TEDxCopenhagen - Mikael Colville-Andersen - Why We Shouldn't Bike with a Helmet
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 июн 2024
- Copenhagen's bicycle ambassador talks about how important the bicycle is for liveable cities and how bicycle helmets are threatening bicycle culture.
About TEDx, x = independently organized event:
In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)
And I just wanted to find a youtube clip of how to adjust a bicycle helmet. Now I feel like an idiot sitting in my room with a helmet on.
Mairis Kļaviņš it's been 3 years now have you learn to adjust your bicycle helmet....
LOL!
You just did the first step into a greater world.
There are many hard surfaces in that room. Better keep it on. Just to be safe. And get a gun. Never know when someone will break in and try to kill you. I think I'll invent a helmet you wear all the time that has a holster for a gun built into it. Yeah. Now we're talking.
Well look on the bright side, if you step outside you'll be protected from blue ice.
*Video Spoilers*
This video is really about how more people should ride bicycles and that helmets make the bicycle seem more dangerous than it is.
Also, he likes the idea of some kind of head protection in a car because cars are way more dangerous for drivers, which is true.
He didn't include citations, but I'd think protection beats no protection and that just because you were able to find a study or two or three saying that you were worse-off with a helmet, doesn't overrule the vast majority that say otherwise, plus the physics of it all.
Yes, head protection, based on physics, types of injuries and studies show that it'll save many of lives while worn in a car. In the car would be the best place to add more safety measures because it would have the biggest impact.
Even on the streets of Denmark, pedestrians have more than twice the number of head injuries. Cyclists are of course not representative, as they are more fit than the average pedestrian, but from a public health perspective. Making bike helmets mandatory but not "walk helmets" would only be virtue signalling. So apparently, cyclists are the least likely to suffer head injury?
Guys, he isn't literally saying that everyone around the world should just stop wearing helmets. He's a city designer. His point is that we shouldn't HAVE to wear helmets, because cities should be designed around people and not around cars. Obviously having a helmet will be better than no helmet if some fuckwad in a car decides to hit you. But the fact that the car and bike came into direct contact in the first place is problematic.
But until they are safe, a helmet may be appropriate until the city catches up.
Thanks for the synopsis, sometimes you prefer reading a comment to giving 15 minutes.
"Obviously having a helmet will be better than no helmet if some fuckwad in a car decides to hit you."
Ummm... No. Helmets are not desgned to help you in this situation. MCA explicitly says this. Helmet makers explicitly say this. Believe it or not.
@@UK030 Pretty sure the person is talking about the impact with the ground after a collision with a car, rather than the impact with the car itself. Which impact are you talking about?
@@UK030 I think he's talking about the impact with the car , if so he's right , but some accidents the biker have Tbi when he hits the floor , statistically speaking is very rare a car hit directly you head ,the majority of head injuries occurs when you hit the floor pushed by the car . When you have big cars like SUVs yes the head can be hit .
He makes a good point. Although you can argue against helmet advocacy, you can't argue against actually wearing one. I just bought a new helmet because mine cracked last time I fell. My head is fine thanks to the helmet. Helmets may not save you from death when you get hit by a car, but they keep minor accidents from becoming major ones.
Excellent TEDxTalk. One of my favs. The most telling reality he describes is how auto manufacturers are pushing for bicycle helmets not because they care about the safety of bikers, but to scare people away from bicycles. The health benefits of bicycling are awesome. Bicycling is fun, freeing, good exercise and more.
My safety advice to bicyclists who haven't yet been hit by a motor vehicle: pretend they can't see you; only steer your bicycle toward places that they can't get to; assume that that motorist is going to try to hit you, go the other way, go a way that s/he can't get to you. I'm also a motorist, and Hades! yes have I not seen every single bicyclist that I should have seen.
+Blake Morrow Watch this TEDx talk. Learn. Are you too whatever to get out there and bicycle? Oh, well. It's too bad to be you then. I bicycle and I drive a car. Almost every time I drive, I have a good statistical chance of dying; almost every time I ride my bicycle, the chances of me dying during said trip and directly due to my being aboard a bicycle are millions if not billions to one. I stay mostly on bike paths, and go about ten to fifteen mph; cars are so much more dangerous because of the speeds involved, both yours and the other guy's.
