Singlespeed & Fixed Gear - Why do so many singlespeeders I see choose not to wear helmets?

I find it curious that on my commute I come across a handful of singlespeeders every day, and almost all of them are not wearing a helmet. Is it an exclusive group thing or what? I've also noticed that most of these riders are 20-somethings sporting a pseudo-ultra-hipster image.... Is it just un-cool in the singlespeeding world to be safe? I realize it's really not my problem, but it makes me cringe when I imagine their heads breaking open like a watermellon in a Gallager skit. I don't think they would be looking too cool in this state. I'm sure a lot of you singlespeeders do wear helmets, but I really have noticed an "I'm too cool for a helmet" attitude with a lot of them around here.

I think what is cool is not having to worry what other people might think....

Helmets are not PUNK ROCk Yo!
Thats why they dont wear them.:roflmao:

Dude, Kevin's right!...

That's why I don't wear one!

I am actually planning on buying a helmet soon though, I just have to find a nice BMX helmet for an affordable price.

Maybe they're not yet convinced that cycling must be considered to be a super extreme death sport where heads explode like watermellons. Seriously, i don't understand why people think that those who don't wear helmets do so because they are on some sort of death mission, explicitly defying the concept of safety for some superficial reason, like protecting their "style."

I think what you are seeing is a "new," "crazy" breed of people who approach bicycles as fun, non-lethal, useful tools, and ride them like they are just that, nothing more. They roll up their jeans, put on their tennis shoes and ride their $300 cheap and efficient singlespeed to the grocery store to get milk.

Nothing to see here. Just people riding bikes.

Amen Shrimpx!

When I start messengering downtown then I'll wear one fo' rizzle though.

Originally posted by shrimpx
I think what you are seeing is a "new," "crazy" breed of people who approach bicycles as fun, non-lethal, useful tools, and ride them like they are just that, nothing more. They roll up their jeans, put on their tennis shoes and ride their $300 cheap and efficient singlespeed to the grocery store to get milk.

Nothing to see here. Just people riding bikes.

I can understand your point, but a lot of these people I see are actually the ones barrelling down with the flow of traffic while switching lanes freely. Albeit they are usually on $300 cheap and efficient bikes, but there's sort of an air of arrogance about them. When I pass them and smile or nod, I usually get this look back that says "What a loser. You're actually wearing a helmet and riding a $1000 bike?" That's why I assume it's merely an image thing, because they seem to have sort of a backwards snobbyness about them. I hate labeling people, but I have noticed this type of attitude specifically with single speedsters around here, so just thought it was a curious phenomenon.

Originally posted by gonesh9
When I pass them and smile or nod, I usually get this look back that says "What a loser. You're actually wearing a helmet and riding a $1000 bike?"

I can totally understand where you're coming from then! I have noticed the same thing but directed at me! I try to be kind and courteous (sp?) to all the other cyclists on the road (especially other fixies/SSers) and even so I'll get snide glances from fixies/SSers.

Anyway, I think it's pretty lame for someone on a $300 bike to look down on someone who has a more expensive bike. Some of my good cycling buddies have really expensive bikes and it's always HELLA fun to ride with them.

Some other people are just scared of random interaction with strangers (call it shyness I guess), or they are thinking that you are thinking the same thing about them that you are thinking they are thinking about you (if that made sense). Jumping to the conclusion that someone is doing something just for style or to represent an image is really just as bad as someone assuming you are a dork for wearing a helmet or whatever.

If you think someone looks super-hip it could be that they are trying really hard to look that way, or it could be just a coincidence. (Some people's laundry day outfits seem pretty stylish to me. :D) It really doesn't have to do with the bike thing. Same thing with helmets, some people probably do go without one just to be badass, some people maybe just don't have one yet, some people might logically feel that it is unnecessary.

I don't know......

-Jason

Originally posted by jasonyates
or they are thinking that you are thinking the same thing about them that you are thinking they are thinking about you (if that made sense).

Yah, I've thought that might be the case a few times. Who knows, maybe I do look cool in my reflective vest, helmet with reflective tape, and work clothes. :D

I try to make an effort to smile or nod, though, to make sure I'm not the one being snide. But I do understand that not everyone likes random interaction with strangers. Very interesting, the psychology involved between fellow bike riders on the road.

