Oh no! Not helmets again!Probably the most widely discussed and contentious campaigning topic in cycling today, cycle helmets receive a degree of attention which is wholly out of proportion to their actual merit. Here I have collected together some thoughts and analysis on the issue, including comments for educators and legislators. Some of this has been taken forward by the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation, of which I am a member.
I used to be a True Believer and cheerfully advocate helmets to all and sundry. Time, experience, and cyclists vastly more knowledgeable than I have taught me otherwise.
OverviewAs the documents listed to the right indicate, the science surrounding cycle helmets is a good deal less conclusive than their proponents would like you to believe. Helmet promotion relies for its effect on three main concepts: that cycling is dangerous, helmets have a major impact on that danger, and that wearing a helmet has no significant disbenefit. I believe, and many others agree, that all these ideas are false. I think that the National Cycling Strategy Board got it pretty much right.
 Arguments that appear to disavow the efficacy or utility of cycle helmet wearing, or on the other hand claim it as the major influence in reducing injury to cyclists, are both wide of the mark. In particular, campaigns seeking to present cycling as an inevitably dangerous or hazardous activity, or which suggest that helmet wearing should be made compulsory, risk prejudicing the delivery of those very benefits to health and environment which cycling can deliver: they also serve to confuse the general public about the wider social and economic advantages of cycling. As a result, the NCS Board is anxious that the question of wearing helmets is placed in its proper context. 
|
I am not trying to persuade anyone to wear or not to wear a helmet, those who know me will know that I own and often use one. I want you to make an informed choice. You'd have thought that would be uncontroversial, but apparently not: some time ago I was berated by a letter-writer to one of Reading's local papers on the grounds that telling people inconvenient facts about helmets was interfering with people making an informed choice. As Bertrand Russell put it, ""The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts."
So, read on and make up your own mind. And whatever you do don't accept what I say uncritically because actively campaigning against compulsion, as I do, makes it very hard to maintain a balanced perspective. Some, like CTC's Roger Geffen, manage; I often do not.
|
 |
Information
| Cycle Helmets Overview | | | The pros and cons of Polystyrene Foam Deflector Beanies, originally from H2G2. All my own work, apart from the bits which aren't. |
| Children and Helmets | | | What parents should know about helmets. I am a parent, and I have I promise you looked into this in some considerable detail. |
| Helmets: Public Policy Arguments | | | Public policy aspects of the helmet debate. Is compulsion justified at any age, and if not, why not? What tests should be applied? Do helmet laws work? |
| Instructions from a Bell helmet | | | These instructions from the (relatively expensive) Bell Ghisallo helmet are completely honest, and should be printed on the back of every piece of BeHIT bullshit. |
| The Snell Affair | | | An excerpt fgrom Dan Brown's "The Snell Affair" leaked on uk.rec.cycling by Mark McNeill |
| Soccer Helmets | | | You were wondering who next? Let me put you out of your misery. |
| Brain injury | | | Why helmets don't protect against the worst injuries: abstract of an article in Accident Analysis & Prevention |
| Motorcycle Helmets | | | Helmets for cyclists might be controversial, but nobody could possibly doubt that for motorcyclists they are a vital safety aid. Or could they? |
| Observational Studies | | | Most (almost all, in fact) pro-helmet publications are based on observational studies, and share common weaknesses. These weaknesses were highlighted recently following the highly-publicised failure of clinical trials to back up a series of such studies. |
|
Claims and rebuttals
| DfT Helmet Report | | | Discussion of DfT Research Report 30, 2002, an "independent" review of helmet research by "independent" helmet advocates. |
| BHIT | | | BHIT, run by non-cyclist Angela Lee, are Britain's leading helmet compulsion promoters. The phrase "economical with the facts" springs to mind... BHIT are zealots. It's not that they can't see the other side of the argument, they simply refuse to acknowledge that another side exists. |
| Logical Fallacies | | | Logical fallacies are common in debate, especially on usenet. Accusing others of logical fallacies is equally popular. Here is a guide to fallacies common in helmet debates. |
| Steven M Scharf | | | Steven M Scharf is a relative latecomer to the helmet debates on Usenet. He describes himself as "one of Earth's leading experts on bicycle helmets" |
|
|
Activism
| Liddites | | | What is a Liddite and what is wrong with being one? |
| EDM 1783 | | | The original text of Alan Meale's Early Day Motion. |
| Martlew Bill | | | A Private Member's Bill was tabled which would have made helmet wearing compulsory for children. This page details the debate, the outcomes, and how the campaign was handled. The Bill fell. |
| Wardlaw re BMA | | | Malcolm Wardlaw's letter re the BMA volte-face on cycle helmets |
| BMA Volte-Face | | | The BMA recently adopted a policy of advocating helmet legislation, following publication of a report by its Science Committee. This report was an execrable piece of work, including such easily verifiable falsehoods as BeHIT's "50 fatalities" claim. It has now been toned down somewhat but remains poorly researched and highly subjective. It is clear that as long as they keep giving the job of writing this report to a helmet zealot whose primary resource is BeHIT press releases, the BMA are going to continue to look foolish. |
| Letter to the DfT re research report 30, 2002 | | | RR30 is a strongly pro-helmet report by pro-helmet authors. In order to render the arguments clear-cut it avoids the messy issues of risk compensation and the deterrent effect of helmet promotion - and then says that these issues make it hard to form a "balanced" view. |
|