Wiggle rides into Twitter storm over 'make helmets compulsory' blog

FML why are you lot arguing about the effectiveness of helmets, that is completely beside the f**king point.

This is a debate about making helmets mandatory.

This not a debate about whether YOU should wear a helmet, this is a debate about making helmets compulsory for everybody.

I am not against helmets.
I am not against you wearing a helmet.
I am not against me voluntarily wearing a helmet.
I don't disagree that helmets might lessen your head injury if you have an accident.

I am against making helmet wearing compulsory.

Being against helmet compulsion does not equal being against helmets.

If you're arguing for mandatory helmet wearing among cyclists then you should also be arguing for mandatory helmet wearing by pedestrians - pedestrians have more head injuries than cyclists, if you believe that helmets reduce head injuries and wish to demand laws then try demanding that pedestrians wear helmets. No? Why not?

I don't give a crap if you, your mate or your relative had an accident and were wearing a helmet, it's irrelevant, what is relevant is that promoting helmets makes people think that cycling is very unsafe - it isn't. By doing this people are being put off of cycling - this does the population as a whole a massive disservice, the negative health effects due to non-cycling massively outweigh any benefits of helmets by over thirty to one.

Is there anyone here who supports helmet wearing law for cyclists but not pedestrians - why don't you support helmet law for pedestrians - they are suffering more head injuries than cyclists?

My observation was due to the amount of riders I see riding with a helmet as opposed to those who dont points to my opinion that a law wouldnt change much. If you already use your bike to get to work etc and a law comes in saying you must wear a helmet, would you stop riding your bike and jump in a car? Some how I think probably not.

Your comment regards wristbands lets you and all of your observations down.

Flippin ek the same old crap yet again I'm off to have a crap its going to be a lot more fun than trawling through the same old arguments and rants again, but before I go here's my 10 penneth aka rant.

Get used to the idea folks, seat belt are compulsory so are motor cycle helmets, eventually so will cycle helmets!

WHY because people seem to think its everybody else's fault when they have an accident ITS YOUR LIFE be responsible for it, assume every motorist is out to get you! That's how I ride my bike and my motorcycle and funnily enough I drive my car the same as well. Is it going to stop some dozy tit pulling out in front of you NO but if your ready then maybe you have a chance to slow, avoid or get off before impact and wearing a helmet might save your life. I agree when a 32 ton truck turns left over you even wearing a car probably isn't going to save your life

Large vehicles have blind spots remember it and live.

People make mistakes, cannot be bothered or are just crap at controlling there vehicle remember that and live.

Do I agree with compulsory helmet laws no, will it happen? Probably if people don't start to take responsibility for there actions and I mean vehicle drivers and cyclists, if not then the government will.

Rant over you can all wake up now and I'm off as I really need a crap

Makes more sense for car occupants and pedestrian to wear helmets, see chart:

http://road.cc/sites/default/files/imagecache/galleria_1200/images/News/...

@John Stevenson - to respond to a couple of points you've made in reply to me -

The point about why helmet manufacturers haven't been sued - you omitted the context which was @Ush suggesting helmets act as a lever on the spine, and by implication this makes them more dangerous than not wearing one at all. Sorry, but I do not think this is true. If it was, manufacturers would have been sued for millions. And they haven't. I'm aware that manufacturers go to great lengths to put disclaimers on their helmets, but that's not the point here

The other point you made about my assumption being wrong - that all of us want to cycle safely on the road - (because you, in fact, want separate cycling infrastructure). Well, we are on ROAD CC. It's a forum about ROAD cycling with whom you are employed. Surely it is a safe assumption that you wasn't to cycle on the road and do it safely.

I think you've made some great points, and very well argued, but at times, you and other anti-helmet campaigners are coming across as obtuse. As for accusing me of 'just being here for the finger exercise', well, it's a forum. What else would you have me do? Am I to feel bad for expressing an opinion?

Are you for real? How many more people are you going to call morons?

How is a bag of crisps a safety device? How many safety standards does it pass?

It's sad you can't have a decent debate without insulting people. Or without giving a proper rationale.

You are probably one of those cyclists that ride in the middle of the road just to annoy other road users and give the rest of us a bad name.

I asked a genuine question and you called me a moron. I think you need to take a real look at who the moron is.

Listening to what?

I genuinely don't understand what the issue is with wearing a helmet? I've asked for it to be explained but all I get is called a moron!

Seriously, I don't understand all you people.

I cannot think of any reason why helmets should not be required by law. I cannot think of a single reason why one would not want to wear a helmet (Oh, sorry, I can think of one: it will ruin your coiffure!). Not a single of the arguments above sounds reasonable for me. And I absolutely cannot comprehend the rage you are all expressing towards anyone who supports this!