Originally posted by shrimpx
...I think what you are seeing is a "new," "crazy" breed of people who...ride their $300 cheap and efficient singlespeed to the grocery...

$300? That's a month's rent!

Originally posted by Makoa
$300? That's a month's rent!
I was paying that much for a tiny one bedroom apartment 25 years ago!

Originally posted by dumpstervegan
Amen Shrimpx!

When I start messengering downtown then I'll wear one fo' rizzle though.

heh... coincidentally, should i have to point to a "community" whose members NEVER wear a helmet, it would be the bike messenger community. =)

all the messengers down here ride track bikes, dressed casually, and sometimes wear cycling caps. never helmets.

If Gonesh is concerned about another snobby bike sect ignoring him, that is one thing.....telling them how to dress for the urban battle is another.

From what I can tell, helmet compulsion leads to reduced cycling participation, e.g., in Australia.

Keep waving if you want to. When the coolness factor wears off, you might get a response. Shame that some folk might want to make even an anti-consumerist statement into something exclusive........

You can mark me down for the non helmet group.....and Im a messenger.I ride both SS and fixed,around 17k+/yr....may hit 20k this year.Bike is a tool for job,yes it can be dangerous....and helmet prob wouldnt be a bad idea,but so are elbow pads,kneepads,forearm/wrist guards like pros wear,and all sorts of other safety gear.As far as judging or waving....I wave,I dont judge and dont care...im moving too fast most of the time to even notice what your riding LOL.Anybody wants to judge me on my attire or bike I ride,so be it.....thats their prob.

Originally posted by Makoa
$300? That's a month's rent!

You've never lived in souther california have you?

Shoot I used to pay 75 dollars a month for a couch in SF in the early 1990's.

Originally posted by horndude
yes it can be dangerous....and helmet prob wouldnt be a bad idea,but so are elbow pads,kneepads,forearm/wrist guards like pros wear,and all sorts of other safety gear.

Yeah, but a broken wrist is a lot different from a smashed skull.

The funny thing is that I've seen a fair share of non helmet wearing folks, but they take all effort to protect the paint of the bike. There's a guy on this forum who wanted fenders to protect from muddy water, but wouldn't wear a helmet to protect his head.

Helmets are a choice. And I'll defend a persons right to choose. But, in my book, not wearing a helmet is like not wearing a seat belt.... A statistic, waiting to happen.

I'm sure if we looked, somewhere on the web there are some stats to prove this point.

It's up to you. But if you smash your head and go comatose:

Can I have the parts off your fixie? :D:D:D:D:D:D:D!

Originally posted by William Karsten
You've never lived in souther california have you?

Shoot I used to pay 75 dollars a month for a couch in SF in the early 1990's.

No kidding........the monthly mortgage I pay on my home today, I can buy a new full Campy Record equipped carbon Colnago once every month! Glad I've only got 3 years to go......whew....

Where in socal are you?

Originally posted by William Karsten
Where in socal are you?

Silverlake........near Dodger Stadium. And you?

San Diego, near El Cajon.

Wish I lived in SD..............perfect riding climate year round!!!!

Originally posted by George
Wish I lived in SD..............perfect riding climate year round!!!!

But it's finicky and really mirco climated. Memorial day weekend it was in the 60's, except for Monday where it soared to the 90's. Wanna guess which day I had attempted my first century?

Originally posted by William Karsten
Yeah, but a broken wrist is a lot different from a smashed skull.

It's up to you. But if you smash your head and go comatose:

Can I have the parts off your fixie? :D:D:D:D:D:D:D!

Sure,which one you want?The steamroller or spicer w/lots of goodies?

Im not much for this helmet debate myself,too many other things can be done as well to stay safe just to zero in on helmets only like so many seem to fixate on......its an easy target for discussion I suppose,then again lts of things on a bike are unsafe.Ive seen posts about correct riding behavior and obeying traffic laws but have yet to see a huge group ride or race anywhere where the start wasnt anything but anarchy on wheels.A week ago someone on another forum posted pics of a group ride with some of the USPS crew,the pro's were sans helmets but the rec riders all had em....few addressed that issue,instead they fixated on rec riders not wearing helmets,struck me as somewhat ironic,maybe its just me.

