- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
White cycle helmetCanadian research claims cyclists with helmets three times less likely to die from head injury
New research published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal claims that cyclists wearing a helmet are three times less likely to die from head injuries than those who are not.
The researchers say that their study supports calls for the introduction of compulsory helmet laws across Canada for all age groups.
However, concerns have been raised locally regarding the validity of the methodology employed, based on an adjusted odds ratio, which does not take account of relative risk, and which it is said may significantly exaggerate the effect of the claimed findings.
The team studied Ontario Chief Coroner’s records relating to 129 people who died in bicycle-related incidents in the province from 2006 to 2010, three in four of whom had been involved in a collision with a motor vehicle.
The other fatalities resulted from an incident involving another cyclist, a pedestrian or other object and, in 10 per cent of cases, a fall. Males accounted for 86 per cent of the victims, with ages ranging from 10 to 83.
“Helmets save lives,” insists Dr. Nav Persaud of St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, who led the research.
“There are about 70 cycling deaths in Canada every year, and based on our study, we estimate we could prevent about 20 of them with helmets.
“We found that 88 per cent of people who died were 18 years of age or older, which is important because the helmet legislation in Ontario currently only applies to those younger than 18 years,” he added.
While Alberta also requires only under-18s to wear a helmet, in the provinces of British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island, all cyclists must wear one, irrespective of age.
He acknowledged, however, that making road conditions safer for cyclists in the first place would also lead help reduce casualties.
“Helmets only prevent injuries after a collision takes place,” he explained. “It would be better to prevent the collision from taking place at all. And infrastructure changes like building separated cycle lanes prevent collisions from taking place.
“That being said, even if we had a perfect cycle infrastructure, cyclists would still interact with cars at intersections, for example, so helmets would still be important.”
Opponents of compulsory helmet legislation, including organisations in the UK such as Sustrans and the CTC, believe it should be left to the individual to choose, pointing out that in places where they have been made mandatory, the number of cyclists has reduced, and that the general health benefits of regular cycling mean it is preferable to encourage more people to ride bikes rather than enacting laws that may deter them.
The CTC also cites several research papers published that found no link between the proportion of cyclists wearing helmets and any the safety of cyclists.
In a description of the background to the research in the Canadian article’s abstract, it was claimed: “Cycling fatalities [are] a leading cause of death among young adults worldwide.”
According to a report published earlier this year in partnership with The Lancet, Unicef said that “in middle- and high-income countries, cars are the biggest killers” among young people aged 10-19.
In Great Britain, an average of 10 children under 16 years have been killed while cycling during each of the past five years.
There’s no way of knowing how many of those fatalities involved head injuries, nor how many of the children were wearing a helmet and if they weren't, whether one may have possibly helped prevent the fatality.
During the same period, four times as many child pedestrians – 42 in an average year – were killed in Britain in road traffic collisions, according to Department for Transport figures.
While Unicef cites injury as the leading cause of death for adolescents worldwide, it’s a broad category that includes “road traffic injuries; injuries such as falls, burns, poisoning and drowning; and injuries from violence, including armed violence.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- froze 1 hour 18 min ago
This was a very good listing of bikes for under 1,000....
- Hirsute 4 hours 39 min ago
Radar tells me their closing speed, if they are slowing and how far away. Then I decide to say a prayer. The change of light pattern is incidental.
- lonpfrb 4 hours 59 min ago
Quite so, which is why our village 20mph zone covers the whole residential extent. Of course, enforcement is another thing..
- lonpfrb 5 hours 25 min ago
No, that's very doubtful while proper testing would be fully destructive.
- don simon fbpe 6 hours 40 min ago
What's wrong with dropping down on to the Millenium Bridge, or the swing bridge, then the brief, but satisfying climb back up the hill? #training....
- chrisonabike 7 hours 20 min ago
The relatives might of course disagree, but in general I'd countenance a relatively light sentence* if only we could fix it so that those who...
- ktache 8 hours 17 sec ago
Id forgotten that I got a second hand set of project two's for my getting to work bike over twenty years back.
