Just been reading an article on Yahoo saying that the Northern Ireland Assembly are considering making the wearing of cycling helmets compulsory and there may be a £50 fine if your are not wearing one!!!!
The article states that the Road Research Lab reckons that helmets are effective in most accidents but that depends on the size of the injured party and type of incident. Headway charity seem to support it too.

So, what do you reckon – a good idea or not?

TJ

Front & centre please

The only people who will care about this are people who dont wear helmets.

It'll be interesting to see how this squares with central governments policy of deregulation. From the stories online its not clear if its just going to be for kids.

Piha is your name after the beach in auckland?

I personally like the fact that you dont have to wear helmets good, I wear one whenever i go for a ride (mtb or road) but if i just want to pop to the shops i dont think its fair you should then be breaking the law if you dont put on a helmet.

Wear helmet anyway so I don't mind but like Australia -it could put a lot of people off riding.

after looking at my grammer maybe i need to wear a helmet all the time!

motorist education should come before compulsory helmets (for road riding); riding off road you`d be daft not to wear one. When cars pass me at 60 mph a few inches out no helmet would save me if they hit me, education that CYCLIST NEED SPACE would save more lives.

The only people who will care about this are people who dont wear helmets.

I care too, though I always wear a helmet. Evidence says compulsion tends to reduce bike usage:(

Insurance should follow the continental ( think )lead of the highest powered vehicle involved in a colision always being at fault.
I think that would concentrate the mind beautifully

treefingerlongboards – Member

Piha is your name after the beach in auckland?

Yep, I used to get there as often as I could when I lived in Auckland as a kid, fishing, swimming, exploring – great place to be. Have you been?

it makes me cringe when I see people riding on the road without a helmet on. especially on winding country roads!! :S

You shouldn't have to be told to wear something that could potentially save your life.

Baby Jesus didn't wear a helmet, and it's not mentioned in the bible, so that's all the evidence that counts.

it makes me cringe when I see people riding on the road without a helmet on. especially on winding country roads!! :S

You shouldn't have to be told to wear something that could potentially save your life.

Does it make you cringe when you don't see drivers wearing crash helmets in their cars? Plenty of lives to be saved that way.

I always wear one but wouldn't want to see them become compulsory. As jamesb says putting the onus on cyclists to wear protective gear* rather than on drivers to, you know, maybe control their ton of metal properly is ass-backwards IMO.

* And that's without even getting into how effective they are if you get hit by a car on a winding country road.

I'm 100% sure this will slide into the usual bollocks, but while there is still room;

In other words, in the places where lots of people cycle and don't wear helmets, fewer people die than those places where fewer people cycle and more wear helmets.

Cyclists are easy targets, easy money….mobile phone use in cars anyone?

I would not be writing this now if I had been helmetless when someone opened a van door on me and I nutted a wall

Tells us nothing crikey. Far too many other variables to draw a conclusion.

Statistics FAIL I'm afraid.

Here we go again 😯 The same people hating to be TOLD what to do 😯 Was the same with seat belts and motorbike helmets – give it up already 🙄

The only people who will care about this are people who dont wear helmets.

or don't like being told what to do 🙂

I would not be writing this now if I had been helmetless when someone opened a van door on me and I nutted a wall

No offence Edric, but so what? You can't possibly extrapolate from that to the conclusion that helmet use should be compulsory, any more than you can argue that nobody needs to worry about smoking because someone's grandad lived to be 100 while smoking 10 packs a day.

For the love of Jesus, i've already explained that God doesn't want you to wear a helmet. Arguing is just falling into the hands of the devil and his evil helpers.

The are thinking of getting rid of the law in Oz

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/16/2983587.htm

I wear a helmet most of the time (don't bother for pootles along a gravel track or trips to the shop) so it wouldn't affect me that much if helmets were compulsory but its the principle, I like the fact its my choice .

What about all the people that wear helmets but they don't fit / they have them in a stupid position on their head?

Rock Wallaby – Member
The are thinking of getting rid of the law in Oz

A health expert saying "get rid" and a cycle group vice-president saying "keep it" hardly equates to a political will to change the law does it?

Hope there is some wider debate but from that article it just sounds like an academic has done what he should do, research, and published. Politics however doesn't seem to follow such advice over here particularly well. Maybe it does over there better…

Edric do you even know you are right?

Agreed Becky, it's the principle of choice I like as well, although the "wearing in a stupid position" thing has got me thinking… Wonder if any legislation would go as far as stipulating how/were it should be worn. Bet hanging from an elbow would be popular on a hot day 🙂

I care too, though I always wear a helmet. Evidence says compulsion tends to reduce bike usage:(

Indeed. Which is probably where the reduction in deaths in Crikeys stats comes from

Mostly, not always, I wear a lid. But I'd stand with anyone who wanted to oppose a move like this, on the general principal of the thing. I simply don't like the idea of being forced into something like this.