Personally,helmets are a choice like anything else,being overweight and out of shape will kill you just as easily as a bike wreck,its all a matter of perspective and point of view I guess.

helmets are a huge culture thing... in the USA, if you don't wear a helmet you're reckless scum, basically.

in most other countries, (think China, France, Jamaica, etc.) people live on bikes. you'll see 65 year old women ride their old skool singlespeeds with perfect spin and balance. of course, they ride these bikes year round, for any transportation needs, and without protective gear. it's just a tool. they don't think about brains splattered on the street, because their culture just doesn't go there; just like american culture doesn't tell you to put a helmet on when driving, even though an insane amount of people die with head injuries in car crashes. (but we don't want the automotive industry to lose business now, do we?)

so i think that some americans don't wear helmets because they feel that if they did so they would cave in to consumerist fear culture. (these are probably some of the "snotty" people mentioned in this forum. they stand for something and i'm with them.) others don't wear them because it's just not what they do. (this is where i fit in... i've been riding bikes since i was 5 and i've never worn a helmet. it's not on the list of things i do in the morning. pure and simple. nothing more to it.) others don't wear them because they know how to ride bikes. even though bike messengers don't wear helmets and ride in heavy traffic all day, they are probably the least likely to show up in the death statistics at the end of the year. that's because they know how to ride bikes and they know how to save their butts in the case of an inevitable crash. they do it for a living.

so helmet shmelmet. religious helmet zealots need to understand that until helmets are required by law, we still have a choice and it would be damned foolish to make that choice influenced by lame peer pressure. especially if it comes from people who don't even know why they wear helmets, but feel compelled to be vocal about it. mind your own.

Curriously, I went trough Maine (I'm from Québec) for a bike trip and saw that every motorbiker had no Helmet! Is there any correlation to that?

Is riding a motorbike that safe? It's about look, style, being part of a community I guess. Between safe and unsafe what do you choose?

i wear a helmet sometimes. other times, i don't.

thing is, i get to choose when that is.

this goes for my motorcycle as well (unless i'm leaving the state, because i'm surrounded by helmet law states).

if you feel like trying to make me feel guilty for not wearing one (or for wearing one, for that matter), you're out of luck. it takes two to play at guilt, and i'm just not interested.

i just use my judgement, however flawed that may be.

Originally posted by horndude
Sure,which one you want?The steamroller or spicer w/lots of goodies?

Im not much for this helmet debate myself,too many other things can be done as well to stay safe just to zero in on helmets only like so many seem to fixate on......its an easy target for discussion I suppose,then again lts of things on a bike are unsafe.Ive seen posts about correct riding behavior and obeying traffic laws but have yet to see a huge group ride or race anywhere where the start wasnt anything but anarchy on wheels.A week ago someone on another forum posted pics of a group ride with some of the USPS crew,the pro's were sans helmets but the rec riders all had em....few addressed that issue,instead they fixated on rec riders not wearing helmets,struck me as somewhat ironic,maybe its just me.

Personally,helmets are a choice like anything else,being overweight and out of shape will kill you just as easily as a bike wreck,its all a matter of perspective and point of view I guess.

Steam roller please!

It is an easy debate. And you could add in traffic laws, etc and 35 million other things that are important. I just figure that there are two things on my body that would be difficult to function with out. My head being one of them.

I think it's easy to see people not wearing helmets.. and not so easy to see other saftey things.

All a matter or perspective... and, well, importance. There's that break over point where you must consider what's important.

Originally posted by bent_sprocket
if you feel like trying to make me feel guilty for not wearing one (or for wearing one, for that matter), you're out of luck. it takes two to play at guilt, and i'm just not interested.


What ever is fine. It's not a matter of guilt. Just a matter of inevitability.

nothing is inevitable, yet.

someone once asked gordie howe why he wore a cup and no helmet. he said: you can always get someone to do your thinking for you.

