The objective of this thread was to open up all the concepts about helmets.
1. wearing a helmet
theres evidence on both sides of this one.
wearing helmet increases the risk of a motorist driving closer so may increase chance of a crash
less chance of brain injury if yoou fallof your bike
There are other issues and I'd have to look at the overall dataina different thread.
2. helmet laws
Helmet laws are an ethical issue weighing good over bad which is why people get pretty heated.
Please if you have any evidence that:
the Cycle Helmet Law does not increase the proportional number of crashes involving cyclists per cycling trips or reduces it
or
the Cycle Helmet Law does not increase the proportional number of brain injuries and deaths involving cyclists per cycling trips or reduces it
Please post it
In Christchurch we have evidence the number of crashes and injuries per cycling trip has increased, cycling has halved, crashes and injuries involving cyclists has not reduced by the same amount. Have a look at the New Zealand Medical Association site, they have serious concerns.
I have had a bit of experience in transport analysing this data, not involving cycling or cycling safety. I'd like to know if there is conflicting evidence, the sooner the better. .
To me if we can first answer the question of does the Cycle Helmet Law increase or decrease brain injury and death we can then move on to the other impacts with that knowledge. the onus has been on the cyclists to disprove the concept that helmets reduce brain injury, now we have enough to start shouting we need a review.
One of the really annoying things about transport is the willingness of organisations to use secondary data and make spurious claims because they do not have the funding, the time or motivation to properly investigate important issues such as cycle safety properly.
The solution is for all locations, especially those who have helmet laws to collect consistent systematic data
Its becoming clearer to me that fundamental information is missing in many areas, and because we have had this law for 20 years, we only now have enough evidence to recommend a review. A review is all we want. If we had a clear transparent analysis for all to see, that is where I want the answer to come from.
Type of data required.
Quantitative data
Is there an organisation in your area which records quantitative data regarding
1, the number of cycling trips per year.
2, a record of cyclist head injuries and deaths ideally including some information about cause etc
Is there an organisation that measures qualitative data including driving attitudes and behaviour involving cyclists and vice versa and do they have resources to improve it.
This information cyclists , planners, politicians etc should be able to find easily if we want to keep an eye on cycling safety
i though by starting this thread we could take away some of that heat, and to me I was impressed and enjoying the logical reasoning being used, alas we've gone off target
On this thread can we return to why motorists don't wear helmets please
peace, love and cycling forever.