On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 22:41:08 -0000, "Spencer Bullen"
<
[email protected]> wrote:
>Whilst, as a police officer myself, I feel that ticketing cyclists for a lack of helmets would be a
>waste of time and resources, I feel the rabid hatred of helmets displayed by some posters to this
>NG is wrong, and the encouragement of safe cycling should include a push for all to wear helmets.
First, who displays rabid hatred of helmets? Most of us are strongly opposed ot the idea of
compulsion, for goiod and sufficient reasons, but I don't know anybody who wastes energy actually
hating the plastic hats, only the imbeciles who pretend they are a fantastically effective solution
to the (greatly exaggerated) danger of cycling.
Second, you have to be very careful promoting helmets. There is good evidence that poeple ride
less carefully when helmeted, and are more ikely to experience precisely the kind of crash about
which they are worried. Helmets are designed for low-speed falls, the way to rpotect youself
against cagers is nothing to do with plastic hats and everythign to do with roadcraft, maintenance
and the like.
>I don't note the same people arguing for the removal of the requirement for a helmet on a
>motorbike.
Have you asked? In some states in the US they repealed the helmet law for motorcyclists. Guess what?
Head injury and death rates went down. There is also a huge difference between the actual protective
effect of a motorcycle helmet and a cycle helmet.
>I know it can be argued that a motorbike can go far faster then a bicycle, but even with my low
>level of fitness I can manage 20+ mph on the way to work, and don't think a close encounter of the
>pavement kind with my head is survivable without protection.
In which supposition you are, I'm afraid, demonstrably wrong. Cyclists have been surviving these
crashes for a century and more. A friend of mine aged 70 did a header after hitting a pothole at
speed, and survived thanks to the protective effect of his Mk. 1 standard-issue skull. Another 70-year-
old, in Reading, died in a similar crash despite wearing a helmet. In higher speed crashes helmets
do not make the difference between life and death. The reasons are discussed in recent reports like
that by Curnow, you can read about it on
<http://www.cyclehelmets.org>
Focus on this, though: wherever you go in the world, increasing helmet use has not resulted in
reduced head injury rates, whether the increase is through compulsion or not. If we acknoweledge
that helmets do prevent some injuries, then we must account for the mechanism by which this benefit
evaporates at the popualtion level. Or at least, if we intend to compel people to wear helmets, we
have to account for it and come up with a mechanism to prevent it. Otherwise all we get is a massive
reduction in cycling for no benefit at all, as they have in Australia, New Zealand and parts of
Canada and the US.
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://chapmancentral.demon.co.uk