Originally posted by shrimpx
helmets are a huge culture thing... in the USA, if you don't wear a helmet you're reckless scum, basically.

in most other countries, (think China, France, Jamaica, etc.) people live on bikes. you'll see 65 year old women ride their old skool singlespeeds with perfect spin and balance. of course, they ride these bikes year round, for any transportation needs, and without protective gear. it's just a tool. they don't think about brains splattered on the street, because their culture just doesn't go there; just like american culture doesn't tell you to put a helmet on when driving, even though an insane amount of people die with head injuries in car crashes. (but we don't want the automotive industry to lose business now, do we?)

so i think that some americans don't wear helmets because they feel that if they did so they would cave in to consumerist fear culture. (these are probably some of the "snotty" people mentioned in this forum. they stand for something and i'm with them.) others don't wear them because it's just not what they do. (this is where i fit in... i've been riding bikes since i was 5 and i've never worn a helmet. it's not on the list of things i do in the morning. pure and simple. nothing more to it.) others don't wear them because they know how to ride bikes. even though bike messengers don't wear helmets and ride in heavy traffic all day, they are probably the least likely to show up in the death statistics at the end of the year. that's because they know how to ride bikes and they know how to save their butts in the case of an inevitable crash. they do it for a living.

so helmet shmelmet. religious helmet zealots need to understand that until helmets are required by law, we still have a choice and it would be damned foolish to make that choice influenced by lame peer pressure. especially if it comes from people who don't even know why they wear helmets, but feel compelled to be vocal about it. mind your own.

What an interesting way to shift the responsibility to the Automobile for your choice on a bicycle. And to somehow criticize those that say you should wear a helmet as unknowing extremist. You can call people zealots, and cite some lottery chances of not getting hurt. The only thing you said that makes sense is choice. And it is choice. And you make that choice. And if you get hurt, you have to accept the fact that you made a choice not to wear something simple (that is IMHO overpriced for what it is).

But you appear to be more of a snob than the zealots you refer to.

Originally posted by bent_sprocket
nothing is inevitable, yet.

I differ in opinion.


someone once asked gordie howe why he wore a cup and no helmet. he said: you can always get someone to do your thinking for you.

Touche' !

That's a riot!

I'm noticing some people getting very defensive about this issue....

You are perfectly correct that it is your choice whether you wear a helmet or not. I am not trying to make anyone feel guilty or push anyone to cave into consumerist fear culture.

Go ahead and wear whatever you want. I was just noting an interesting observation that sneering, cooler-than-thou hipsters in my area seem to ride a certain type of bike, are extremely rude to non-hipsters, and happen to not wear helmets. Seems ironic that they tend to try to portray this anti-consumerism and anti-conformist ideal, when they sneer at anything that's not their style. Maybe the thread shouldn't have mentioned helmets at all, but rather just asked why hipsters feel they have to sneer at everyone else when we ride by?

Originally posted by gonesh9
Maybe the thread shouldn't have mentioned helmets at all, but rather just asked why hipsters feel they have to sneer at everyone else when we ride by?

I would look at it in this light: Does thier opinion, attitude or if they say hello or not have some effect on your existance?

I don't worry who says hello, or not. I don't wave to other cyclist. I'll talk to them when we ride parallel, or at a light. But my day, and my opinion of them does not pertain to if they say hello or not.

Originally posted by gonesh9
Maybe the thread shouldn't have mentioned helmets at all, but rather just asked why hipsters feel they have to sneer at everyone else when we ride by?

i guess that's just not something that i see happening around here.

then again, i live in a city where there are probably more bikes than people. the bikes and riders are of all sorts.

it seems to me that you're branding other riders for how they look, just like you're assuming that they're branding you.

how would you classify me? I'm a mid-30s guy of stocky muscular build with a shaven head, large goatee and a bit of visible body art. i ride fixed a lot, and sometimes don't wear a helmet. sometimes i wear bike shoes and lycra, sometimes i wear vans and rolled up jeans. i track stand at stop lights, sometimes quite well, other times not. i might pass you on our morning commute, but i usually call out that i'm passing on your left.

the better question is, why would you classify me? i'm not gonna classify you.

i'll take something from the motorcycle world (after all, i ride both):

it's not what you ride, but that you ride.

Originally posted by William Karsten
I would look at it in this light: Does thier opinion, attitude or if they say hello or not have some effect on your existance?

