- 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
OPINION
Helmets. Legislate and it'll cost you...
Wed, Apr 29, 2009 13:05
1
White cycle helmetAh, the great helmet debate. This time it's reared its ugly head in the form of a dry paper entitled Evaluating the health benefit of bicycle helmet laws by Piet de Jonga of Macquarie University in Australia.
The paper is attached below. I won't pretend to understand the formulae it contains but essentially it's an exercise in pitting a single cost of cycling (accidents) against a single benefit (exercise), assigning some numbers to the two and trying to estimate the impact of helmet compulsion which MAY reduce injuries and MAY also reduce cycling participation.
So what does Piet conclude? Well in essence he concludes this:
Using widely cited estimates of the exercise benefit of cycling, costs of head injuries and reductions in cycling leads to the conclusion that bicycle helmet laws do not deliver a positive societal health benefit.
Discuss. There's already plenty of heated discussion on the New Scientist thread about the paper: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17032-bicycle-helmet-laws-could-do...
Dave is a founding father of road.cc, having previously worked on Cycling Plus and What Mountain Bike magazines back in the day. He also writes about e-bikes for our sister publication ebiketips. He's won three mountain bike bog snorkelling World Championships, and races at the back of the third cats.
More Opinion
Latest Comments
- wtjs 1 sec ago
Complaint to the taxi licensing authority? ...
- David9694 2 min 12 sec ago
That sign "confuses drivers" - therefore doesn't count.
- stonojnr 11 min 5 sec ago
The bit at the start and end looks like a cycle lane, but the bit they drive on looks just like a patched filter lane for traffic lights.
- JOHN5880 11 min 28 sec ago
Hey, you 4 execs helped run a company into the ground and have no jobs anymore... Come work for us because you have great experience in the...
- Oakhambike 56 min 17 sec ago
£11.5k for a bike weighing over 8kg that's 2 fingers to customers let alone UCI
- HarrogateSpa 57 min 57 sec ago
No trees need to be cut down for a cycleway....
- Dnnnnnn 1 hour 11 min ago
I'm going to show my bike a picture of this shed and tell it, "If you don't behave..."
- Hirsute 1 hour 59 min ago
Ex black cab https://twitter.com/KingArtAT/status/1783296299787309088
Add new comment
1 comments
The comment by Roger Geffen of CTC was good. I am a non-helmet wearer who believes firmly that there is no requirement for a compulsory law for cyclists to wear helmets.
The risk of head injury is small when cycling, and it appears strange to me that as a society we should single out this one activity for legislation whilst avoiding things like walking, showering and DIY, which are all vastly more risky and account for many more head injuries and deaths than cycling.