Bicycle helmets do almost nothing to prevent concussions

Re:Bicycle helmets do almost nothing to prevent concussions by nl on Saturday October 11, 2014 @06:42AM (#8441800)

Regarding the reduction is cycling: the share of cycling as a transport mechanism fell by almost the same amount in a number of jurisdictions with no mandatory helmet laws over the same time period[1]. People in the transport strategy field generally seem to think the cause of this change was more dual-car families.

However, I used to be strongly in favour of mandatory helmet laws. Now I tend to think they need to be more targeted and used as a blend of changes. I think riding on footpaths should be allowed (with a strict speed limit) without helmets, as well as on separated bikepaths, again with a speed limit. On roads they should be mandatory.

[1] http://i.imgur.com/qPGUfAK.png

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bicycle helmets do almost nothing to prevent concussions by tom_morrow on Saturday October 11, 2014 @09:07AM (#8442022)

an effective mandatory helmet law, from a national health perspective, would be to force those who drive a car to work to wear a bicycle helmet ...all day long.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bicycle helmets do almost nothing to prevent concussions by revelation on Saturday October 11, 2014 @07:27AM (#8441873)

The idea being that a) cyclists should fuck off, b) pedestrians deserve no space or protection and c) the burden of mitigating danger needs to be placed on those most vulnerable to it, not those introducing it in the first place (cars).

This is thinking from the 1950s. All of these things have failed dramatically.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bicycle helmets do almost nothing to prevent concussions by nl on Saturday October 11, 2014 @07:50AM (#8441908)

I'm unsure if your response is to my ideas around helmet laws or something else? For context, I'm from Australia, where helmets are mandatory for all bike riders. Making them non-mandatory is a change that some think will increase cycling uptake.

Anyway, if it was to me, then

a) I'm a cyclist (over 6000km and 115,000 vertical meters this year. That's further than I drove).

b) Of course pedestrians deserve space. I'd prefer to change the laws to allow non-helmeted riding on separated bike paths only, but that would be useless as where I live most separated bike paths don't link up which means people must either ride on the road or (illegally) on the footpath to get between them. In a world where not everywhere is Copenhagen or Amsterdam I'd prefer to see children ride to school with their parents on footpaths than not ride. I'd prefer to see people who worry about helmet hair ride to work on footpaths and separated bike paths than not ride. Where I live both these things are currently illegal.

c) Yes. Riding on roads needs to be made safe. That does not preclude encouraging more diverse transport choices by making other changes too.

I find too many cycling advocates come from entrenched pro or anti-helmet positions and aren't prepared to look for compromises. That isn't helpful overall.

[ Parent | on HN ]