and no helmet is worn, then consequences are usually very severe and often fatal.
So the question is: how many head injuries and fatalities per year are "acceptable", in order to justify encouraging more people to ride bikes? Most of the time, my answer is "none". Because I'm pretty sure that the person who dies from not wearing a helmet would have probably preferred being a bit overweight to being dead. But the argument remains that people should have the freedom to choose what risks to take, and what protection to wear, and I understand that too.
I guess my hope is that by always wearing a helmet, and always respecting the rules of the road, I can help set an example for others that it's just common sense and "normal" to see someone with a helmet on, riding a bike. And hopefully others will agree. My son will always wear a helmet riding a bike. No exceptions. Because to me, the risk, albeit small, is not worth it.
Same with me and mine... If you are on your bike, it's on your head.
No? Don't wanna wear it? Makes you look "silly"?
Get off the bike, child.
For all of you that have spent a VAST amount of money on university etc you owe it to yourself to protect that investment with a helmet.
Once upon a time I stood at the front door of my house and I couldn't figure out how to open the locked door, even with the key in my hand. This was one week after a collision with a car where I WAS wearing a helmet. Had I not been wearing a helmet the most complicated decision I could make now would be whether I dribbled out the left or the right side of my mouth.
Every day I ride my bike is a great day. To curl up in bed with my wife is a perfect way to end each day. I will do anything necessary to maximise the number of great and perfect days I will ever have.
I would say your average Pinkbiker is already in good shape and rides as much as he or she can. Changing the laws won't make a difference to our health. Joe Public needs to get their fat asses into shape, not us. These changes in laws are for them.
* Selling a bike while it is still current and before I need a new drivetrain means change-over costs me only hundreds of dollars, not thousands.
but in Indonesia, it's quite dangerous on the streets so I wear helmet everywhere I ride
Not that I'm supporting to ride without helmet, but as someone commented on this article, I think helmet mandatory is quite a grey area. Just like you said, it depends on the person to gauge the level of risk if one's riding without helmet. But then, shit happens they said and I'm not going to take the risk. Now, I ride everyday to my uni and always wear helmet. I think government should encourage their people to ride bike more and ride it safely.
We have another new bike lane now, located in east Jakarta and some says it’s the longest bike lane in south East Asia.
It has clear road signs say "bicycle only". Sadly it's being 'invaded' by motorist most of the time.
Last week I shout at one of them because he honks at me like mad.
It is also my daily experience when I ride in BSD. Motorcyclists cutting my lane and honking at the traffic light (even it is not yet turned green) and yes, almost all of them not even feeling guilty. That's why I always suggest everyone I know to wear helmet. Because we might be able to ride safely but it doesn't make the others do the same thing. Plus, the roads are not always smooth, you could possibly put your front wheel in a hole and go over the bar
We have extra bicyvle lanes in our city and thankfully the majorty of people use them very thoughtful.
I commute everyday via bike and do not wear a helmet.
i looked a few times and never found one, that fits my head properly. I have a giro remedy for dh riding, the only helmet that sort of fits to my disfigured head :-D. if the helmets are mandatory for biking in general it could be possible o get a much wider choice for people with big heads.
i could also see myself buying one of the bicycle airbag systems: www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kZGTOLBvek
ps: if someone knows a bike helmet that fits a head whitch measures 65 cm / 25,6" -> post it
A well established city for bicycle traffic should have extremely well established bike lanes and private streets for travel, should divert bicycle traffic away from main busy roads and highways, and should have a strong stance on promoting safe biking in their city through youth outreach, programs to promote the use of helmets, education programs for proper obedience of traffic laws via biking, and strict enforcement for reckless behavior on a bicycle. I define reckless behavior as no helmet, disobedience of traffic laws, and riding under the influence (DUI). It may sound like I am promoting a police state against cyclists, but really I strongly believe that safety needs to be a higher priority for people and that everyone should be required to obey the same traffic laws regardless of the mode of transportation. If our sport is promoted in the right way our streets will be safer for travel, our citizens will be healthier and happier, and our community will be a stronger group of like-minded individuals to further advocate the promotion of our lifestyle.
i say its vanity. in one way or another. posturing maybe...
and happily, vanity might be one of the reasons for me to want to remain fit, but i sure couldn't give a shit about what my hair looks like. or that i look like the great gazoo by wearing a helmet.
wear a helmet, get over your stupid hairdoo. cool people have too many interesting things going on in their lives to give a shit about their looks.