I don't worry who says hello, or not. I don't wave to other cyclist. I'll talk to them when we ride parallel, or at a light. But my day, and my opinion of them does not pertain to if they say hello or not.

You're right. I shouldn't let it bother me. Just an observation that extends beyond bicycling. I have to deal with these people every day and it does bother me when they flirt with my girlfriend right in front of me. Maybe I've just harbored some pent up hostility towards certain types of people, which is wrong.

Originally posted by gonesh9
I have to deal with these people every day and it does bother me when they flirt with my girlfriend right in front of me.

Deal with that accordingly. I used to get upset if someone would flirt with my wife. Then, I just decided, if she decides to reciprocate, she'll be moving out. I do intervene when *******s decide to do get aggresive, but by and large, most people don't go beyond a simple flirt. I'm secure in the relationship.. which is something you should work on, from what I read here.


I don't agree with the ideal that "it's not what you ride, it's that you ride". Just not pratical.

Originally posted by bent_sprocket
it seems to me that you're branding other riders for how they look, just like you're assuming that they're branding you.


Originally posted by William Karsten
Deal with that accordingly. I used to get upset if someone would flirt with my wife. Then, I just decided, if she decides to reciprocate, she'll be moving out. I do intervene when *******s decide to do get aggresive, but by and large, most people don't go beyond a simple flirt. I'm secure in the relationship.. which is something you should work on, from what I read here.

Sorry, I think my 8-5 job is corrupting my once open-minded and tolerant existance. I really shouldn't be labeling anybody, or caring about their safety choices, or worrying about some dude hitting on my girlfriend. I need a vacation.

I dunno, the hipsters are anorexic too... that's a health risk...

When I was a kid I used to keep the helmet in my backpack until I got within view of my parents... then my brother got a concussion. I figured I'd rather avoid that, even if I looked like a dork.

So I guess I'm a dork...

Originally posted by gonesh9
I really shouldn't be (snip) or caring about their safety choices, (snip).

Nothing wrong with being concerned about a potential hazard. But just think of it this way: no matter how hard you throw a dead fish into water, it ain't gonna swim. For what you can affect, do, what you can't, don't waist your time.

Originally posted by William Karsten
What an interesting way to shift the responsibility to the Automobile for your choice on a bicycle. And to somehow criticize those that say you should wear a helmet as unknowing extremist. You can call people zealots, and cite some lottery chances of not getting hurt. The only thing you said that makes sense is choice. And it is choice. And you make that choice. And if you get hurt, you have to accept the fact that you made a choice not to wear something simple (that is IMHO overpriced for what it is).

But you appear to be more of a snob than the zealots you refer to.

Heh.

I was merely making a point of helmet compulsion being a strong cultural artifact. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation. You're not telling me that i should be wearing a helmet based solely on the added protection that it provides. You didn't sit down to research better ways to protect yourself and came to the conclusion that you must wear something that protects your head, oh and awesome, you discovered that they make helmets. The helmet was passed down to you via some social interaction, and under heavy cultural influence, you decided it was a must. Like I said, proposing a helmet to a rider in France would be like proposing a helmet to a driver in the US.

So cycling without a helmet is dangerous. And cycling with one is not? Crossing streets is not? Driving is not? Swimming is not? Every moment of your life is basically an opportunity to die in some horrible accident. So if you insist so hard that helmets MUST be worn, then I suggest that you re-evaluate many other activities in your life, and realize that many other things are just as dangerous or more dangerous, and you should protect yourself accordingly. However, that would mean rolling around in a big plastic bubble (Simpsons, anyone?) which is pretty inconvenient.

More convenient is to cave in to peer pressure and put on some superficial gear that will make you feel more secure. And isn't that what everything is about nowadays?

So this is my point: helmets HELP. They are useful. Use them. But the whole "helmet is essential cycling gear 'cause it saves lives" issue is so ******** and paradoxical, it will only spur dumb conversations like this one.

PS: oh, and the dead fish thing, it totally goes both ways. only to reinforce the stupidity of the subject.

