chasm54

OK, here I am again. I can assure you that I would be influenced by data. The problem is that much of what is presented as data is so flawed. So, for example, the linked site states that helmets have been estimated to reduce head injuries by 85%. That's true. What it does not say is that the 85% estimate, which is widely quoted, came from a study that has been discredited because it relied on researchers assumptions about helmet effectiveness rather than real-world data.

There's another stat in there that is pretty striking. It claims that 23% of cyclists killed in accidents were drunk at the time. If that is anywhere near true, it gives us a pretty good clue that there are other things we can do to keep ourselves safe. And in one sense it would be a very encouraging statistic. It is already very unlikely that you will be killed while cycling. If you can cut by one quarter that already slim chance simply by staying sober, that just emphasises how safe you really are. In the UK, there is one cycling fatality for every thirty million miles cycled, according to Department of Transport figures. And if one is sober, visible, competent, stays away from the inside of large vehicles at intersections, one can considerably improve even those staggeringly good odds.

And, just for the avoidance of doubt, I'm quite clear that helmets do save some people from injuries to their scalp. But the evidence does not indicate that they save lives or brains. And the risk of my simply falling off my bike while just riding along is fantastically low, I'm not a mountain biker. So the bottom line is, if despite all the precautions i can take, I am hit by a car or truck, a helmet isn't going to make any difference. And the very small risk of my sustaining a minor head injury for another reason is one I am perfectly happy to take. Cycling is very safe.