The major problem here is that in order to minimise the risk low enough not to wear a helmet there needs to be a change in vehicular attitude, a thing that is certainly lacking in Australia! In Copenhagen this change in attitude/awareness took 30years!!! It is true that we need to slow down traffic, create separated cycle lanes, etc... but this takes time!! People are still going to be pissed off at the lady with the basket on front pedalling at 5km/h.
Check out this blog, its pretty cool
www.copenhagenize.com
I've only been in the emergency services for five years, but I can still recall clearly a handful of accidents involving cyclists that could have POSSIBLY (I am saying possibly, I'm not an expert) ended better had they simply worn a helmet.
common sense ftw here.
They may not know the next time they'll be riding the bike so wouldn't have the helmet to hand anyway.
Not ride often enough think its worth buying a helmet in the first place.
And I can relate to that.
I've witnessed a man cross the street and was hit by a bus, massive head trauma with blood pissing out his ears.
Personally I'm lucky, where I live we have cycle paths completely seperate from the road so helmets aren't really necessary.
I don't even think about putting my helmet on or not- it's just an automatic thing like putting on a seatbelt. Do I think peoiple should be forced to wear a helmet? Not really, but until North American society adjusts to a more bike centric view (and it's coming folks- without a doubt as oil skyrockets) I think it's the smart choice to make.
With that being said, everything we do has an inherent danger associated with it, that we choose to do at our own risk. If in our bicycle riding waivers there was some sort of "ride helmet-less at your own risk" could help spread the blame away from the company not really enforcing a strict helmet rule.
Like I said in the beginning, in my opinion it should be up the rider rather or not they would like to ride with a helmet, or without.
I would like to see legitimate statistics showing, car-bike accidents with some of the following criteria, head injuries vs anything else, helmeted vs non-helmeted, and deaths vs survival. I would like the first sets to include the statistics for both people who survived, and the people who did not survive. It would be (albeit sad) interesting to see how many people who have died in a car-bike crash actually suffered a head injury.
I also would like to share this website. A silent and touching reminder of some of our fellow riders who have been lost from their saddles. ghostbikes.org
The one noticable thing in the course is that upon impact with a car is the way the body reacts at different speeds, in the demonstrations once a vehicle is hitting over 35mph imapcted bodies tend to overrotate and land on their heads.
This is with pedestrians on the whole but i would imagine cyclists are similar.
One good quote from the course is "The human body is designed to withstand impact of a speed at which it is able to move" ie running speed, anything beyond poses a risk.
Still lots of variables so who knows best.
I'm against mandatory helmets - it's like forcing women to completely cover themselves to protect them from men. It is addressing the wrong end of the problem. Reducing the number of cyclists increases nett morbidity, so it just isn't a rational public health response (unlike seat-belts which DO reduce morbidity).
What should be compulsory is constructing decent off-road cycle facilities in and between all population centers. How are 6 year olds supposed to ride to school (yes most folks, Dutch kids of that age ride to school - go there and be amazed)
Ironically, it is cheaper to build cities with off-road cycle facilities than not - because adding cycle space onto a road still needs to be engineered for the heaviest and fastest vehicle. Ditto for roads between towns. By increasing the number of cyclists commuting, we decrease the area of road required to cater for peak hour volumes of traffic. Add decent trains into the mix and (we in NZ are train poor) suddenly life is good.
On the other hand, helmets should be compulsory for competition riding (races on and off road).
I will always choose to ride a helmet, but as much for sun protection as head protection.
On the other hand GLOVES should be compulsory!
Amsterdam would be a good study as for cycling in the city. The amount of people on bikes there is ridiculous. The number of bikers during rush hour is quite challenging of course, but it works. It is cheapest, healthy and fastest way to commute in cities. Yes people do ride in the rain. They ride pretty much almost whole year. But then In Holland people accept commuting by bike as such. It has to do with the fact that Holland has very impressive network of bike lines. It is separated from the traffic when possible but in old towns it is impossible to avoid "sharing" where a white line separates cars and bikes.
It is not helmets (absent in general, only kids and road, xc racers wear them) what makes it work, it is the car drivers attitude. Yes, some will say hold on, but it is truth. I was warned to watch out for cyclists by almost all Dutch guys I met. I accepted this and made myself aware of the high risk of irresponsible cyclists.
PS I tried both: cycling and riding by car. Maybe I should have mentioned.