Originally posted by shrimpx
Heh.
You're not telling me that i should be wearing a helmet based solely on the added protection that it provides. You didn't sit down to research better ways to protect yourself and came to the conclusion that you must wear something that protects your head, oh and awesome, you discovered that they make helmets. The helmet was passed down to you via some social interaction, and under heavy cultural influence, you decided it was a must. Like I said, proposing a helmet to a rider in France would be like proposing a helmet to a driver in the US.
Actually, a fall off my MTB as a teenager, and the cracked skull that followed dicated that I wear a helmet. If you want to call that a cultural influence, perhaps you've hit your head once or twice yourself. Nice try on social commentary.


So cycling without a helmet is dangerous. And cycling with one is not? Sure it's still dangerous, but less so.


Swimming is not?
Never needed a helmet to swim. And I swim 4 times a week.


Every moment of your life is basically an opportunity to die in some horrible accident. So if you insist so hard that helmets MUST be worn, then I suggest that you re-evaluate many other activities in your life, and realize that many other things are just as dangerous or more dangerous, and you should protect yourself accordingly.

Actually, this is something that is proven to prevent severe injury. And if we look around the web, I'm sure we can find a few studies that would say that riding a bike is a little more dangerous than walking. It's a sensable method to reduce risk. But, if you choose not to, that's your choice. You choose to include bicycling with lighting strike chance possibilities of other dangers that could happen.


However, that would mean rolling around in a big plastic bubble (Simpsons, anyone?) which is pretty inconvenient.
Or you could live in your enclosed point of view. Same thing.



So this is my point: helmets HELP. They are useful. Use them. But the whole "helmet is essential cycling gear 'cause it saves lives" issue is so ******** and paradoxical, it will only spur dumb conversations like this one.

Where did I say it's essential. I'll say this, it's better to wear one than not, on any given basis. And for parts I want to protect, this one protects it well.


PS: oh, and the dead fish thing, it totally goes both ways. only to reinforce the stupidity of the subject.

Well, coming from someone who advocates the terrible dangers of swimming, I guess you'd be thrown once, and left to drift a long?
:D:D:D:D:D

But I'll give you this quote: "Roll cages, because body damage is creates idiots".

Something that carrys from another hobby.

Originally posted by shrimpx
[B]You're not telling me that i should be wearing a helmet based solely on the added protection that it provides.

only to reinforce the stupidity of the subject.

Here's some quick research:

First, our own cut at Basic Numbers
from many sources:
There are 85 million bicycle riders in the US

About 800 bicyclists die in the US every year

About 550,000 bicyclists visit emergency rooms with injuries every year.

Bicycle crashes and injuries are under reported, since the majority are not serious enough for emergency room visits.

One in eight of the cyclists with reported injuries has a brain injury.
In accordance with the CAN policy statement, we ask for a review of the mandatory helmet law. Both the Ministry of Transport and the LTSA have heralded the helmet legislation as a success, claiming around a 20% drop in injuries over the 6 years of the law (i.e. an average reduction in injuries of 3.3% per year). The latest LTSA Travel Survey Report shows a drop of 34% in bicycling hours over the 9 years from 1989-1997 (i.e. an average reduction in bicycling hours of 3.8% per year).
As injuries and bicycling hours have reduced in a very similar manner, CAN concludes that the mandatory helmet legislation has failed to meet its objective of increasing bicyclists' safety. Given the major health benefits of bicycling (we make reference to the Transfund consultation document about inclusion of general health benefits into the Project Evaluation Manual), and lack of environmental impacts, any drop in bicycling is a major disbenefit. Overseas evidence suggests that the introduction of compulsory helmet legislation results in a significant proportion of bicyclists to change modes.

Given the disbenefits, and the apparent lack of benefits, CAN suggests undertaking a review of the legislation as part of the Road User Rule process. For example, research has shown car users would benefit far more from wearing helmets than bicyclists and an examination of this discrepancy should be part of the review of the legislation. In our view, far more important issues than compulsory bicycle helmets determine road safety for bicyclists. Urban speed management, segregated pathways in rural areas, driver and bicyclist education, enforcement of reckless driver behaviour towards bicyclists, and 'share the road campaigns' could potentially be far more significant. Trying to meet the bicycle helmet wearing targets may get in the way of dealing with these considerably more important road safety issues for bicyclists.

