Should cyclists wear helmets?

[Bob Kane]

I'm thinking that it should be optional for cyclists to wear a bike helmet.
I can't see the protection a helmet provides is worth the hassle of carrying it around.
Is this a case of 'nanny state' safety officials going too far in trying to protect us?

[jimO]

my 22 year old son was knocked off his road bike on xmas eve by a hit and run driver, his helmet saved him smacking his head on the road, his $1000 bike was wrecked, cops dont care cos nobody got a rego, the ute that hit him turned left from a straight through lane as my son was riding through beside him, so i say yes to helmets

[drelly]

Ex-cyclist here. Yes absolutely should. Stupid not to.

[Damap]

Absolutely yes. I know a few people who would have had serious head injuries without them. My wife is a mad cyclist got open doored at 30K by a parker car a few years ago. Could have died without one.

[eri]

yes

and car drivers would survive more car accidents

if they were forced to wear bike helmets in cars too

also more pedestrians would survive being knocked down by cars if they wore bike helmets

and children pretty much all children

all the time

[drelly]

All cyclists know it's only a matter of time before they come off their bike. They have a far greater risk of head injury than drivers or pedestrians.

[Bob Kane]

So why do you want to fine me if I fail to wear a helmet?

[speights boy]

So why do you want to fine me if I fail to wear a helmet?

To help us fund your hospital treatment.

[Bob Kane]

LOL
Won't I be dead?
If all these 'the helmet saved my life' stories are correct then by not wearing a helmet, I cannot possibly survive.
So I won't have any hospital bills.
But that is a good point which we could explore a bit further.
If wearing a helmet will save your life then those helmet wearers who end up in hospital should contribute to their hospital expenses.
How about imposing a 'helmet wearing fee' on cyclists who insist on wearing a helmet?
Perhaps $100 pa? And they can have a sticker on their helmets.
Easy to police it.

[jimO]

LOL
Won't I be dead?
If all these 'the helmet saved my life' stories are correct then by not wearing a helmet, I cannot possibly survive.
So I won't have any hospital bills.
But that is a good point which we could explore a bit further.
If wearing a helmet will save your life then those helmet wearers who end up in hospital should contribute to their hospital expenses.
How about imposing a 'helmet wearing fee' on cyclists who insist on wearing a helmet?
Perhaps $100 pa? And they can have a sticker on their helmets.
Easy to police it.

perhaps you will be severly brain damaged, in which case we wouldnt notice

[Bob Kane]

perhaps you will be severly brain damaged, in which case we wouldnt notice

lol
I was brain damaged at birth.
Haven't you noticed?

[Bob Kane]

Someone who should know about brain damage - Auckland neurosurgeon and concussion specialist Rosamund Hill:

An Auckland neurosurgeon says bicycle helmets are too flimsy to prevent serious brain injuries and that cyclists should be wary of depending on them for protection.
Concussion specialist Rosamund Hill says there is merit to the argument that helmets effectively make no difference to someone involved in a major cycling accident.
But she says helmets are "better than nothing" and effective in low-speed crashes.
"They're certainly not going to prevent a brain injury or concussion, I don't think there's any doubt about that.
"You may reduce the chance of a serious head injury depending on how you land or where you're hit. The argument really should be whether the flimsy helmets people wear are good enough.
"Could we have better helmets? I think so."
London-based brain surgeon Henry Marsh created international controversy recently when he suggested wearing helmets put cyclists at even greater risk on the roads due to cars giving them less space, and said countries where bike helmets were compulsory had no reduction in injuries.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/10154986/Bicycle-helmet-debate-reignited

[drelly]

Bob - that quote is generally supportive of helmets and suggests we could have better ones.

[eri]

yup

because motorists mow down cyclists with increasing speed and force

cyclists need to buy and wear heavier and more expensive helmets

young lives would be saved if children were made to wear helmets

- when playing at parks

- with mum's new boyfriend

- alone at home with the baby sitter

but the majority wouldn't wear that

[drelly]

Because motorists mow down cyclists with increasing speed and force, cyclists need to buy and wear heavier and more expensive helmets. Young lives would be saved if children were made to wear helmets

- when playing at parks
- with mum's new boyfriend
- alone at home with the baby sitter

but the majority wouldn't wear that

That's a ridiculous comparison. Rarely do kids in playgrounds get hit by cars moving at 100kmph. Even a cyclist riding on a flat road could easily be doing 50kmph. If you come off at that speed, a cyclist can be badly injured. Even the (hopefully very intelligent) neurosurgeons who speak against helmets are making stupid statements. Just because cyclists are still seriously injured or killed while wearing a helmet, that does not mean that many others weren't prevented from serious injury or death by wearing one. Perhaps they should have spent a little more time studying statistics before making such subjective statements.