About one year ago I took a hard spill while riding off-road on my bicycle. Fortunately, I was wearing a helmet. When my head impacted the ground, the point where the helmet hit cracked. I still have a sore neck but I believe I was spared a more serious injury thanks to the helmet.
Well there is quite a difference between riding off road and in a city... Glad you're okay :)
I've known of a few people who crashed on a bike at low speeds and cracked their skull open. I have personally hit my head on asphalt without a helmet enough times while biking around 30mph and have never had that happen. I don't know how a helmet will actually save my skull from being broken apart until it actually happens. That's a leap of faith. I also live in Houston, which has probably the most aggressive drivers I've ever encountered in a city that's completely almost dependent on driving.
Was just in Amsterdam and saw SOOOO many people without helmets (and the majority were also looking at their phones while riding). Children held on a hard seat in front and one rider CARRYING THEIR BABY... I am still in shock
And yet, we have an extremely low accident and fatality rate when it comes to cycling accidents.
Putting some painted styrofoam on your head does nothing for you in 99% of the cases. It only messes up your hair and causes discomfort.
Noticed the cycling infrastructure in Amsterdam? All cycling paths are separated form cars. That's everywhere in the Netherlands. Bike usage is the highest and the change of being in a cycling accident the lowest in the world. Everyone cycles because it is the fastest, cheapest and safest why to go from A to B. You are in shock because the facts don't fit your paradigm. Change your paradigm.
I use a bicycle to get around my city. I have never worn a helmet. I remember the day an older gentlemen biked by me dressed in Lycra on his racing bike and gave me a "shame on you" look and tapped his helmeted head as if I should have been wearing one. We were biking on a segregated pathway far removed from any vehicular traffic. I was biking on an upright dutch bicycle going 18km/hr. I wish more people realized helmet use is context dependent. This is the greatest problem in North America where mention of a cyclist conjures images of recreational racing. They don't realize biking as transportation is very relaxed.
A lousy winter hat kept me from cracking my skull when I skidded on a frozen puddle and fell so you can be damn well sure that a helmet is going to protect your skull.
The primary message here is not necessarily that wearing a helmet is bad, rather that when we market or legislate that helmets are necessary we 'scare' normal people away from riding bikes. In this talk it's suggested that we're 'fearing' people into a sedentary lifestyle and that we could 'save' more people (more exercise, healthier lifestyles, etc) if they weren't afraid to ride bikes and that any head injuries would be minimal in comparison.
I do have to say something about motorist safety. Race car drivers routinely walk away from crashes at over 150mph and yet people die every single day on American roads at less than half those speeds. Cars are insanely dangerous.
full face helmets block part of your peripheral vision and hearing, leading to an increased risk of that accident you never saw (or heard) coming. instead of worrying so much about what happens when you crash, how about preventing it from happening at all be being more aware of your surroundings. or even knowing how to crash properly. every dirt jumper knows how to land in a crash to prevent injury (usually a slide or roll), and roller derby girls actually have to crash on purpose as part of their training list. I know it sounds weird, maybe even a little bit crazy, but crashing properly is a skill way more useful than any helmet, and riding defensively is worth even more than that.
This. The amount of protection that people think a styrofoam hat provides is mindblowing. Learning how to fall with protect you much more than any helmet.
Full face helmets make sense for MTB, especially downhill. Commuting? Not so much!
This guy made a good argument for the idea that, as a matter of public policy, we should not overstate the dangers of biking. There was no argument that you - for your own safety - should not wear a helmet.
The majority watching will not get this because the concept of freedom is twisted.
Graham Widmer That's a great and one that he certainly should have emphasized in his presentation. The intent was slightly misleading in its omissions.
The problem is the environment surrounding the bicycles. Urban environments should be bicycles only (and it is possible). Interurban could be motorized. A balance is possible and should be aimed to.
Marc C how do you bike a few thousand tons worth of commercial or industrial goods into your hypothetical bike only city?
He didn't. He said you're 14% more likely to get in an accident. That's an important difference.
To wear a helmet or not? It's not all or nothing. "Only Sith believe in absolutes."
Use common sense.
If you're doing something inherently dangerous - mountain biking. bicycle racing, riding way too fast in the street, weaving between cars, passing way too close and blowing red lights, for example - then you should wear a helmet. In fact, load up on the safety gear, Johnny & Jeannie Live Dangerously.