Insurance should follow the continental ( think )lead of the highest powered vehicle involved in a colision always being at fault.

😆 You really think that, even if it was true? Do you call the RSPCA if you find a dead bird?

Edit – surely even TJ must have a boredom/pragmatist breaking threshold!

Indeed. Which is probably where the reduction in deaths in Crikeys stats comes from

PP, doesn't that graph say more cycling = fewer deaths (generally, with the Finns doing their own thing)
and more cycling with less helmet wearing (generally, with Sweden and Finland doing their own thing, with more deaths relatively).

Mostly, not always, I wear a lid. But I'd stand with anyone who wanted to oppose a move like this, on the general principal of the thing. I simply don't like the idea of being forced into something like this.

Agreed on that.

Still no TJ???

Will they be also required to wear knee pads and day-glow jackets? I can see it kicking off up there 😉

It crucified the cycle industry in Australia.

It marked the end of the non-enthusiast cyclist.

It will do the same here.

Hello! Just in from a night shift.

Edit – surely even TJ must have a boredom/pragmatist breaking threshold!

Indeed I have we went thru all thi sin a lot of detail only a couple of weeks ago.

There is no decent evidence that across populations helmet wearing reduces injuries. Daft tho it seems this is consistently shown in multiple studies looking at injury rates before and after helmet compulsion. They simply don't provide much protection from major injuries. ( good at minor ones) and there is evidence they exacerbate major injuries.

In Australian after helmets were made compulsory head injury rates per mile cycled increased and this has been seen in american states as well.

Helmet compulsion reduces the numbers who cycle dramatically and thus increases health risks from lack of exercise – so actually you have more deaths from heart attacks and so on.

Much of the evidence on both sides is poor, counter-intuitive and contradictory. Helmet designs are badly flawed, helmet testing standards are very low and not related to the real world.

I ain't gonna argue this all again – everything I state here is backed by evidence. The only evidence that shows helmets doing any good is from badly designed after the fact surveys of A&E stats which will allways exaggerate positives as its s elf selecting sample.
Wear one if you want – compulsion is shown over and over again to be counterproductive

cyclehelmets.org for the (mainly)anticompulsion argument

I see a lot of families out on a ride togehter along the towpath I use to get to my local trails. Hardly ever do you see the kids wearing helmets. I just cant fathom why parents would let their kids out on a bike without one.
Even if im riding the bike 50 yards to my local shop I always always have mine on.

PP, doesn't that graph say more cycling = fewer deaths

It does.

The number of people cycling seems to be an important factor in the safety of cyclists. Percentage wearing helmets does not.

However, there's also a big link between having decent cycling infrastructure and the number of trips made by bike. Decent infrastructure is what we need, not a helmet law. Or, should we reduce deaths from knife crime by enforcing the wearing of stab proof vests?

i think people should be encouraged to wear a crash-hat, but not forced by law.

this is based on my total guess that compulsory skid-lid wearing would just put people* off cycling.

anyone got any numbers on this? (i like numbers).

(*the average citizen of MotD-Xfactor land)

Adopting the role of TJ-lite…..

If you look at the statistics (rather than the stories) regarding injuries pre- and post helmet laws, you can draw your own conclusions.

Unfortunately, this does require you to adopt an open mind rather than your chosen opinion with regard to helmet use.

The info is out there; http://cyclehelmets.org/papers/c2022.pdf

Epicyclo has it in a nutshell, although I would add that it also led to cyclists being fined and prosecuted far more than any car driving transgressions.

I suspect that helmet compulsion would be a walkover in the UK, largely because of the attitudes revealed on here every time the subject is raised….

foxyrider – Member

Here we go again The same people hating to be TOLD what to do Was the same with seat belts and motorbike helmets – give it up already

The big difference is that the evidence base was good for them – it is not for cycle helmets.

Evidence based practice please.

People should be able to choose what they want to do. If not wearing a cycle helmet and increasing their chances of a life-changing / ending injury is their decision, then they should be able to choose to do that.

Darwinism.

For those of us out there with sense the law will make no difference.

One part which should be compulsory is helmets for children until they are 16. If the parents are dumb enough not to wear one, the least we can do is protect the children.

I love it when people mention Darwinism in relation to bike helmet laws.

Riding my bike to work without a helmet is safer than riding off road with one.

Ergo, we should ban mountain biking.