Originally Posted by
Raleighroader1
Any statistics purporting to show a similar head injury potential, per mile, for cyclists and pedestrians are suspect. One, we don't have good mileage data on those two groups. Two, most pedestrian fatalities that involve simple falls are of very elderly people.
But most pedestrian fatalities aren't from simple falls. And neither are most cycling fatalities.
I personally know of two people who were saved serious head injuries in bicycle accidents by their helmets, and I am pretty sure I was saved from a concussion in a fall I had.
Anecdote is ubiquitous and always suspect. I don't doubt that you believe what you say to be true, but many of the people who say "my helmet saved me" must be mistaken. If they were not, increased helmet use would have had a statistically significant impact on the number of deaths or serious head injuries to cyclists, and that does not appear to be the case. Ghettocruiser is right about that.
Certainly helmets aren't going to help in some kinds of accidents, but they help in quite a few.
Quite possibly. But serious injury is rare, with or without a helmet.
If you want to run the risk of being helmet-less, don't kid yourself that it's actually as safe. It is an additional risk to run.
This is not certain. There is some suggestion that helmets worsen some accidents by causing rotational injury that would not otherwise have occurred. And some - not much, I accept - that helmets induce risk-compensatory behaviour on the part of both cyclists and - much more important - drivers. But even if it is an additional risk, that risk is small.
And it is interesting to me that no helmet proponent ever deals with my central point, which is that cycling is pretty safe and the benefits outweigh the risks by a mile. If everyone cycled fifty miles a week, say, I am prepared to bet (and the previously-referenced BMA analysis would back me up) that the incidence of premature death would fall. The number of heart attacks and strokes would drop by far, far more than the number of accident victims would rise. So as a matter of public health policy, shouldn't we promoting the benefits of cycling rather than allowing the debate to be dominated by those with an exaggerated fear of an unlikely eventuality?