But if you're just riding around town and are relatively slow/careful, you don't need a helmet.
His point is that this 'culture of fear' discourages bike riding by those who would be slower/safer on a bike, so they don't earn the healthy benefits of biking, and society as a whole loses.
The crazy biker is still going to need a helmet (and more). (Cops writing tickets for reckless biking would probably help more than tickets for 'riding in the street instead of the bike lane'.)
I wrote one of the papers disproving the efficacy of bicycle helmets. I'm also a person who received a serious concussion while wearing a helmet under ideal conditions. This is not a funny injury and I will be taking expensive anti seizure medication for the rest of my life. Trek has developed a new method of making the foam padding that makes it 28 times more effective against concussion than normal Styrofoam. This passes the same safety standards and they most certainly protect the rider better. While you can get seriously hurt on a bike it is by far the safest form of transport not to mention the health benefits. I'm about to go out on a weekly ride of 40 miles with 4,000 ft of climbing at nearly 75 years of age. Things are always looking up.
@@tomkunich9401 Was there a critical speed that the helmet became useful? Or more-so useless? I was told in the past that if you come off your bike over 20km/h then a helmet wont help at all, but I have also had other people say that under 20mph helmets increase risk of concussions and neck injuries.
most accidents are caused by the actions of drivers.
@@tomkunich9401 glad you can ride on!
Because helmets markedly increase the size of their heads, converting what may have been a near miss to a hit.
Also, some may be taking more risk while riding, thinking they are better protected from injury.
Mikael -- in the ensuing decade more complete data has come to light:
"According to Dutch government data, only about 0.5% of cyclists wear helmets in the Netherlands - the country where bicycles rule the roads. And yet, about 15% of injured cyclists admitted to the hospital were wearing them. It might seem odd that Dutch riders are overwhelmingly more likely to land in the hospital if they wear a helmet, but there is a simple explanation. Virtually all those who wear helmets do so because they are engaged in competitive cycling - racing or mountain biking. The risk of cycling injury has a lot more to do with the type of cycling activity than with the safety equipment in use. The remaining 99.5% of the Dutch cyclists who don’t wear helmets ride their bikes as transportation at a lower speed, which turns out to be a far less dangerous endeavor."
you misread the stat. is there a relationship between who is wearing the helmet--for instance more frequently or longer? the stat as presented means little. is there maybe a stat on how people in bad accidents fare in helmets versus more those with no helmets?
@@anthonyriddle8539 Research it and get back to me. I'm all ears.
Being all ears must make it near impossible to fit a helmet Someone else answered your question above.
I support your view and am also an optimist however here in Australia where it is legislated it is quite likely now impossible that it will ever be repealed. It’s undeniable that people cycle less when penalties exist for not wearing a helmet.
If you don't want to wear one, don't. I don't. It's NOT the government's business.
I have hit my head four times coming off a bike. One resulted in an ambulance ride to the hospital. The last two times was wearing a helmet. Big difference between accidents 1 and two, and 3 and 4. I am sticking with the brain box, thank you very much.
How does on sustain a head injury from a bike fall a 10 mph, do you drink and ride a lot!
I went over the bars, landed on my head, split my helmet in 3 and didn't get hurt. Sorry, gonna wear my helmet.
Good talk. People need to stop arguing safety vests and bicycle helmets and start focusing on what *really* makes bicycling better, safer and more efficient.
Those safety vest dorks make me nervous. One of them pulled out in front of me without looking once. They probably assume they need that shit because they're not paying enough attention to stay out of harms way.
jeolf And what does *really* make bicycling *better* , *safer* and *more* *efficient* ?
Good infrastructure and traffic systems in short. I want something like www.visionzeroinitiative.com/ to cover bicycles too. (in reality it does not apply for bicycle infrastructure in sweden...yet?)
In Australia we have these two things-
bicycle helmet laws &
hard rubbish roadside collection
when the bicycle laws were introduced (early 1990's) , you could walk down any street and find many completely usable bicycles just thrown out in the rubbish
+strangedaysarethese
Can't tell if I'm preaching to the choir here but if you aren't already
familiar with this web site crag.asn . au/are-bicycle-helmets-dangerous/
it is one of the better compendiums of knowledge on this topic on the web, it'
has a lot of Australian specific information as well.