Speaking from my experience with my daughter age six, she has been put of cycling a bit because I insist she wears a helmet. None of her friends wear helmets, all of them ride every day pretty much and are much better riders than her, she will tend not to take her bike out maybe because of my insistence on a helmet.
Do I need a bit of a rethink?
I don't always wear safety glasses but when I do, I'm glad I decided to wear them.
TEDxCopenhagen - Mikael Colville-Andersen - Why We Shouldn't Bike with a Helmet
www.youtube.com/watch?v=07o-TASvIxY
I'd rather cops were hassling dangerous drivers than riders not wearing helmets
BUT
no helmet in a crash... not worth thinking about
I just dont commute by bike any more cos helmet or not,bike skills or not, its just too fkng dangerous
CAN you be hurt on a bicycle?
Is it POSSIBLE?
Based on the reasonably assumed answer, should "reasonable" protection be worn / attached?
Answer that, make a choice.
I never, NEVER ride without one. I have five. One for each type of riding I might encounter. All Snell certified (or better).
That's just one person, but THIS person has had sever cranial trauma (at the age of five) and can ABSOLUTELY attest to even the smallest head injury causing LIFELONG CONSEQUENCES.
Helmet laws may "suck" but they are apparently preventing up to 700 head injury hospital visits per year down under. That is about 50% less visits to the hospital for smacked heads. I think we all accept riding trails without a lid isn't smart, why do people throw that idea away on the street where it's waaay more dangerous?
More people I know have been killed or seriously hurt by cars than on the trails.
Here is the link to a little write up.
www.bikeradar.com/news/article/decline-in-australian-head-injuries-linked-to-helmet-law-35450
www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/helmets-bike-paths-halving-number-of-head-injuries-in-cyclists-nsw-study-finds/story-e6frg6nf-1226487190018
As the docking bay is outside my flat I use my helmet.. no brainer really. But the downside to these schemes are the irregular user. Twice a week I strap my bike to the back of my car and start the 2 Hour drive to go see my buddies and ride the trails in the North downs where they all live, or a longer drive to Wales or a dedicated trail centre further up the country. Having to drive through the city trying to avoid idiots on there hire bike weaving around, chicks peddling in high heals wobbling precariously in front of traffic and the current point system race where commuters mentally gain points during there commute for passing other cyclist's. Big points for a lycra clad city worker on his mega bucks full carbon road bike going down to very little points to a full Suspension MTB
The problem is the majority of them don't have a helmet on there head, the comment about climbing a ladder is ridiculous, when i'm up a ladder, that is generally footed by a mate i'm not dodging other road users! I read recently that drivers worry about un helmeted users and give them more space when passing, add this to the chick riding with heals and wobbling all over the place, i've seen many times erratic driving, as drivers start doing stupid take overs moves and driving along half on the other side of the road trying to avoid the un helmeted hire bike rider, this them forces the on coming traffic closer to the curb and guess what closer to another un helmeted unconfident wobbly bike user. Ultimately making the roads an accident waiting to happen. And unfortunately i've seen first hand cyclist making love to hard steel car twice now, and its not pretty trust me. Both times 100% hire bike user that is unsure when riding, doing something stupid......TBC...
It specialy piss me off people that doesn´t wear a helmet for "it ruins my look and that's far more important that my brain spread all over the road" reasons...I mean fixies and bmx mainly. No ofense, is a fact...
For me this is really the most important comment in the whole article, urban riding as an action is not really dangerous enough to NEED a helmet but the conditions in which you need to ride makes it necessary (definitely in Australia) Removing helmets from the existing infrastructure will only result in a greater number of head injuries. If governments/ cities want to encourage cycling they should look at the root of the problem.
I think anti-helmet advocates are failing to see the real reason why cycling is so popular in places like Copenhagen etc. Along with a far safer network of bike paths the public opinion is also vastly different, in Australia if a motorist hits a cyclist the response is normally "bloody cyclist shouldn't have been there" in Copenhagen it's "oh shit what have I done I hope he's alright"
As for helmet use during sport riding (road riding, mtb, DJ etc etc.) anything that requires more concentration than walking it really is obvious that helmets should be used. The question "where does it end, perhaps we should all wear armor when riding road bikes too" pops up from time to time, but basically skin will grow back, bones will heal brains tend not to and being that it is arguably the most important organ in our body we should protect it.
My 2 cents, take it or leave it
When I ride on local trails I think they're pretty, so why wouldn't they be on the city too? I just love to see girls with helmets and well dressed, and I think most of the people just have beauty issues with helmets. Thats ridiculous.