It should be noted that there is a wide range of views on helmet wearing within CAN's membership, from strong supporters to strong opponents. However, CAN believes that an investigation into the effect of the mandatory helmet legislation on bicyclists and bicycling is long overdue. Sensible conclusions about its effectiveness cannot be made without such research.




Two-thirds of the deaths here are from traumatic brain injury.

Eighty eight percent of cyclists' brain injuries can be prevented by a helmet.

Many years of potential life are lost because about half of the deaths are children under 15 years old.

Direct costs of cyclists' injuries are estimated at $81 million each year.

Indirect costs of cyclists' injuries are estimated at $2.3 billion each year.

Also read this:

The most careful, conservative estimates from good studies show that the reduction in risk of head injury to a bicyclist as a result of wearing a helmet is in the order of 45 per cent. In other words, at the very minimum a helmet halves the risk of head injury.
Other estimates from controlled studies give even higher risk reduction figures. Depending on the type of impact and the severity of injury, the reduction in the risk of head injury as a result of wearing a helmet has been shown in several studies from all over the world to be in the range of 45 per cent to 85 per cent.
Those who do not wear helmets are several times more likely to sustain injury to the brain tissue than riders who do.
For children, an Australian study has shown that the risk of injury is reduced 63 per cent for head injury and 86 per cent for loss of consciousness, when a helmet is worn. For loss of consciousness, the risk is over seven times higher among non-helmet wearers than among helmet wearers.
In the two years after the compulsory helmet legislation was introduced in Victoria, the number of bicyclists with head injuries decreased by 48 per cent and 70 per cent in each of the two years, relative to the last year before the law.
In Queensland, the rate of head injury from bicycle crashes fell by more than half following the introduction of a helmet-wearing law; admissions to hospitals with bicycle-related injuries other than to the head remained unchanged over the same period.
Helmets designed to the Australian and Snell standards provide a margin of protection in the real world greater than the respective standards require.
Old-style helmets that do not comply with the Australian Standard reduce the risk of head injury by little or nothing.
The vast majority of head impacts occurring in the real world of traffic are easily survivable if a Standards-approved helmet is worn.
No studies have come to conclusions contrary to the above.

It is all about what you consider to be an acceptable risk.

On my daily commute I wear a helmet because I am riding in heavy traffic and usually going fast. I am glad I wear a helmet because I had a bad accident when I got T-boned by a car in an intersection (lady ran a red light) but I was wearing a helmet and just suffered bruised ribs - glad to report the lady's car got pretty beat up.

When I am just cruising around my neighborhood or riding on the weekend on paved trails or infrequently travelled roads I go without a helmet.

As for mandating wearing a helmet I disagree with that. I don't like motorcycle helmet laws either. I think people should be free to exercise common sense (or lack thereof).

Originally posted by shrimpx
in most other countries, (think China, France, Jamaica, etc.) people live on bikes. you'll see 65 year old women ride their old skool singlespeeds with perfect spin and balance. of course, they ride these bikes year round, for any transportation needs, and without protective gear. it's just a tool. they don't think about brains splattered on the street, because their culture just doesn't go there; just like american culture doesn't tell you to put a helmet on when driving, even though an insane amount of people die with head injuries in car crashes. (but we don't want the automotive industry to lose business now, do we?)


not gonna disagree with you there. but at the same time a culture like china which is predominantly bicycles (perhaps getting less and less like that every year), you're cruising along at your own speed, not being intimidated into needing to ride as fast as automotive traffic, etc. so therefore i think it's also safe to say that biking in china is much less dangerous than in america. i'm in hawaii and riding in traffic can be gnarly. i think helmets are a personal choice but i will go out on a limb here and say that if you are facing high risk situations and the only thing protecting you from being a head of cabbage is a thin piece of foam on your head, it's something worth wearing. a kid i know came barreling down a fireroad and smacked his bike up into a wild pig crossing the trail. the bike was broken. his helmet was broken. the pig was dead. and he was not. so i guess what it comes down to is not so much do you or don't you want to wear a helmet, i think it's more like would you rather make a smart decision or a dumb one?

matt