@@BartBart22 Thanks for sharing the link!
Protective head gear in cars is not a bad idea. During WWII British tankers had a much higher rate of head injuries than their American allies. American tankers wore leather helmets, the Brits wore wool berets.
I'm sitting here watching this, recovering from a freak bicycling accident... a fall in a parking lot over a speed bump. I haven't crashed in 30 years. I have always worn a helmet religiously. Wasn't wearing one, because I was traveling with my Brompton and forgot it. It was only a 2 mile ride from my hotel to my client's office, and I crashed in their parking lot. Three days in the hospital including 2 days in the ICU. A bad concussion, several fractured facial bones, some brain bleeding. I will never ride without a helmet again.
What Mikael avoids, or fails to understand, is the concept of risk exposure. The chances of anyone falling on a bicycle on any given day is very, very low. As I wrote above, haven't fallen in 3 decades. However, the consequences of a fall are likely to be very serious. I was moving less than 10 mph (16 kph) and yet suffered a severe concussion, multiple broken facial bones, and a broken arm. A low chance times a very high cost is a very high number. Helmets will not protect against all falls, but you do what you can reasonably do. Spending EU30 or less for a helmet is no inconvenience and if it prevents one severe injury per person per 30 years it's worth it. Yes, we shouldn't market helmets based upon fear, but instead as a simple, obligatory piece of gear. BTW, cherry-picking statistics to make the anti-helmet point is as misleading as fear-mongering.
With that low of a risk and with that risk be more or less equal to the risk of head injury from traveling in a car or being a pedestrian. per hour of activity, how can you justify the notion that helmets should be an "obligatory" item. I'll guess that you don't wear a helmet in either of the two situation, what about when climbing or descending a set of stairs? Walking on stairs leads to far more head injuries on a per time basis that does bicycle riding. It's people who use their amygdala to make decisions and feel there should be a law or at the very least public shaming so that everyone wears a helmet while riding bicycles that are the fear mongers.
So just exactly how would a helmet have protected your face in that situation? As far as helmets and concussions go here is what a leading Canadian Neurosurgeon has to say about that.
www.cbc.ca/news/health/bike-helmets-should-address-concussion-risk-scientists-say-1.1367454
Because I hit on my forehead as well, and it hit first, leading to the concussion. Any dissipation would have been of benefit. Trust me, I am looking to buy more than just a rudimentary helmet now!
BTW, if you read the article (and yes, I did earlier this week after googling for it), you'll see that there HAVE been changes to helmet design addressed to reduce the risk and severity of concussions. This article is dated in 2013; a little Googling will show you that things have progressed since then, e.g., MIPs, smooth helmets.
I've yet to see anyone wear a MIPs helmet and at several hundred dollars I'm not expecting a whole lot of them anytime soon. Bike racers would rather wear something that appears aerodynamic than something that actually protects them/ That said I would hope you recognize that you on some level understand that 99.999% of the helmets that you see cyclists wearing provide little or no protection or worse can add to or even cause rotational injuries to the brain leading to far worse damage that even a fractured skull. If you're into googling this topic read more about rotational injuries.
It is not as simple as "helmets are good" or "better safe than sorry". They may not be as good as we like to think they are. Cycle helmets are not designed for major impacts - if you are really serious you should get a motorcycle helmet. Even more worrying - hitting the head wearing a cycle helmet increases the rotational energy transmitted to the brain causing diffuse axonal injury and cervical spine trauma. On a population basis, helmet wearing might reduce cycling and lead to worse health overall.
Wearing a helmet should always be a choice, I agree that enforcing it is a bad idea but until the cycling infrastructure where I live is improved drastically I'm going to continue wearing a helmet. All it takes is on serious head injury for a person to wish they were wearing a helmet. Sensible road use is the way to go but you can't always account for everything so I choose the wear a helmet in conjunction. I've heard and read about loads of people's personal experiences where a helmet has prevented death/serious head injuries. I don't wear a helmet walking down the street because the risks are much much lower. You can't compare walking on a path to cycling on the road in a city full of impatient drivers.
...and to say a helmet increases the risk of brain damage... There is no DEFINITIVE proof of that claim. I know that on impact I'd rather have something between my head and the concrete floor, car bonnet (hood if you're American) ect...