The only argument you all give is the freedom: it's your head so it's your business, my injury, your brain and spinal cord, and so on. You argue that no one tells pedestrians to wear helmets, nor the drivers. But... have you noticed that drivers are required to wear safety belts, turn lights on when it gets dark, stick to speed limits (even of they don't), not to text while driving (even if they do)? I assume it means you do not wear seat belts and do eat your healthy breakfast while driving? Have you noticed that construction workers wear helmets, high visibility jackets, harnesses, and so on? Is it their choice, you think? It is as if you were saying that everyone is against the little vulnerable cyclists, putting restrictions and rules, when everybody else is enjoying their freedom of choice? Bulls**t. No, it is the law. What I am saying is that there are rules in this world, and thank god for that! And you know, many, many of there regulations are there to make the world a little bit safer. You will say that drivers cause threats to others and cyclist only to themselves? What a bulls**t! If you fall of your bike in the middle of the road, don't you cause threat to all others around you??

You say they should concentrate on improving the infrastructure instead of coming up with requirements for cyclists. How does one relate to the other?? As if it one either-or. Sure, infrastructure should be improved, but how does this make up for personal safety?? These are not alternatives, these are complementary issues. Besides, what do you mean by infrastructure? Cycle paths? Come on, cycle paths are necessary, but I bet most of you--proper road cyclists--would curse all the kids and ladies on their shopping bikes jamming the narrow cycle paths, when you don't like going slower than 20mph. You are saying that making helmets compulsory affects these who cycle but have no jobs? Don't give me that. You don't care about them, you are roadies / racers, you care about the great joy riding a road bike gives you. You say that this forces people to spend money? Sure, I bet most of you ride bikes for thousand(s) quid, so spending another 30. Besides, if you can't afford to buy petrol, or pay for the MOT, you don't buy a car. And there are requirements, not choices. Sorry, but there are limitations. You say that once they force us to wear helmets, they won't stop and force us to wear hi-viz, lights, and whatever. I hope they will! A set of lights and a hi-viz jacket is really a tiny cost comparing to not being seen at night! And then you will blame the motorist that he/she hasn't looked properly, and it was his/her fault! We all use the same roads, so we should do our best to live on them together, as well as possible. You don't like when the car does not leave you enough space, the driver doesn't like when he/she cannot see others. Don't you think that a stressed driver means just more threat, also to the cyclists?

Cycling forums are full of cyclists complaining about the bloody motorists, or infrastructure. Sure, drivers are quite often horrible, they never stick to speed limits, write text messages and do their make-up while driving, don't look, don't indicate change of direction, and are... well, horrible. And you want to be respected cyclists and road user? Then do whatever you can to deserve this. Every day I see drivers not using their indicators, and every day I see cyclists jumping red lights, riding in town with no hi-viz or lights with earphones dressed all black on their fixies, or speeding through pedestrian areas. And it pisses me off, because no wonder motorists don't like us. Also, of course, I see many pedestrians jumping on the road without looking. Everyone has his/hers sins, but first think of your own.

You say there is no sound proof that helmets save lives, reduce number of casualties and serious injuries. So.. OK, you don't mind small injuries. Fine by me. But I prefer not to get one of those either. And whatever can be done to improve road safety, should be done.

I imagine many of you are much more experienced, stronger road cyclists than I am, with much better bikes (and helmets), and I envy you. But you sound like: oh, I am so good, I don't care about anything/anyone else, I am such a good rider, I can escape any danger. It's all of you who make my life difficult. I am vulnerable and delicate on my bike, and you still want to out restrictions on me. You all talk about bikes being healthy and eco-friendly and still want to make my life harder. Oh, poor, poor me. And the police keep harassing me, but I am cyclist, don't you see!? I am the good character! Reading your opinions, I also imagine that once you drive a care (and most of you probably do, besides cycling) you are one of those drivers who also thinks that he is such a great and experienced driver that it's always the other ones fault, so you can keep speeding.

And I am not saying all this, because I have an accident a couple of months ago (it was the driver's fault), and the helmet got crushed against the road surface, instead of my head. So thanks to this helmet I am possibly sitting here writing all this.

On the "immoral" Wiggle theme: they are a retailer, for god's sake, so why should they not do whatever (they think) will bring them more revenue!? They are not a charity or some publicly funded institution, they exist to make money, what do you expect!? They used their own blog, expressed an opinion, you can have your own. What do all of you care what some shop says!? If you don't like it, buy somewhere else, perhaps paying more, if you prefer. Why are they suddenly the devil, this is ridiculous! I don't understand why they backed off (I understand--the stupid pressure from the media and all of you).

