There is a nuanced discussion to be had. It is easier to pass laws that make wearing helmets mandatory than to make roads and transportation infrastructure cycling-friendly. There is also the issue of recommendations vs. making things mandatory, especially if it could be used in some countries to harass or ostracize cyclists.
Another point to consider is the change in average speeds: in Germany, it seems that the uptick in serious cycling accidents amongst the elderly can be linked to the massive popularity of ebikes. In the past, older people were traveling at slower average speeds, which gave them more leeway to react and consequences of a crash were less severe. With ebikes it is very easy to travel at 20–27 km/h, e. g. going from 15 km/h to 20 km/h increases the kinetic energy by about 80 %.
Yes, completely agreed.
In my experience, that is no longer necessary with modern helmets. My Octal and Tectal (X?) have performed really well even in the Japanese summer heat and humidity. With older helmets, I suffered more.
That’s the weird thing. When on my road bike, i don’t even think about my helmet. It’s just an automatic, just like the seat belt in the car. A hardly commute, but i don’t wear one then. I’m not even sure why, it’s just a culture thing i guess.
Another + for the OCTAL. I forget it’s on my head sometimes. Even in 38C weather. Most comfortable helmet I’ve ever worn.
That being said, I don’t think helmets should be law. However, the Netherlands is urging their cyclists to wear helmets due to a rise in deaths (85 preventable deaths a year), despite it being a bike commuters heaven.
I think it’s a bit naive to jump from ‘wear helmet’ = ‘prevent death’. In our country the population grew 18% in the past 20 years while space remained largely the same. Roads don’t magically get wider to account for the increased traffic of cars and bikes. SUVs have become pretty much prevalent (Tesla Model Y is best selling car here). Ebikes are everywhere and although we have good cycling network there are always ‘road-bottlenecks’ where you can’t increase safety for one group without sacrificing safety for another. It’s always a risk when you mix fast traffic with slow traffic (Autobahn: fast cars + slow trucks, roads: fast cars + slow bikes, cycle paths: fast e-bikes + slow bikes, shared paths: fast bikes + slow pedestrians).
Currently it’s still widely accepted that cars get the most space over any other traffic in our cities. But this is slowly changing and cities have to make car free streets and bike free streets to try to strictly separate the fast traffic from the slow traffic in my opinion. It’s gonna need a change in mindset like in 1920 when cars became prevalent in cities and horse and carriage started to disappear. I don’t think it’s quite the same today as cars will not disappear any time soon but in most cities in Switzerland it’s obvious that bike-riding and commuting by bike is a desire of many people. And so the government and city-planners have to adapt to that and build good infrastructure to decrease the amounts of accidents. I think that’s by separating the two. Wearing a helmet to me is like wearing a seat belt in the car - it should be common practice whether your commuting or bombing down alpine descents at 90kph.
I think that’s the wrong approach in “marketing” these things. Riding you’re bike doesn’t magically get saver because you’re wearing a helmet, but when things do go wrong, chances are you’re less injured when you do wear protection. And while a large percentage of incidents aren’t to blame on the cyclist. It’s not to say you shouldn’t do your part in keeping yourself save.
Here’s something a little different: The most serious bike accident I had was a car collision. I was going 25mph-35kph when I realized it was going to happen. Without turn signal, a car was making a turn across the bike lane, into my side. I braked hard and got the speed down a little before impact. Later realizing I blew the rear tire from braking.
In the 1-2 seconds I had, I was completely calm but physically boxed in, being pushed off the bike path. My over-riding thought was: arms in and ROLL when you hit the deck. And I did just that. Head preservation never a factor. Helmetless, it MAY have been. I may have put my arms down, trying to protect the head, resulting in much greater injury.
I got away with pretty minor road rash, considering the speed. My point: wearing a helmet potentially gives you more cards to play in a crash. Whether or not you can, or even have time to play them is another matter.
Acting like recommending wearing a helmet prevents further discussion about cycling safety is silly. It’s like saying “it’s stupid to talk about wearing a seatbelt when people should be paying attention to the road while driving”. We can recommend both without one inhibiting the other.
Hha maybe I‘m just selectifely reading what I already agree with. Not wearing a helmet while cycling or skiing is a no go like not wearing a seatbelt. I get that the culture in holland and denmark are different but I think even there the mindset is (hopefully) changing.
I‘d attribute the need to wear a helmet even when leisurely cycling to the pool, park, gym directly to the increase in car traffic, speed and reckless driving. Heck, even cyclists can‘t put away their damn phone - it’s a serious problem.
I agree with nearly everything said in this thread, I’ve worn a helmet every time I’ve gone cycling in the last 30 years, only time I didn’t (thought it was on a sKul cape made me think it was on) freaked me out, I don’t cycle with people who don’t
But just need to point out, that I feel Chris Boardman isn’t making the case that cycling should be safe enough to cycle without one, he is making that case that largest killed of people in the UK is lack of exercise and obesety, and one of the blockers for people riding bikes is the “attire” and lives would be saved by getting people doing some sort of exercise daily (imagine the change to the world if every parent cycle their kids to school) , how do we get more people cycling
I don’t feel comparison with Ski’ng is far, in the UK (which is where CB is taking about) making helmets mandatory in sking would make any difference to the strain on the NHS
I think we are in a different position, because we are all here because we enjoy cycling, CB is coming at it from the angle of, how do we get people who don’t (know) enjoy cycling to get on their bikes, I totally agree, lets make the cultural shift so that wearing a helmet is the accepted normal, but these are two things and can be addressed separately
I do think that dismissing somebody as “none serious” because you don’t agree agree or understand the point they are putting forward (some people make points so that a discussion is well … lame
It’s difficult to legislate judgment. People want to and should be free to make their own decisions.
I know where I fall on this issue, and I make the choice to wear a helmet 100% of the time I am on a bike. I don’t however feel the need to tell others what to do.
I know a few people above have already made this point but I’ll say it again anyway…
There is a huge difference between somebody making a personal plee for people to choose to wear helmets (Ramsey) and somebody saying that helmets should be compulsory (which is what Boardman is against).
Ramsey telling people to wear Helmets and Boardman saying that we shouldn’t be talking about making them mandatory are not counter arguments - they are different things.
I personally would always wear a helmet, recommend people wear helmets and my kids will wear helmets… but there is no reason at all for laws making them mandatory… So I agree with both Boardman and Ramsey
I remember hearing a thing a long time ago that drivers were more likely to give space to riders without cycling gear than those who dressed the part. Of course in my area I am not worried about attentive drivers, I get virtually zero negative run ins with attentive drivers (unlike the coal rollers in other places). It’s the cell phone drivers that scare me.