I don't know what your definition of definitive is but this study trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=810710 published in The National Academies of Science Engineering and Medicine is pretty damning especially in conjunction with our understanding of bike helmets and rotational head injuries. Look up "The efficacy of bicycle helmets against brain injury" by the author W.J. Curnow for more evidence.
+BartBart22 that article starts off saying "may increase risk" I'll read it properly when I have more time but it already seems like it's not definitive.
+BartBart22 that article starts off saying "may increase risk" I'll read it properly when I have more time but it already seems like it's not definitive.
Thanks for at least entertaining the idea that helmets may not be what they seem, if any of the articles I've reference peek your interest there is a lot more information available WRT how minimally protective bicycle helmets are. By your standard there is really no definitive evidence that bicycle helmets provide protection against anything but the most minor impacts and may make impacts of greater force worst by magnifying rotational forces transferred the brain and or neck.
I concede to all of your points, my friend, except that in my experience I've found that drivers are more agressive when I wear a helmet. Maybe because a person without a helmet on is like a pedestrian on wheels and so it's a much more fragile figure. peace and keep on biking
It is a fact that countries where cycling rates are high, helmet wearing rates are low.
It is a fact that scaring people into wearing helmets or making helmet use compulsory causes fewer people to cycle, than otherwise would.
It is a fact that the more people cycle, the safer it is.
It is a fact that money spent on cycling infrastructure is higher where more people cycle.
Next up on TEDx: "Why We Shouldn't Drive with Seat Belts on."
Safety belts actually have a very convincing safety track record. As opposed to bicycle helmets.
Actually there is a ted talk on seatbelts causing harm
The issue is lack of infrastructure. Hence, people wear helmets. I wish the USA would get their act together. I hate living in a world where the car dominates the streets so much I feel uneasy with the simple clean act of getting from A to B on a bicycle.
I totally agree with this. I am a regular bike commuter to and from work. The poor planing or development of infrastructure in the majority of American cities to accommodate alternative transportation is troublesome.
I'll keep wearing a helmet
Perhaps you should consider wearing shoulder, knee and wrist protection as well then, seeing as most accidents on bicycles at speeds where a helmet could possibly do something, mostly result in injuries on the arms or legs.
Diggnuts head injuries are worse than limb injuries
HealixGaming True, but limb injuries are by far more common and most accidents involving head injuries result from situation where foam helmets help as much as a damp cloth.
Came off at only 12mph today. Slammed the side of my head onto the pavement. Glad I had my helmet on.
This is just as anecdotal, but the only "bad" accident I've had on a bike was 12 years ago. There was an icy spot on the street I didn't see and I went down. Broke my wrist. But my head never touched the ground. I dunno.
What caused you to fall and what stopped your hands from breaking the fall?
BS!
A girl from my class fell weird from her bike at a fairly low speed (or so bystanders say, she has no recollection of the accident) She basically got angled in her bike and hit her head. She had an emergency surgery, spent months in the hospital and half a year in rehab.
All that would have been avoided, had she worn a helmet.
@@lilia3944 No, because side-ways hits are not protected well by a helmet. Also, if it's a kid, the helmet probably wasn't put on correctly on that day, and in that case it would have done more harm.
If only 5% of the budget for road maintenance was diverted to bicycle paths, then bicycles would be the safest, cleanest, fastest urban vehicles out there. Helmets increase the inconvenience of your bicycle by a lot. Increasing the inconvenience means more people take their car. Cars just casually murder people. They murder them with climate change, they murder them with pollution, and they straight up run them over. Every car trip saved saves lives.
I am from the Netherlands and nobody wears a helmet and we have the lowest rate of head injuries
I've ridden bicycles cross-country, thousands of miles. Spent human weeks on bicycle. Yet, on a very slow joy ride on a bike path by the sea, I fell and fractured my skull and eye socket, hospitalized for days. I do not remember how I fell. What I do remember is I haven't had a helmet. Because I thought I would be safe.
Doesn't matter what you feel about helmets. After a fall and an injury like mine (I do hope it doesn't happen to anyone) only thing you will not forget is the fact that you haven't had a helmet. I bet it would be much easier to blame the helmet than yourself if you get injured.
You mean you were drunk and hit a pothole.
@@mikewade777 Wish I was Mike! Would have been nice to blame it on something solid that I did.