I'm rather passionate about the subject because someone close to me suffered a tbi. He's been in various therapies for two years and can finally jog on his own, but he's lost memories of his children growing up, has extreme difficulties with his speech (studders, can't find simple words, etc) and now suffers from seizures so he can't drive and isn't back to work yet. We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills if it wasn't for his great insurance.
All said and done I don't think helmets should be mandated, not that I believe the argument that mandating lends to higher risk of obesity.
im fairly sure if your on a dual cariadge way and you get hit by anything helmet isnt going to do much
The man didn't crash, he simply fell from his bike.
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/08/12/arnold-schwarzenegger-boris-bike-london-2012-picture_n_1769616.html
I have a friend, who was in a 4x race and smacked his Troy Lee helmet with such impact that it left him in a coma for nearly a year, now he is wheel chair bound and only just learning to communicate again. He would be dead though if he wasn't wearing the helmet.. Now yes, he was racing, but lets assume he just hit his head on a car? I'm pretty sure they ain't softer than trees and dirt.. His name is Scott Shepherd, and his website is Rider-Down if your interested. www.riderdown.org.uk
Anyway, as for whether a helmet should be the law is debatable, I don't think it should be the law, as in I don't think you should sweat getting fined over it, because fines suck balls, but I don't think it should have to be law, because it's just common sense. It ain't worth the risk, and you run the risk you face the possible consequence. To phrase an expression in a different context; If you don't use it, you might well lose it!
We live in a day and age where society has been flooded with helmet marketing hype. The fact that I don’t always wear a helmet does not mean I am not a safe cyclist. Its important to understand that wearing a helmet does not insure you will never hurt your head when you fall off your bike.
Luckily we live in a country where free choice is allowed and in most cases encouraged. Individuals are allowed to make decisions (that some may disagree with) regarding what we choose to do, or not do. And that freedom of choice is far more important than a mandate regarding bicycle helmets
Then again Darwin is always around the corner so if you want to compare your skull HRC (hardness) to concrete or asphalt.... have fun !
not worth the risk not wearing one !?
If not, more power to you, but otherwise, your brain is in jeopardy! LOL
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Larry
"Yes, there are studies that show that if you fall off a bicycle at a certain speed and hit your head, a helmet can reduce your risk of serious head injury. But such falls off bikes are rare — exceedingly so in mature urban cycling systems."
The implication being that the falls in which a helmet would be of benefit are rare... that is flat out retarded. Any time your head impacts the ground, regardless of speed or height, you are better off with a helmet than without. I have no problem with it being a personal choice whether to wear one or not and I'm not suggesting they should be compulsory for adults but anyone who tries to argue against the basic physical reality that some cushion is better than no cushion is a moron.
This article also wholly ignores the massive flaw with all these helmet studies... they focus only on "serious" and "life threatening" injuries which is how they make these absurd comparisons to walking down the street or climbing a ladder. The reality is, that's not the typical case in which a helmet is useful... it's all the stupid little get-offs we as bikers take where you tumble through the ground and pop right back up without thinking twice. Go have a look at your helmet, all those little scratches and chips represent a moment that your head contacted something hard without you ever even realizing it thanks to your helmet. People can argue all they want that a helmet has never saved their life but it's undoubtedly saved some bumps on the head and some headaches.
Do you not think that telling people exactly what they can and can't do is more irresponsible than letting them make their own informed decisions? Think of the bigger picture.
Like I said, I'm not pushing the helmet on anyone but this intentional misinformation on the part of the author is bullshit... you talk of making an "informed decision", how is that possible if people are being fed misinformation about the usefullness of helmets?
I guess when you're as ignorant and lackwitted as you three though, head injuries really aren't something to worry about.
Thus the argument stands; the author isn't saying that a helmet wont benefit you in low-speed, or non-life-threatening situations, rather that the situations in which a helmet will drastically alter the damaging effect of a injury on other parties are far less common than the North American safety paradigm would dictate.
I choose to wear a helmet, however I also choose to consume unhealthy foods and hang out in polluted areas without one of those funny little Asian-lady-masks. Big picture my healthcare-impact is neutral at best.
I love how I've repeatedly said I'm ambivalent as to whether anyone wears a helmet and you idiots seem to think I'm somehow saying everyone should wear them...
There's a difference between saying people should all wear helmets and pointing out that it's idiotic to suggest that a helmet only offers protection in certain special types of impacts. That you lot can't seem to understand that difference is really pretty pathetic.