Beware Anti-helmet ninnies

[DismalScientist]

What I find interesting is that a vehicular cycling blog would wade so deeply into helmet advocacy/non-advocacy.

I always thought that vehicular cyclists (of which I consider myself) question the value of typical “segregated” bicycle facilities and advocate more of a “share the road” philosophy.

Helmet use seems pretty tangential to this. Although I wear one, I wouldn’t mandate them. I assume that there are marginal benefits to their use, but I don’t have a dog in the fight. That said, I am surprised by the emphasis that a “vehicular cyclist” blog would put on this issue.

[TwoWheelsDC]

What do you mean “spin statistics”? Sounds like you are espousing a pro-helmet position, which is fine, but are you advocating for mandatory helmet laws? That’s also fine, but I suggest doing some research on Melbourne’s bikeshare system and how helmet laws may have affected its failure. Vancouver is also a good case of a system that is struggling to find a way to launch a bikeshare system whilst having to deal with mandatory helmet laws. Also, at least one study has concluded that mandatory helmet laws tend to discourage cycling with, at best, a marginal improvement in safety…so said laws are actually detrimental to public health.

I’m not trying to be argumentative or anything, but I think this debate tends to stray a bit far into the anecdotal realm (I crashed and my helmet saved me, thus helmets keep you safe), when the actual statistics are inconclusive at best. I, for one, wear a helmet most of the time, since it gives me piece of mind without really costing me anything, but there definitely are times when I need to ride somewhere and don’t want to carry a helmet around. This leads right back into bikesharing, where helmet laws have proven to be a major obstacle for a lot of systems. Overall though, I think the helmet issue is a distraction from the real issue, which is making roads safer. Helmets are just a band-aid on the festering flesh-wound that is our car-centric street system.

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 30837 wrote:

What I find interesting is that a vehicular cycling blog would wade so deeply into helmet advocacy/non-advocacy.

I always thought that vehicular cyclists (of which I consider myself) question the value of typical “segregated” bicycle facilities and advocate more of a “share the road” philosophy.

Helmet use seems pretty tangential to this. Although I wear one, I wouldn’t mandate them. I assume that there are marginal benefits to their use, but I don’t have a dog in the fight. That said, I am surprised by the emphasis that a “vehicular cyclist” blog would put on this issue.

I guess its part of their “stop thinking of biking as inherently dangerous” theme.

A theme I sympathize with, even though I both wear a helmet, and often like to utilize segregated facilities .

[jabberwocky]

I think Jerry Seinfeld said it best:

There are many things that we can point to that proof that the human being is not smart. The helmet is my personal favorite. The fact that we had to invent the helmet. Now why did we invent the helmet? Well, because we were participating in many activities that were cracking our heads. We looked at the situation. We chose not to avoid these activities, but to just make little plastic hats so that we can continue our head-cracking lifestyles.

The only thing dumber than the helmet is the helmet law, the point of which is to protect a brain that is functioning so poorly, it’s not even trying to stop the cracking of the head that it’s in.”

[KelOnWheels]

ArlNow.com makes me tired and quiet.

Also, I keep reading the title of this thread as “Anti-helmet mines.”

[Rod Smith]

@TwoWheelsDC 30839 wrote:

What do you mean “spin statistics”? Sounds like you are espousing a pro-helmet position, which is fine, but are you advocating for mandatory helmet laws? That’s also fine, but I suggest doing some research on Melbourne’s bikeshare system and how helmet laws may have affected its failure. Vancouver is also a good case of a system that is struggling to find a way to launch a bikeshare system whilst having to deal with mandatory helmet laws. Also, at least one study has concluded that mandatory helmet laws tend to discourage cycling with, at best, a marginal improvement in safety…so said laws are actually detrimental to public health.

I’m not trying to be argumentative or anything, but I think this debate tends to stray a bit far into the anecdotal realm (I crashed and my helmet saved me, thus helmets keep you safe), when the actual statistics are inconclusive at best. I, for one, wear a helmet most of the time, since it gives me piece of mind without really costing me anything, but there definitely are times when I need to ride somewhere and don’t want to carry a helmet around. This leads right back into bikesharing, where helmet laws have proven to be a major obstacle for a lot of systems. Overall though, I think the helmet issue is a distraction from the real issue, which is making roads safer. Helmets are just a band-aid on the festering flesh-wound that is our car-centric street system.

While I agree with most of what you’re saying here, and while that the few times my helmet has saved my life are not enough to make a statistically significant study, I find the results compelling.

[jabberwocky]

I spent over a decade skateboarding sans helmet, and have the multiple concussions to show for it. I wear a helmet on the bike. They aren’t perfect, they won’t protect against everything, but they’re cheap and easy to wear, so why not? I’ve spent massive amounts of time and money collecting the knowledge contained in my brain, I’d rather not damage it. Same reason I don’t drink or do drugs. *shrug*

That said, I’m not really a fan of helmet laws. Trying to legislate people smart is a fools errand and a waste of resources.