Ah, the usual sound and fury signifying nothing much.

If you feel better for wearing a magic hat, be my guest. But don't insist that I wear one. Thanks.

I often wear a helmet when it's dark or wet, or on long journeys, but not pottering to the shops on a sunny day. I would not make it compulsory because I know that many, especially young, would simply not cycle if they had to wear a helmet. Increased cycling would make it safer for all, and our priority should be to increase active travel to reduce the truly shocking death rate from lifestyle health illnesses such as obesity and diabetes.

I really think you can crack it this time, folks.

Sarah H could you enlighten me on your actual profession and what you have studied in relation to cycling and helmet use and how the risks outweigh the benefits of wearing one ?

I only ask so that some other person does not have a pop at you about making things up etc etc.

Some people here have complained about the endless nature of helmet threads.
Speaking for myself, I feel forced to counter what I see as faulty arguments in favour of helmets because I see a real risk that they will be made mandatory. It has after all happened elsewhere.
I don't want to be forced to wear a helmet because I do not think they do any good.
Australia, where they are compulsory, has a cyclist casualty rate more then twice ours, and this did not reduce when helmets were mandated.
I know that many people here disagree with what I say above.
No one is suggesting that helmets should be banned. If you want to wear one, thats fine.
But don't tell me I should wear one, or make claims for them which I think are demonstrably wrong, unless you are ready to hear my reasons for not wanting to wear one.

OK:-
You are more likely to hit your head in a crash if you are wearing a helmet due to it being bigger than your head.

If your head doesn't hit the ground in the correct way you are more prone to rotational injuries of the neck and spine.

The biggest safety improvement for cyclists is more cyclists, people don't like having to wear a helmet for an activity which is far far less dangerous than say golf, therefore less people cycle where compulsion is introduced, making it more dangerous for the rest of us.

This is probably down to the attitudes of cyclists or drivers but statistics say that cyclist wearing a helmet are 14% more likely to be involved in a crash.

There's more if you can be bothered to look it up, try cyclehelmets.org for the anti helmet view although it's just as biased as the pro compulsion lobby. I often wear one, sometimes don't, but at least I have taken the time to find out the facts and make an informed choice myself rather than trying to enforce a misinformed view on others. The main argument against compulsion is that cycling does not pose a serious risk of head injury.

The reason these debates go on endlessly is because some people seem to think that:
helmets may protect your head, I can't think of a reason not to wear a helmet = helmets should be made compulsory.

Some fairly obvious reasons why not:
You may not see any reason not to wear a helmet, but lots and lots of people do meaning they give up cycling.
This in turn increases the risks of cycling, there is a lot of research showing that cycling risk is inversely proportional to the number of cyclists on the road.

There is not a lot of good research to show helmets reduce risk. On of the first studies purporting to show reduced risk here in NZ merely showed that , suprise, suprise, vastly reducing the number of cyclists by imposing compulsory helmet law reduced the number of cyclist admissions to hospital.
One of the key and seemingly overlooked reasons why helmets may not increase safety is because casual cyclists who do not particularly want to wear a helmet, tend to make no effort to wear the helmet correctly (ie loose straps, helmet on back of head). There was a massive campaign for many years to try and change this attitude here in NZ, but it has been entirely ineffective. It is also extremely common here to see people (particularly young boys) with their helmet clipped onto their handlebars. In short, you can force people to carry a helmet, but this in no way translates into effective use of helmets anyway, regardless of whether they are actually worn.
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/cycle-network-and-route-planning/img/3...
typical NZ helmet wearer pictured on NZTA website

The bit that I don't get is how so many of the 'pro-helmet' cyclists almost invariably appear to have had near-death occurrences that apparently were only alleviated by their use of their precious helmets.

I've been cycling for nearly 50 years ( and my father for 50 years before that), with neither of us ever having used a helmet. Strangely, in all that time, neither of us have ever experienced one of these "if I hadn't been wearing a helmet I'd have been dead" moments.

What's going on here? Does the wearing of a helmet induce cyclists to take absurd risks or what?

This is where it all started for NZ:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4031829/Aarons-tragedy-spurred-Helmet-La...

Her son had a crash and got brain damaged. She became a crusader for compulsory helmets touring the country and shocking kids (and parents) into wearing helmets.

Ironically, she wanted to protect the nations children, but ultimately harmed generations.

Quote:

The reason these debates go on endlessly is because some people seem to think that:
helmets may protect your head, I can't think of a reason not to wear a helmet = helmets should be made compulsory.

