AA to hand out 5,000 free cycle helmets in London today

"The use of cycle helmets and vests by all cyclists could significantly reduce the number and severity of injuries....". UTTER NONSENSE!
Please Mr King explain how the wearing of PPE can possibly reduce the number of accidents? Yes it might reduce the severity of a particular accident when it happens but passive bits of plastic cannot prevent an accident. Accidents are down to people.

Good on the AA... we need more people like this..

If the AA were handing out free aero helmets I would go along to claim mine. Look's like I'm just going to have to buy one then.....

If this had been emailed to me before 1745 I might have been able to get one!!! Not very helpful!!

I really don't understand all this sniping and hysteria going on at the moment, cyclists v drivers, them v us, why??

The AA's promotion in my opinion is good, it shows that the AA as an organisation is thinking about cyclists. I feel that the free hi viz kit which is given out by cycling organisations tends to antagonise drivers by writing things like 'The zero emission option' on the back, or some other stupid and inconsequential clap trap. I would generally say that most cyclists are drivers too and I am sure there are many situations, of which I have experienced some, where the actions of a cyclist has angered you and put themselves in danger. We all need to work together and I am getting fed up of all the nastiness from both sides. There will always be bad drivers and bad cyclists, accept it.

The CTC has a lot of explaining to do as in recent years they have taken a very militant attitude towards drivers particularly locally, to such an extent that I am tempted to cancel my membership. The AA's activity, although obviously a publicity stunt, is not a bad thing just should have been organised differently perhaps.

The AA should send free helmets to all their members and asked then to wear them while driving.

They'd save a lot more lives that way.

if only the CTC would hand out explosive steering wheels

I lived in the Netherlands for two years. It was only club riders that I ever saw wearing helmets.

Most Dutch people find wearing a helmet amusing, and I once had a bike full of kids from a playgroup laughing at the man wearing a helmet

I'm sure in a nation of cyclists, if there were major health benefits to wearing a helmet, more people would be wearing them.

The cynical comments about the AA are well founded. there's been no overall helmet related casualty rate reduction in the real world. Fully controlled studies are difficult, but it seems this is due to risk compensation, physical limitations of helmets, conversion of minor impacts into brain wrenching rotations; diversion of effort from really effective measures (e.g. lower speeds, National Standard Cycle training / awareness) etc.

In any event health benefits outweigh risks 20 fold and cycling is safer than most other regular activities and pastimes, including walking which has around 50% more casualties per mile. Why not walking or driving helmets? Maybe because it's all part of the demonisation of cycling (an 'in group' / 'out group' syndrome).

All of this is explored by Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation www.cyclehelmets.org including showing the bad science of many 'studies' (especially the one which says 85% of casualties would be avoided).

Boris Bikes have a fantastic safety record, re inforcing these points. Why is the AA interfering? And beware of letting highly emotive 'reasoning' based on personal tragedies dominate the argument, much as the media loves doing so. (Tragedies occur in lots of life's situations: try demanding life jackets for riverside walks).

For anyone now disillusioned with being a 'member' of the AA, try the ETA. (I have no financial interest in them BTW)

John Mallows, Policy Director, cyclenation the federation of cycling campaign groups

When did Mikael Colville-Andersen become an expert on UK cycling anyway? Bikehub could have asked any one of the 20,000 members of UK cycle campaign groups for their opinion.

Call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist, but is the AA's action in any way connected to or coordinated with the Independent's front page today?

It's like if the NRA handed out bullet-proof vests. Someone should go and collect a hundred of those free helmets, then pick up a car from a scrap yard, glue the helmets to the car, and create an ironic art installation.

It is always a case of how you spin the news.
I see this as the AA admitting that the bad driving of some of its members put cyclist at risk (otherwise way would they need helmets) of serious injury and therefore I applaud their move to offer 5,000 free helmets to London cyclist; probably the cyclist at greatest risk. It is a shame that the helmets are unlikely to offer any real protection in a collision with a moving vehicle, a fact I'm sure the AA is aware of.
If however it helps removes the shaky defense of "they were not wearing a helmet" (contributory negligence) it may just moderate the unwarranted accusatory behavior of insurance companies as well as encourage some drivers to be more aware of and considerate towards other road users.
But as I said at the beginning there is always spin.

Fair point Joe, I have'nt had any problems with any AA vehicles as yet though, so I'm not sure if portraying them as the is good crack.

But anyway free stuff is always a winner, or am I just a cheapskate?

Not much hair left, and I hate rubbing suntan lotion on my head, a helmet makes sense. Every body has their own reasons for wearing or not wearing one. I just hope this isn't the beggining of a push by the insurance companies to make them mandatory. (AA is about insurance as much as its about repairs).

@Sammy - I guess we'll have to differ on what constitutes cycnicism and what constitutes reasonably questioning the motives behind a publicity stunt organised by a large pro-motoring organistion.

Anyway, enjoy your free stuff.

@mr_colostomy

that's just plain silly

I'm OK so long as I've made a full H&S risk assessment for everything I do.

@BigDummy

It's true man, sometimes you just gotta look cool

Riiiight. I know what a cycle helmet is. I have two of them. Neither a piece o' shit hot, uncomfortable and gonky £27.99 effort.

And I know what a cycle helmet is for.

So if I'm not wearing one (it happens) it's for a reason, to do with not going fast today, not jumping, not racing, not going offroad, not riding in a tight bunch, don't want to mess my hair up, this hat looks pretty good. That kind of thing. Deal with it. Preferably by looking where you're going with that 1-tonne metal thing.

@andylul

As long as you're consistent

It must be a bit awkward showering with a helmet, knee pads and safety goggles though....

@mr_colostomy

Who says I don't already?

@joemmo

Cynical: believing the worst of human nature and motives; having a sneering disbelief in e.g. selflessness of others

Had on that describes what you wrote perfectly ;x

Best way to promote the use of cycling helmets?

Make them illegal, put a tax on them or plaster them with pictures of how wearing them makes you an organ donor in waiting.

Maybe road.cc should begin a survey:

I do/do not wear a cycling helmet because...

Even before the 'wind thought my hair (sic)' comment by that suit full of bugger-all made helmet wearing more of a political band-wagon, the debate has raged (or caused rage) and I'm done with it. Let people make up their own minds - if you're convinced that "it'll never happen to me" then some karmic PMA might save you from injury for the rest of your life - good for you.

I don't live in a Final Destination film but I'm aware (for my sake, and that of those around me) that accidents can happen and IF they do, I'd like to be as protected as possible.

A hard hat on a building site won't save you if you have a skip load of bricks dropped on your head, but it will stop you gashing your head open on that stray scaffold pole

Hi Vis might come in handy if you plan to tour France, mind, now a requirement in law for cyclists at night, or in poor visibility.