I’ve written about this before (Should helmet use be made compulsory?) But, I’m against making helmet use compulsory by law.
The Association of Paediatric Emergency Medicine has just voted to officially call for a change in British law to make it compulsory for cyclists under 16 years of age to wear a helmet.
The Association quotes studies suggesting that helmets reduce the chance of head injury by 85 percent, brain injury by 88 percent and severe brain injury by 75 percent. (Bike Radar)
I agree with the CTC which claims compulsory helmet use is bad because:
- It reduces cycle Use (
- Leads to a rise in obesity
- Less cyclists makes the roads more dangerous (safety in numbers)
- Difficult to enforce
- I think the number of children who die from head injuries whilst cycling is on average 1 or 2 a year (can’t remember where I read this though) By comparison, how many children are creating early onset diabetes and other obesity related illnesses because they stay at home all day playing with computers and eating donuts?
Countries with the lowest fatalities for cycle use like Netherlands and Denmark have a very low rate of helmet use. In the US, with the highest helmet use, there is also the highest rate of fatalities.
Also wearing a cycling helmet may well reduce head injuries for pedestrians and passengers in cars.
Nevertheless despite being against a ban, I think children should be encouraged to wear helmets.
All cycle helmet should be destroyed, same as the nanny state, I’ll never wear one of those stupid things, and haven’t done since I taught myself to cycle back in 1963, I’m still cycling to this day, I encourage children, adults of any age to throw the helnet away and go free spirit.
Helmet promotion and laws are insane. They go against the evidence of the population wide studies and to the experiences gathered from those countries that have introduced laws or that have high helmet use.
“The Association quotes studies suggesting that helmets reduce the chance of head injury by 85 percent” – which means they are using a case control study that has been completely discredited – I believe it was also clearly showing that helmets protected your elbows from injury.
So they are basing their decisions on utter drivel when it should be left alone unless and until there is far clearer and non-contradicting evidence. In the meantime we can concentrate on encouraging people to cycle (which is better for them even with any possible risks). More cycling improves congestion, health, pollution, cyclists safety, sense of community, etc.
10 deaths a year and 500 serious injuries. However I am not certain that helmets will change things.
I have more fundamental objections to helmet compulsion, ably illustrated in this article from Copenhagenize.com
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/09/fear-of-cycling-03-helmet-promotion.html
I’m a Brit ex-pat living in Melbourne, Australia where we have helmet compulsion. It is not a good thing.