That's exactly it.

The problem is that there is no accurate data to go on.

You can't go back and recreate exactly the same crash with and without a helmet and see what your injuries are each time. So all you've got is anecdotal evidence of the "I hit a tree and my helmet cracked but I'm still here therefore it must have saved my life" type. With respect, anyone posting stuff like that - sod off, you're doing the debate no good. It's not about one incident with you, it's about the whole big picture.

Who enforces this kind of stuff and at what cost? What happens to cycle hire schemes? I use Boris Bikes whenever I'm in London - if I had to carry a helmet round with me in order to use it, I'd just get the bus or tube instead (or alternatively, what is the cost of equipping every Boris Bike with a "hire helmet"?). It's impractical and unworkable on so many levels and detracts from the true argument.

Here's some proper data though:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/woman-injured-by-lorry-at-oxford-c...
Three cyclists killed or seriously injured on London's streets by lorries/coaches within 2 days.
Is the answer:
a) better infrastructure, getting rid of lorries at peak times, better education for all road users
b) give all cyclists helmets

Clue: it's not (b)

Whilst i always wear my helmet i dont agree with compulsion as it would be nigh on impossible to regulate.

However whilst out in the car this morning there was an article on radio 5 about Hugo Lloris and the concussion he received the other day. There was a professor of neuro science and a consultant from a head trauma dept and both said that if you receive concussion (which most cyclists will get if they crash and bang their heads) then if you get hit again within 2 - 3 weeks then it can cause major internal brain problems.

Now this conversation was not about cyclists but i thought i would mention it to see if anyone else heard it and their opinions.

Every time someone mentions helmets, the same old stuff gets trotted out by...

...oh, never mind, I can't be bothered.

Move on. Nothing to see here.

John, point taken mate, i missed a lot of the article but i just thought i would mention it because some people think that just banging your head is a risk worth taking for not wearing a helmet.

I just wanted to put it across how a couple of simple bumps can cause problems and it came from head trauma experts and not anecdotal.

Its everyone's choice though and hopefully it will stay that way.

It makes me laugh that I, just this week, bought £400 of high explosives and no one ever says anything about banning firework sales.

Get a life, worry about yourself, if someone falls off and dies when a helmet could have saved them then that is their lookout. They will be printing 'open other end' on bottles of coke and banning certain nuts in their shells because if you eat too many shells you will get poisoned next! Oh, wait a minute...

Every piece of legislation costs a large amount of money. Do you know that this week Parliament debated the sugar content in Jam because some numpty was concerned that the minimum sugar requirement had changed? Seriously, 100,000's of people relying on food banks and that's what the politicians were discussing.

Get over it, wear a helmet if you want, don't if you don't want.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/january/31/newsid_25050...

Playing devils advocate here but substitute 'Motorist" for 'Cyclist' and 'seatbelt' for 'helmet'. Anything sound familiar ; 0 )

If it's true that mandatory helmet use in NZ Australia has led to a define in cyclist numbers, then I would welcome it here in London. There are way too many idiots on bikes undertaking me, trucks, buses; sailing past red lights and crossings and generally exercising their choice to be anti social buffoons.

I miss the good old days when there were very few of us cycling and no way near the number of clueless accidents waiting to happen.

Please, please make helmets compulsory.

As a cyclist, car driver, sometime deliver van driver, motorcyclist and pedestrian. I believe that I can see a lot of the issues that appear in these posts from a range of perspectives. There are good and bad road users in all of these camps - just as there are loonies and unreasonable people.
On the subject of crash helmets... As a motorcyclist I am required by law to wear one. Easy to enforce: if the police see me not wearing one I get a fine, simple. They are not nice to wear, hot in summer, they limit your vision and hearing. It would be tempting not to wear one every now and then, but we aren't given that option. Common sense should be a persuasive argument fit wearing a helmet but
there isn't actually any evidence that crash helmets save lives and prevent injuries. They are big heavy things so instead of fracturing your skull by hitting your head, your neck is more at risk of being broken.
I'm afraid that cyclists (myself included) will just have to accept helmets when the powers that be decide they will make them compulsory. There is no point in bleating on about freedom to choose or the "right" to make your own mind up. I doubt that cycle helmets are heavy enough to create any hazards (unlike motorcycle helmets) mine certainly isn't. There are however many far more obvious ways that cyclists can make themselves and other road users safer.

I know my helmet saved my skull so I'm going to carry on wearing one; I know from the damage to my bike and clothing the forces involved in my crash, I was lucky to walk away but I did, thanks Specialized.