[bobco85]

This reminds me of a discussion I once had with a lady who was very anti-helmet (not just helmet laws, but people choosing to wear helmets). She explained to me that because people in general find helmets either uncomfortable or not stylish, they will not wear them. Forcing people to wear them will cause less people to ride bikes. This will lead to less bikers on the road and drivers will have less knowledge about how to share the road safely. This will, in turn, lead to more accidents. People wearing helmets will choose riskier routes and get in more accidents.

I tried to argue that in cases with head injuries, people who did not have a helmet had much greater rates of brain damage and/or death. She then retorted that humans were never meant to wear helmets in the first place, so it’s unnatural and somehow our bodies reject it because of that.

I started to get a headache after a while until I realized I was just banging my head against the wall.

That said, I’m a fan of helmet laws for children only. Adults can do what they please, but children, as indestructible they may be, are not fully developed in their risk assessment and go to the hospital often enough for other injuries. Brain damage does not need to become part of that list.

When people ask me why I wear a helmet and tell me that they don’t because they think it’s unsafe, I tell them: “I wear my helmet because I know it’s cheaper for the [Arlington] County to just scrape my brains off the pavement than get an ambulance.”

[Mikey]

@bobco85 30860 wrote:

This reminds me of a discussion I once had with a lady who was very anti-helmet (not just helmet laws, but people choosing to wear helmets). She explained to me that because people in general find helmets either uncomfortable or not stylish, they will not wear them. Forcing people to wear them will cause less people to ride bikes. This will lead to less bikers on the road and drivers will have less knowledge about how to share the road safely. This will, in turn, lead to more accidents. People wearing helmets will choose riskier routes and get in more accidents. . .”

I look at conclusions with suspicion, I look at conclusions drawn from conclusions as questionable, tertiary conclusions are farce; this Rube-Goldberg of an arguement relys on 4 or 5 conclusions to work. Yes sometimes the mouse gets trapped, but sometimes the book kicks the ball bearing, and it falls off the stairs, failing to knock the diver off the diving board and into the tub.

[lordofthemark]

@bobco85 30860 wrote:

People wearing helmets will choose riskier routes and get in more accidents.

Pelzman’s Law.(or at least the bike helmet corollary)

Which of course does not mean its irrational behavior. If you CHOOSE to wear a helmet and take a more direct route, versus going helmet less and taking a longer route, it might be the best choice for you. I mean I could deliberately drive an unsafe car, but only at 3 MPH, but what would be the point?

Where Pelzman’s law is relevant is to show that a regulation that is based on valuing consumers live’s or safety more than they do, can have its impact offset by people optimizing based on their own preference functions. Within limits though. A driver can adjust to mandated safety features by going faster, but may not want to pay speeding fines. A cyclist forced to wear a helmet can pick a faster but more dangerous route – but often there ISN’T a faster route, I guess.

[acc]

At low speeds in a residential neighborhood or on a college campus, I’m probably not going to bother with a helmet. It’s one more piece of gear to drag around, I love the feeling of the breeze in my hair, I’m going to be on the bike a max of ten minutes.

In traffic, on busy streets, or when speed is a factor, I’ll wear the helmet. It’s not going to save me. Car + human being on a bike = disaster. But if I’m distracted and hit a pothole, or go down in some gravel, it might keep me from getting a concussion.

Like most things in life, it’s not a black and white issue. It’s fifty shades of gray.

[Mikey]

@acc 30874 wrote:

Like most things in life, it’s not a black and white issue. It’s fifty shades of gray.

Not unless your brain emits dopamine when it experiences blunt force.

I wear a helmet out of habit, and so my kids see me wearing it. I did get in one accident this year, on the Custis, by the lagoons, on bike to work day, apparently you shouldn’t look over your shoulder when coming down hill there becuase the road may not be infront of you when you turn back around. D’oh. Minor scrapes and scratches, but my backpack fell forward over my shoulders drove my head into the pavement, I was glad I was wearing my helmet.

If anyone chooses not to wear a helmet, I will not judge you. I’ll even give the bike wave.

No big deal.

[5555624]

@bobco85 30860 wrote:

This reminds me of a discussion I once had with a lady who was very anti-helmet (not just helmet laws, but people choosing to wear helmets). She explained to me that because people in general find helmets either uncomfortable or not stylish, they will not wear them.

Stylish? I never look stylish, helmet or not.

[consularrider]

@bobco85 30860 wrote:

… I started to get a headache after a while until I realized I was just banging my head against the wall. ..

Banging your head against a wall will give you a headache, probably even if you are wearing a helmet at the time.

[ShawnoftheDread]

I just wish someone would convince my daughter that she doesn’t need to wear her knee and elbow pads every time she rides her push bike. Also, she doesn’t need to take them off the second she decides to take a short break.

[Author]

Posts