Originally Posted by
makeinu
Not to be presumptuous, but I believe the critical indicator is to protect your head and the fact of the matter is that it's not physically possible to make a helmet that can protect your head in a cycling specific collision while remaining light, aerodynamic, and well ventilated.
Don't fool yourself, all nationally certified standards for cycling helmets make the same compromises: they're light, aerodynamic, and well ventilated enough for cyclists to wear them, but they only protect against falling over whiled stopped. So while they are excellent for walking to the corner store or avoiding a ticket in Alberta, if you want something to protect you from the additional dangers of cycling you'll need something else.
The suggestion is simply made to ensure that the buyer actually gets the helmets that will protect against falling over while stopped, as opposed to one that will not even do that. I don't believe that its likely shops will be carrying helmets that don't even work to a standard, but it could happen. I was suggesting features to look for in a helmet, not whether or not one should wear one.
Neither do I make an attempt to fool myself. I know precisely the level of protection helmets are capable of providing, as that information is readily available.
I did not mention the effectiveness of helmets or dispute whether or not one should wear one besides the fact that there can be fines for not doing so in certain circumstances. I don't usually mention it at all, because its a good way to spark personal opinions into a good flame war.
So, yes, you are being presumptuous. But thanks.