- Veganpotter 8 hours 57 min ago
My bet is that all these tires popping off are from people with bad pressure gauges or they're simply just putting too much air in on purpose. ...
- chrisonabike 10 hours 12 min ago
David9694 - you were right! These new autonomous vehicles really are conspiring to run out of control!...
Add new comment
85 comments
YOU WILL SURELY DIE!!!
@hairyairey - do people driving open-top cars in the Pyrenees wear a helmet? And what about the vast majority of us who aren't in the Pyrenees? Should we fear rockfalls too?
So the Dutch Prime Minister is a moron then? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/debt-crisis-live/9220235/Debt-crisis-...
All politicians are morons, even the ones I vote for.
Since the main purpose of a cycle helmet is to assuage the guilt of the motorist who runs you down, I think you may be wrong.
I always wear a helmet since coming off without one and gashing my head open. I think it was Chris Boardman though who suggested the best way to improve road safety was to ban seatbelts and have a large sharp spike protruding from the steering wheel of all cars to within a couple of inches of the drivers heart, would focus the mind on driving carefully I suppose !
High vis is more important than helmets (maybe). I don't think some people realise just how much difference it can make, I was out early in the car on Sunday and didn't see the guy dressed all in black (really ?) on a slightly foggy morning with low winter sun casting long shadows. Fortunately I drive slowly and look out for such things, but the fact is this guy was asking for a SMIDSY episode
Precisely the point I have been trying to make. Why is it so difficult for people to grasp this aspect of the debate?
Anyway, my concern is primarily road safety and the (re)education of drivers. If just 10% of the energy spent on the helmet debate amongst cyclists was directed towards getting drivers to give us all more room and respect, maybe we'd start to see some progress.
Actually, angelfishsolo, I've never fell off my bike. The point I was making is that cycling is risky. Of course wearing a helmet isn't going to necessarily stop serious or fatal injury, but as part of being safe on the bike surely it helps
I am a great admirer of brevity. A concisely, clearly made argument is something to aspire to.
However, you have simply exposed yourself as an ignorant jerk. You'll be telling me next that Armstrong raced clean, is a lovely guy and it's all a conspiracy.
Expert opinion, anecdotal evidence and common sense all suggest I'm safer with a helmet. But if some of you want to put your heads on the line to prove me wrong, I'm grateful.
Maybe a few martyrs will persuade Governments to invest in better cycling infrastructure rather than spoiling our fun. And those lard-asses for whom a helmet is the only barrier to a healthy life style will thank you too.
Please stop this nonsense and look at the Netherlands and Denmark
Thank you
@ontheroad - what a gloriously self-righteously smug person you are. Martyrdom, whatever the cause, would be too exalted an end for you.
My Dad cycled for 30 years or so to and from work not wearing a helmet and never once suffered a serious head injury. I, on the other hand never ride without my helmet on. I guess I'm trying to say it's personal choice, there seem to be arguments both for and against helmets. We're all cyclists here though and all on the same side, I hope, so maybe the it's time to stop with the insults....
I'm neutral in this debate, but I'm struggling to understand what harm can be caused by wearing a helmet.
I'm old enough to remember the fuss when wearing seat belts was made compulsory, lots of stories about people being trapped in burning cars and unable to unfasten their belts etc. Some of the arguments on here seem similar.
I also don't understand why anecdotes from people who have fallen on their heads and report serious damage to their helmets are dismissed. Is it that the helmetless head would not have been damaged and a bare head absorbs shock better than a helmet?
Wear helmet => less sexy => less sex => fewer children => less DNA passed on => Darwinian loser
Sadly this study has not put the issue to bed. The point still stands that wearing a helmet may result in more relative risk (likelihood of being involved in an accident in the first place) [1].
There are a few forms of study which would (potentially) put the issue to rest:
1 - A population study: take a large population, of those who cycle compare the mortality rates and collision rates of the group which mostly wears helmets with the group which mostly does not wear helmets. Problems: age and sex matching are difficult, ignores effects of helmet wearing on cycling uptake.
2 - A randomised controlled trial: take a group of cyclists, divide into three groups: 1 group do not wear helmets (control), 1 group wear "placebo" helmets (placebo), 1 group wears real helmets (treatment). Compare the mortality rates and collision rates.
