Originally Posted by closetbiker
Check out the same number of collisions when there are no helmets and when there are lots of helmets. There are lots of examples. There's a big article about this in the New York Times, showing that head injuries among cyclists went up 51% in the 1990's as more and more cyclists started wearing helmets.
Check out Vancouver (lots of helmets) and Montreal (much fewer helmets) or Vancouver in 86 (10 years before MHL), in 96 (MHL passed) and now, in 06 (10 years after). Not much difference in head injuries. Or maybe check out fatality trends in the whole country from before helmets were worn, to now when helmet levels are high.
There was a bigger drop in fatalities in the years before helmets were worn, than the years since they became popular.
I wonder what other variables also changed. Early on there were some problems with helmets... weight caused some neck injuries, non-slick covers resulted in torsional injuries... so early helmets were perhaps more of a problem than a solution.
Since the introduction of helmets have road speeds also increased? How about ridership (actually I believe an Australian study said that ridership fell off due to the dork factor of helmets... a negative). There is also a rather poor study pointing to helmets as giving motorists a false impression (re rider skill) that causes closer passing.
Personally I find helmets hot and would prefer not to wear one. But I do wear a helmet on the marginal chance that it might offer some form of protection.