Cyclists: do you wear a helmet?

[MattA7]

If you are a cyclists do you wear a helmet?

If you do, do you think they should be mandatory like motorcycle helmets and seatbelts or left to personal choice.

If you don’t would compulsory helmet laws put you off cycling. Research shows that cycling rates drop when a jurisdiction introduces helmet laws so it obviously is seen as an issue for some cyclists.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you are a cyclists do you wear a helmet?

Yes. Though I never used to, I only started when I went on blood thinners due to the higher risk posed by a head injury.

If you do, do you think they should be mandatory like motorcycle helmets and seatbelts or left to personal choice.

No, for adults it should be personal choice.

I could see an argument that for children they should be mandatory, to protect children from the poor decisions/negligence of their parents, however.

 

[Trainbike46]

If you are a cyclists do you wear a helmet?

That depends: In the UK I generally do (but I have on occasion forgotten and not realised till I was out!), but in the Netherlands I never wear one

If you do, do you think they should be mandatory like motorcycle helmets and seatbelts or left to personal choice.

Absolutely should be left to personal choice, the drop in cycling in response to helmet laws makes cycling more dangerous for the people remaining, so there is no safety case for cycle helmet laws, like there is for seatbelts.

If you don’t would compulsory helmet laws put you off cycling. Research shows that cycling rates drop when a jurisdiction introduces helmet laws so it obviously is seen as an issue for some cyclists.

I would continue cycling, unless other things (such as a less/worse cycle paths or changes in driver behaviour) change at the same time. Admittedly, I don't cycle nearly as much here in NI as I used to, simply because Belfast drivers are much worse, and the roads are much more dangerous in design

I could see an argument that for children they should be mandatory, to protect children from the poor decisions/negligence of their parents, however.

I'm not sure I agree. If that were to lead to fewer young cyclists it could actually make cycling less safe for those that still do, and it would be bad for society overall if children were less indepent and more reliant on their parents

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Depends where I am. On quiet country lanes or traffic-free trails I generally don't. In London I generally do.

 

[Snow1964]

No, but when I go for cycle ride it tends to be quiet roads and parkland. I don’t even own a cycle helmet

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure I agree. If that were to lead to fewer young cyclists it could actually make cycling less safe for those that still do, and it would be bad for society overall if children were less indepent and more reliant on their parents

I don't think it would. Children are used to being told what to do, and most children do have helmets even if they are often hung on their handlebars. A programme of giving them away for free may be worth considering, they cost very little to make.

Furthermore children are more likely to fall off their bike (the thing they are designed and tested to protect against) than adults.

 

[Trainbike46]

I don't think it would. Children are used to being told what to do, and most children do have helmets even if they are often hung on their handlebars. A programme of giving them away for free may be worth considering, they cost very little to make.

Furthermore children are more likely to fall off their bike (the thing they are designed and tested to protect against) than adults.

I didn't mean that children shouldn't wear helmets, but rather that I fear the negative impacts of making helmet wearing mandatory would outweigh the benefits even for children

 

[gordonthemoron]

Sometimes I wear a cycle helmet, sometimes I don't. I do not think that helmets should be mandatory, but I think they are advisable for small children

 

[bib]

I probably wear a helmet 80% of the time, normally would if I'm on busier roads/going faster/its icy, wouldn't bother if it's a quiet route or off-road. I guess I'd still cycle if it was compulsory but would be less likely to just go for a ride round the park etc.

Personal choice seems fine to me, sure there's a risk but I think it's similar to walking on a per mile basis, although I guess you'd go further on your bike. I haven't fallen off a bike since I was about 5 and I doubt a helmet is going to help much if I get hit by a lorry so there's a limited amount of circumstances in which wearing one is beneficial, and it's a question of whether you decide that risk mitigation is worth the minor hassle of a helmet.

I think I've possibly seen a study that concluded drivers give you a wider berth when overtaking if you don't wear a helmet, probably even more so if you dye your hair grey and wobble a lot!

Probably a more interesting debate regarding e-scooters and e-bikes, there seem to be plenty out there that are de-limited and I've heard e-bike injuries tend to be more similar to motorbike injuries. Though if you've gone to the hassle of hacking your motor controller etc then you maybe aren't going to bother with other legal requirements anyway.

 

[miklcct]

I always wear one as a safety measure, like wearing a seat belt in a car.