If youre not confident in your biking skills, I would wear a helmet. For me though, I'm very confident which is why I don't wear a helmet. Remember, there's different levels of skills and people are on differnt spectrums.
While I agree with the sentiment against the culture of fear, it's a no-brainer that wearing a helmet can be a great asset in the event of an accident on a bicycle. I think that choice should be left up to the rider, since there are many styles of riding and places people ride bicycles. If you feel better about not wearing a helmet for the rides you do, that's fine. I ride fast, in an urban and suburban setting in the USA, so I will always wear my helmet. Some protection is better than none.
Grazie tante, è stato illuminante. Simone
I got a puncture at 60 kph and hit the ground hard. Broken collarbone, road rash everywhere, helmet split in 2 but not a scratch on my head!? So yeah, they do work over 20 kph, sideways...
+iSE9 It takes an unusually open mind to realize the guy might actually be right. First I was on the brink of disliking the video, too - before I realized the truth he could be conveying. He`s not saying bicycle helmets can't help in certain cases, he is just saying that bicycling isn't very dangerous - with and without a helmet - if you for example compare it to driving a car. Yet for many people it's unthinkable to ride a bicycle without a helmet, however the thought of wearing a helmet inside a car hasn't occurred to most people at all, even though it is probably the more dangerous activity and also would receive greater safety benefits from wearing a helmet. It's all about how for example the automotive industry want's us to perceive danger levels, perception of safety to promote certain activities and perception of danger to discourage others. I think further evaluation would be necessary for different kinds of cycling (I've a hunch for example mountainbikers receive a way geater benefit from helmets than normal commuting cyclists) but the guy has some very good points...it's just many people can't see them because they are so indoctrinated. I almost failed to see them, too.
+Max White True, but in a car you have seatbelts, airbags and are protected by a metal frame. That will save you in many cases. Why remove the only protective equipment you have just because it might not work in the unlikely event that you do have an accident on your bicycle? Many if not most accidents involving cyclists happen when hit from behind by a car, and you will likely hit your head. Personally, I would want to do all I can to protect the most important thing - my brain.
iSE9 No the real reason why you wear a helmet when bicycling (btw I do wear a helmet, too) is conditioning. That is not to say that it can't be effective to protect you (I have no clue whos right) but it's not the reason we wear a helmet if you think about it! Think about alpine skiing, a few decades (or even less) ago noone would even consider wearing a helmet, nowadays even in areas where it's not legally enforced almost everyone does! Why? Did people 15 years ago not value their brains? I doubt it! The reason again is conditioning, it has been brought to our attention from the outside via campaigns and such that skiing without a helmet is incredibly dangerous and we need to wear (and thus buy) ofcourse a helmet. And we do because we are anxious not to do so.
I am not saying you should now start playing Russian Roulette but I think the risk minimization we practise on a daily basis is not as logical as we think. It's based on subjective criteria (which is quite normal) but we are very vulnerable to suggestion, fear is a prime motivator to make people do something. Another example would be terror: is it likely that someone living in a western country will fall victim to a terror attack? No, chances are almost zero. Yet people are afraid to some degree, avoid crowds. There is absolutely no reason for that, none. You are probably more likely to be struck dead by a falling branch, yet people do not avoid forests. By the way those who dare to go into the forest, do they wear helmets? ;-)
I think the mainpoint of the speaker is not that you should not wear a helmet, but that helmet campaigns are a tool to shift the perception of what is dangerous and what is safe more in favor of automotive transport or buying safety equipment. Maybe that's a bit of a conspiracy theory and I myself think it's abit black and white (since I believe that atleast sometimes there are also sincere intentions to protect people at play) but I am not sure it's really that ridicolous.
The type of cycling I do is dangerous with or without a helmet, I know that. It's part of the sport. Today I drafted behind a bus going 70km/h. A little tree branch could have killed me. Would I be doing the same thing if helmets didn't exist? Probably. I either live or die happy on my bike, that is my motto. I don't fear crashing, I have done that many times. I fear more for my bike than my own health. But I am convinced some of those crashes would have ended much worse for me without my helmet. That is my opinion, and my experience.
iSE9
Well as I've written in my first reply I think while the guy generally may be correct it's important to evaluate that further for different riding styles, not just riding in general where the bulk are commuters.
