I've never worn a bike helmet
I used to wear a helmet, but have stopped
I've always worn a helmet
I didn't wear a helmet, but now do
I sometimes wear a helmet depending on the conditions
Seat belts have a much stronger correlation. Fatalities decrease at the same rate belt use increases, which is entirely what you would expect of an effective life-saving device. Meanwhile exponential increases in helmet use led to arguable effects on a continuing downtrend in cycling fatalities.
"The bicycle is the noblest invention of mankind. I love the bicycle. I always have. I can think of no sincere, decent human being, male or female, young or old, saint or sinner, who can resist the bicycle."
- William Saroyan
I personally have not ever worn a helmet, but have not ridden a bike since 1999 so now I have just started riding again will be getting a helmet next week, I'm dumb enough without bouncing what little brains I have left on an inanimate object. IMO.
The British Medical Journal has today published some research into the impact of Mandatory Helmet Laws in Canadian Provinces. Their conclusion is that making helmets mandatory has had "minimal" impact on the rate of cyclists being admitted to hospital with head injuries.
Bizarrely, the authors quote without qualification the widely discredited Thomson and Rivara study that claimed helmets were 88% effective in reducing head injuries, and go on to express puzzlement as to why, in that case, they can't find any real-world evidence for this. Thye conclude that other factors relating to road safety may be more important in reducing the rate of injury, and (surprise surprise)In other words, helmets are good at saving you from bumps and scrapes, but are unlikely to save your brains, or your life.A third possible explanation for our results is that the effectiveness of helmets is greater for mild and moderate head injuries than for the severe head injuries captured by hospital admission data.
It is an interesting but largely unsatisfactory paper, not least due to the fact that "[d]ata on exposure to cycling are desirable, yet were unavailable for Canada at the time helmet legislation was implemented." I also very much doubt that they have accurate data on real cycling exposure rates now.The authors also mention the confounding presence of multiple other effects which can not be accounted for, i.e. CAN-BIKE programs and other educational efforts.
To some extent I sympathize with the authors as it's hard to say anything that is meaningful in this area due to the paucity of data.
Seeing as how you're from Florida, and since I still have flashbacks to the terroristic way drivers operated down there, I'd be more concerned about your brains being splashed by the careless CAR TIRE. So that may be the better choice, after all.
Since Im old and dont want to wade back thru 211 pages, could the anti helmet cult refresh my memory on what they get out of trying to keep people from wearing helmets????
That's what makes the paper Chasm54 just cited interesting: even given a reading of the literature which is apparently skewed towards accepting that helmets do something besides stopping scrapes and cuts it's seems probable that in Canada widespread helmet use has not decreased concussions, death, and mental impairment.
You can start whining when you get a cop coming up to your daughter and telling her to take her helmet off. Until then it would be prudent for you to zip it up unless you want to be taken for anything other than a troll.
Interesting that you, too, are interested in moving to the personal and avoiding the central point that yet another country fails to show that helmets prevent concussions and other brain damage.
He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts...for support rather than illumination. I do like my beer, so sometimes I do end up leaning on the lamp-post...
I read through the last 10 pages. Interesting. I wear a helmet always and hope none of you non-helmet wearers are in my health insurance pool and if so..I've some DNR's you can happily sign. Otherwise...I could care less if you wear/don't wear. One exception is kids under 16, maybe 18.
Make Amerika Grate Again
Proved my point.
Make Amerika Grate Again
That's true for the "what if?". But helmet use has been estimated prior to this and generally pre-legislation most people do not bother. In general we see (e.g. pp22-23 ) a doubling across age cohorts with initial values ranging from 30 to 50%. So we would expect a halving of head injuries, which is not shown.
This all neglects actual exposure rates to cycling.