 

[Romsey]

I do wear a cycle helmet even on cycle routes. Having seen the state of a colleagues head and shoulders after going through the back window of a unlit parked BMW, self preservation becomes more prominent. Anything energy absorbing between my scull and concrete is a good idea. I think I'm at as much risk from idiots on unregulated electric scooters as any other road traffic.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having seen the state of a colleagues head and shoulders after going through the back window of a unlit parked BMW

"while cycling without due care and attention and/or with inadequate lighting" is the phrase you are looking for. If you hit a stationary object with a road vehicle (bicycles included), you're a fool, whether it's technically meant to be lit or not.

If he's that bad a cyclist, I'd suggest a full-face helmet and knee/elbow pads, or perhaps just to give up cycling.

 

[Romsey]

"while cycling without due care and attention and/or with inadequate lighting" is the phrase you are looking for. If you hit a stationary object with a road vehicle (bicycles included), you're a fool, whether it's technically meant to be lit or not.

If he's that bad a cyclist, I'd suggest a full-face helmet and knee/elbow pads, or perhaps just to give up cycling.

In his case "without due care and attention" is appropriate even now ......

 

[BingMan]

I didn't mean that children shouldn't wear helmets, but rather that I fear the negative impacts of making helmet wearing mandatory would outweigh the benefits even for children

It is mandatory for children to wear helmets when riding a horse. And that hasn't led to the demise of the Pony Club

 

[TheBigD]

I cycle around 80 mile a week on average, 4000 miles a year. Will be alot more this year as Im doing LEJOG.
The only time I wear a helmet is when on an organised tour as they usually insist on it.
The 101 mile ride I did early this morning, 6hr17m for those interested, and no one mentioned helmets at all.

You get the odd helmet Karen who hectors you but they are easily dismissed and soon leave you alone. On the whole most people don't care whether you have a helmet or not.

As for being a legal requirement, absolutely not. As a society we really need to move away from the suffocating maternalism of the nanny state and this belief that the government must interference in every aspect of life.

If the goal is to get more people cycling, then separated infrastructure is the way to go, as I get that some snowflakes don't like cycling in traffic.

 

[Nicholas43]

I've been tri- or bicycling since 1945. Never worn a helmet. Worst crash was off my tricycle in 1946, going too fast down hill.
I've just returned from a lovely few days in the Netherlands. The school run into Naarden was 95% cyclists, 5% cars, with a clever traffic light to ensure that cars, limited to one at a time, gave precedence to cyclists. No-one, from babes in a front crate, to grannies sitting up, was wearing a helmet. UK helmet propaganda just feeds car dependence.

 

[Magdalia]

I grew up in a cycling family, for most of my childhood my family did not have a car. In those days it wasn't a legal requirement to wear a helmet on a motorcycle (that became law in 1973) and the idea of wearing a helmet on a pedal cycle wasn't even considered.

When cycle helmets first became a thing, I remember tentatively suggesting to my mother that I could buy her one as a birthday present, and she said that she wouldn't be seen dead in one of those. My father was still cycling without a helmet well into his 80s.

So I come from a background with strong cultural resistance to wearing a helmet. I was still resistant when I first went on blood thinners.

I changed when I bought my electric bike. This is much heavier than a pedal cycle, and potentially more difficult to handle in an emergency, which changed the risk assessment. I bought a helmet at the same time and now don't get on the bike without it.

But I would not make it a legal requirement. People need to be encouraged to cycle and the benefits outweigh the risks. It should continue to be a personal choice. I think that applies even with children: they are better off cycling to and from school without a helmet if the alternative is being taken in a car.

 

[Sm5]

Having been put in hospital twice in my youth by bad drivers, I always wear a helmet, if I ever doubt it for one minute, I run my tongue over two of my chipped teeth, and my hands over the dents in my forehead to remind me of those events 30 years ago… and put my helmet back on.

 

[telstarbox]

I do but it's never helped me in 7 years of regular cycling apart from deflecting the odd low tree branch It does give me confidence to take long descents faster and it keeps my head warm in winter. Also it's white with reflectors which should make me more visible at night (I use lights too).

If I've hired a Boris bike in London or the equivalent on holiday I typically haven't used a helmet, although that tends to be a gentler type of riding anyway.

Completely agree that it would be counter productive to enforce helmet use.

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't wear a helmet but I also rarely cycle on any route with a medium or high risk. I almost always cycle on segregated paths or in parks, or similar.

