Live data from Hacker News

Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

howiechong.com

11–20 of 94 posts

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#11
One of the arguments is flawed:

> According to a 2006 French study, pedestrians are 1.4 times more likely to receive a traumatic brain injury than unhelmeted cyclists.

To fails to take into account that almost everyone walks, but very few cycle. The fact that it's only 1.4 times greater goes to show how common cycling head injuries actually are.

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#12

One of the arguments is flawed: > According to a 2006 French study, pedestrians are 1.4 times more likely to receive a traumatic brain injury than unhelmeted cyclists. To fails to take into account that almost everyone walks, but very few cycle. The fact that it's only 1.4 times greater goes to show how common cycling head injuries actually are.

This same fallacy appears in almost all the statistics he cites.

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#13
I hope this doesn't circulate, I was out with my kid (4 yo) today who fell and tapped his head on the road, the helmet didn't save his life but probably stopped a minor concussion.

I'm sure if I dug hard enough I could find evidence that cocaine can help the human body in some type of way, that doesn't mean its right.

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#14
post #2

There 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?

"compulsory bicycle helmet laws reduce the overall quality of life"

So...compulsory seat belt laws reduce the overall quality of life? Say what?

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#15

One of the arguments is flawed: > According to a 2006 French study, pedestrians are 1.4 times more likely to receive a traumatic brain injury than unhelmeted cyclists. To fails to take into account that almost everyone walks, but very few cycle. The fact that it's only 1.4 times greater goes to show how common cycling head injuries actually are.

Came here to point this out. This is a wildly popular argument for no-helmeters, but it's just flat out inaccurate. If you control for the percentage of people who drive, walk, and cycle, the percentage of head injuries from walking would pale in comparison to head injuries from cycling.

This is like the statistic that says that 80% of all automobile accidents happen within 10 miles of home. It's not because the area around your home is more dangerous, it's because you drive near your home more than you drive anywhere else. It's basic statistics.

The reason car drivers don't wear helmets is because of the insane number of safety features that are built into a car, from seatbelts to airbags to varying strengths of materials, that bikes simply don't have. If another car hits your car, a number of things jump into play to save your life. If a car hits you on your bike, you're gonna have a head injury at a minimum.

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#16

One of the arguments is flawed: > According to a 2006 French study, pedestrians are 1.4 times more likely to receive a traumatic brain injury than unhelmeted cyclists. To fails to take into account that almost everyone walks, but very few cycle. The fact that it's only 1.4 times greater goes to show how common cycling head injuries actually are.

Came here to point this out. This is a wildly popular argument for no-helmeters, but it's just flat out inaccurate. If you control for the percentage of people who drive, walk, and cycle, the percentage of head injuries from walking would pale in comparison to head injuries from cycling. This is like the statistic that says that 80% of all automobile accidents happen within 10 miles of home. It's not because the area…

no-helmeters??

Of course something like that exists. Of course there's a group of people up in arms over helmet use.

Of course. Fuck me, nothing should surprise me anymore.

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#17

One of the arguments is flawed: > According to a 2006 French study, pedestrians are 1.4 times more likely to receive a traumatic brain injury than unhelmeted cyclists. To fails to take into account that almost everyone walks, but very few cycle. The fact that it's only 1.4 times greater goes to show how common cycling head injuries actually are.

Maybe...I've met a lot of people who drive everywhere, and cycling is a lot more popular in France than in the US. I went to read the study but I'm not going to pay $42 or sign up to rent it, so we can only speculate about the frequency of different transit modes in this study, what they controlled for, etc..

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#18

One of the arguments is flawed: > According to a 2006 French study, pedestrians are 1.4 times more likely to receive a traumatic brain injury than unhelmeted cyclists. To fails to take into account that almost everyone walks, but very few cycle. The fact that it's only 1.4 times greater goes to show how common cycling head injuries actually are.

i remember hearing on the news that "Most motorcycle accidents happen to those without a motorcycle-endorsed license."

of course this statistic is meaningless without knowing what ratio of endorsed:un-endorsed are actually on the road.

oh, and: http://www.horace.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/How-to...

Re: Why it makes sense to bike without a helmet

#20
I choose to ignore this "advice".

I've hit my head a few times while getting into bike accidents.

The first time, I was wearing a helmet. Mostly landed on my face, but the helmet broke and I was fine. (An ambulance was driving by and took me to the hospital as a precautionary measure. Somewhat convenient.)

The second time, I was riding a CitiBike without a helmet. I hit a pothole and somehow ended up landing on my head. I don't really remember much, except laying in the middle of the road for a few minutes trying to figure out what happened. (I do remember being pretty sure that this was the end. But I decided I didn't want to get charged for the missing bike, so got up anyway.)

The third time I was wearing a helmet again, but I landed on my hands. It was winter so I was wearing gloves with leather palms, and just kind of slid for a while. It was great. I rode 40 more miles after that one. (And I'm definitely a fan of gloves!)

Wear a helmet. It's pretty easy to fall off your bike, and you don't really want to injure your head.

Post reply on HN