Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
howiechong.com
Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
1–10 of 94 posts
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#2There appears to be strong - IMO, conclusive - evidence that compulsory bicycle helmet laws reduce the overall quality of life (with the main mechanism being reduction of physical activity, and resultant deterioration in health).
But repealing such laws seems hard, politically. Any ideas on how to support such a repeal?
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#3For fucks sake, no. This is a meme that will not die.
Howie's evidence (as nice a guy as he is) is based on a single study by a professor at the University of Bath. (And there's a PLOS One paper which disputes his conclusions too which is worth reading: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna... )
There is no compelling evidence to recommend that you shouldn't wear a bike helmet and PLENTY of very solid evidence why wearing helmets have very important and life altering effects on the outcome of serious head trauma.
If you are cycling, wear a bike helmet.
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#4The only good argument (in that article anyway) for not wearing a helmet seems to be the Bath university study, which everyone has been citing since the day it was released. But that's the only study I have seen on the topic. The fact that other modes of transportation (walking, driving) would theoretically be safer if you wore a helmet is irrelevant. And it's possible that helmets would turn someone off from cycling, but that seems like a poor reason to not use a bike.
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#5The only good argument (in that article anyway) for not wearing a helmet seems to be the Bath university study, which everyone has been citing since the day it was released. But that's the only study I have seen on the topic. The fact that other modes of transportation (walking, driving) would theoretically be safer if you wore a helmet is irrelevant. And it's possible that helmets would turn someone off from cycling…
There's a PLOS One paper which reanalyzed Ian Walker's 2007 data and claims that the effect Walker demonstrates is illusory if you chose different classification criteria for how to group data points: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna...
I tweeted w/ Ian Walker a bit about it, and though he hasn't written up a reply he disputes their conclusions (just for full disclosure).
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#6The only times I've hit my head on the ground as an adult have been coming off my bike. (Not that often, but still, three times is more than the zero for all other causes combined.) In each of those three times, I've been profoundly grateful that I've been wearing a helmet.
Adults tend not to fall over, voluntarily or in-, while walking around. There are plenty of ways to fall over and hit one's head while cycling that aren't under one's own control at all.
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#7This is like saying "If I drive a car without a seatbelt, I will drive safer!" When I ride I wear a helmet and I've broken (full failure mode absorption at impact) two in accidents; one was my fault, the other a slick spot at night that surprised me. I'll keep wearing my and put them on my kids too.
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#8[deleted]
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#9Fascinating ideas... I was astounded to hear that drivers pass closer to bicyclers wearing a helmet. I'd be prone to do so myself, as they do induce a false sense of security for both parties. I also agree that perhaps drivers and pedestrians should wear helmets as well.
Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet
#10Do you bike faster than you can run?
Would you run, as fast as you can, head-first into a concrete wall?
No, it does not make sense to bike without a helmet.