 

[razor89]

I do wear a helmet, and a recent crash at the trails at Cannock reaffirmed my view. Went over a small drop a bit wrong, my handlebars swung violently to the left and I went over the bars. Landed on my right shoulder and my head whipped into the ground with some force. Thankfully I had a helmet on which not only protected my head but also stopped my neck from wrenching and potentially giving me whiplash. Less than a metre away from where my helmet hit the ground was a large rock, had I hit that without a helmet I'm certain I would have been looking at serious injuries. On the road that rock could just as easily have been a kerb.

 

[philthetube]

Had this forum existed when seat belts were being introduced I wonder if the discussion would be much different.

 

[yorkie]

Helmets and seatbelts are not comparable.

It's also a similarly legitimate question to ask of pedestrians: do you wear a helmet while walking in urban areas which involve crossing roads? You could even ask car drivers if they wear a helmet while driving.

 

[philthetube]

Helmets and seatbelts are not comparable.

It's also a similarly legitimate question to ask of pedestrians: do you wear a helmet while walking in urban areas which involve crossing roads? You could even ask car drivers if they wear a helmet while driving.

agreed, but I reckon the arguments would be the same.

 

[rangersac]

I generally wear a helmet, but I am typically undertaking what I consider to be more risky cycling activities, which are mountain biking and frequently mixing with traffic on fast roads. For a relaxing cycle through a park with no traffic, on a protected cycle route, or on a quick trip to the shops on quiet urban streets then I don't see the need, so I don't support mandatory helmet laws.

There are a few studies that have been done that show that driver behaviour is less vigilant towards cyclists with helmets, as they are perceived to be "safer", which I think is also concerning when considering mandatory helmets for cyclists.

 

[yorkie]

agreed, but I reckon the arguments would be the same.

The case for seatbelts is far stronger, far less contentious and completely different.

In the last few years in particular, certain people have been attempting to compare seatbelts to all sorts of other things which are a false equivalence, in my opinion.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

No

Many children wear their helmets incorrectly, even the wrong way round, or use the wrong size.

A helmet makes the head bigger so it may be more likely that head/helmet strike an object (kerb?)

There have been suggestions that belted drivers are less careful ("risk compensation"). Seems plausible. Might apply to helmeted two-wheel users too.

Making helmets compulsory for ebikes might be worthwhile, that would make conventional bikes relatively more attractive perhaps. I fear that ebikes doing 30+kmh on cycleways is bad for normal cyclists and walkers. Perhaps the helmeted ebikers should use the road instead.

 

[Simon11]

I never wear helmets and I think for adults, they make it slightly more dangerous to cycle and create the illusion of greater safety. They give you less viability and reduce the noise/ feel from other traffic.

Plus, most cycle helmets only protect you when travelling at very slow speed and impact on the way your body reacts if there is a crash. When someone doesn't wear a helmet, you have better reactions and use your arms quicker to protect your head.

Instead of focusing on helmets, I think more lives could be saved by getting all cycles to read the cycle code, wear hi-vis and lights at nights.

 

[stuu]

It depends what I'm doing. Round town and gentle cycling, definitely not. If I know I will be going down a big hill then generally I do

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do wear a helmet, and a recent crash at the trails at Cannock reaffirmed my view. Went over a small drop a bit wrong, my handlebars swung violently to the left and I went over the bars. Landed on my right shoulder and my head whipped into the ground with some force. Thankfully I had a helmet on which not only protected my head but also stopped my neck from wrenching and potentially giving me whiplash. Less than a metre away from where my helmet hit the ground was a large rock, had I hit that without a helmet I'm certain I would have been looking at serious injuries. On the road that rock could just as easily have been a kerb.

While I think it is a matter of personal choice with regard to wearing one when riding on the road or segregated tarmacced urban paths, I think anyone who engages in mountain biking without wearing one is taking a very high level of risk. You are far more likely to come off on trails (even more so on technical graded trails) and there are far more things to hit. Mountain bikers often wear full-face helmets (to avoid losing teeth) and gloves and elbow/knee pads, let alone simple helmets.

Making helmets compulsory for ebikes might be worthwhile, that would make conventional bikes relatively more attractive perhaps. I fear that ebikes doing 30+kmh on cycleways is bad for normal cyclists and walkers. Perhaps the helmeted ebikers should use the road instead.

No prejudice against "€bike$" as you usually put it showing there, honest?

An e-bike doing 30+km/h is being ridden manually or has been illegally modified and is legally a motorcycle, the assist drops out above 25km/h.