Problems: at least 1 group (placebo + 1 other group) have been placed in (relative increased) danger, randomising where individuals have very strong personal opinions is nigh impossible (dropouts).
3 - Intervention study: take a group of cyclists. Require all to wear helmets. Compare mortality rates and collision rates to overall cycling population normalising for distances travelled.
Problems: ignores effects of helmet wearing on cycling uptake, group will be self selecting for those who normally wear helmets (dropouts), the act of intervention may change the behaviour of the group (e.g. reduce risk taking).
Anyone else have any ideas / proposals?
[1] http://drianwalker.com/overtaking/
Just get everyone in the whole country to wear helmets at all times. Surely it's only common sense that this will decrease the chance of death and injury?
How ridiculous you steadfast refusniks are! It's just plain obvious that if you hit your head & it's not protected you risk injury - the same goes for many professions where a helmet is expected to be worn. How many builders refuse to go on site or leave the trade because a helmet is mandatory?
Make it law - if some people stop cycling then fine, they can sulk for a bit then go buy a damn helmet once they've got over it & put weight on.
Since the helmet standards are so incredibly low, the level of protection offered by a cycle helmet is so minimal as to make wearing one commpletely and utterly pointless.
Try this test. Pick up a motorcycle helmet. Now pick up a cycle helmet in the other hand. Feel the difference in the weight. Examine the structure of the motorcycle helmet. Now do the same with the cycle helmet. You will notice that the motorcycle helmet is rather more substantial. It works. The cycle helmet on the other hand, is insubstantial and the protecion it offers is almost non-existent.
Denmark and Holland have the highest percentages of people cycling in Europe, and also the best safety record for cyclists. Go there and see how many wear helmets while riding. If you wait long enough, you might see one.
Way to go Ridgeback, couldn't agree more.
Yep, I second that one. Should also add that builders wear safety hats to prevent their noggin being penetrated by falling masonry etc. Those forces are totally different to the sudden acceleration and deceleration that occurs in a collision with a vehicle.
By all means make helmets and hiviz compulsory BUT make the sentence for 'death by driving' a minimum of 5 years with a life long driving ban. Make all motorists and passengers wear full face helmets and neck braces after all more drivers suffer head and neck trauma than cyclists.
I've been cycling for near enough 40 years and the worst injuries I've had are a twisted shoulder and road rash. I've learnt to hold a good road position, give clear signals and read the road. The issue that needs to be addressed is the aggressive driving that exists and the fact that the majority of our towns and cities are not designed for motorised traffic
Yep, anyone who really believes in wearing a helmet whilst riding for protection should wear a motorcycle helmet, or at the very least a full-face race helmet for downhill MTB racing or BMX racing. Downhill MTB racing/BMX racing body armour incorporating arm protection and knee/shin guards are of course even more important as anyone should be aware limb injuries are prevalent amongst cyclists. A kneck brace is of course necessary for protection too.
Those shell type things some people call cycle helmets are a waste of space, other than for decoration if you ask me.
And no, I haven't plucked those beliefs from opinion derived from reading comments online. I've a bit of paper at home somewhere that reminds me I qualified as a mechanical engineer, with expertise in materials technology and structural design.
Ride safe, claim the road.
so people dying of obesity is okay but people dying from hitting their heads is not? not sure i follow. and you should check how much the NHS spends on those two things.
the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks by an order of magnitude and more. since cycling actively decreases your chance of dying overall, why put obstacles in people's way? what we should be doing is making it easier and cheaper, not harder and more expensive. to take head injuries and look at them in isolation completely misses the point.
You're right - you are no expert. You can cite your personal experience but it is just that - personal. It is not scientifically compiled or statistically validated. You have no control group. You are apparently looking at head injury without considering limb and torso injuries, which are more prevalent in incidents with vehicles, especially HGVs, in urban situations.
You are not taken account of what non-trauma doctors such as cardiovascular, obesity, diabetes and other specialists might have to say.
It is better than the old " a helmet saved my life" canard, but only just.
Pages