By the way are you a roadie, too?
I'm a road racer. Not to be mean or anything but I don't think 70kph is that fast ;-)
Motordrafting is dangerous, though - but fun. Ido it too lol
This was beautiful, absolutely terrific talk.
One of my favourite TEDx talk - just referred to it on an X/Twitter response - so I re-watched it . . .
We're back? Where did we go? I've been obsessed with bicycles since I was a very young child, and I'm still obsessed at the age of 55.
You are hitting the nail right on the head here.
Pedestrians wearing helmets would cut down on head injuries sustained from being hit by cars too, but you don't see laws enforcing that!
@jan simonides source?
I remember a few people wearing helmets in VW Beetles, as they were known to be risky for head injuries.
Cool presentation and I agree for utilitarian cyclists.
He may be talking about Euro standards for bike helmets. US standards (CPSC) are more stringent and are tested in random places. This makes the US bike helmets more robust and weigh more.
This is true for motorcycles too. The Euro motorcycles are very noticeably lighter.
Even though I don't wear a helmet myself, from a scientific point of view this talk is heavily flawed. He claims to have spent 2.5 years researching the subject [6:05] and reading scientific reports [6:15] but does not provide a single citation supporting the strong claims he makes. I did a little bit of homework and checked out recent scientific publications on bike helmet effectiveness and found, to my surprise, that the claims made in this video are utterly wrong.
A recent meta analysis study [Reference see below] from 2018 that includes 179 effect estimates from 55 studies from 1989-2017 concludes with: "Bicycle helmets have consistently been found to reduce head injury, specifically serious and fatal head injury. The results from different meta-analyses are remarkably consistent...".
And yes, this video is old and new scientific studies have been made in the meanwhile but in the paper I cited, it is made clear that even the publications from 1989 to 2010 consistently found that helmets reduce head injury. So this can't be an excuse.
In my opinion, this video should be removed to prevent spreading of misinformation -- or -- the claims he made should be supported by proper citation of scientific papers in the description of the video. But in its current shape, this video is just bad for everybody.
[Reference]
"Bicycle helmets - To wear or not to wear? A meta-analyses of the effects of bicycle helmets on injuries.", Høye, A. (2018), Institute of Transport Economics, Gaustadalleen 21, 0349, Oslo, Norway Accident Analysis & Prevention, 117, 85-97. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.026
Thx
Thanks for taking it seriously
makes sense i can see how heavily marketing helmets would reduce the number of cyclists but wearing a helmet literally can't hurt
"If You Torture the Data Long Enough, It Will Confess" a wise man once said. Thanks TEDx for the clickbait title and video of some guy who doesn't know how statistics work.
@@BerkmanLord Actually, no. Look at the policies of countries with a lot of cycling. Very low bicycle death rates, and no helmet use.
So many afraid that they'll fall off a bicycle and hurt their head. In about 40 years of cycling, I've fallen once. And that one fall only hurt my shoulder and knee, and taught me one important lesson. Do Not Fall Off.
I have a helmet for the past few years but its main function is to keep rain off my head and warm in the winter.
The speakers point about the culture of fear is valid. I meet it regularly when using my recumbent trike with people who don't cycle saying "It looks very dangerous being so low to the ground, people mightn't see you." Oddly enough, I have more problems with people not seeing me on my bicycle even wearing hi-viz jacket than on my trike. These people have bought into the fear culture and project their fear onto me, or try to do so.These same people have no problem with wearing dark, dull clothing in the dark when walking about. Talk about "people mightn't see you".
Pretty hard to fall from a recumbent trike! I also have ridden recumbents extensively and believe that typical head-over-heels falls on an upright bike are far rarer on recumbent bicycles due to the design.
Re 'Do Not Fall Off', unless one is willing to go the recumbent trike route (not yet, for me), then falling off is always a possibility. A helmet is insurance... something you buy that you hope you never need. Yes, it won't protect from all injury. But it will protect more than not wearing one.
***** You can "fall off" a trike, just go fast enough and take a corner hard while not paying attention. :)
Well, I still have and use an upright bike so I have the option of falling off with that.
I've yet to see any end-over's with a recumbent bike, they most they will do is skid out.
Mike Savage easier said than done to just "not fall off" I'm pretty sure most people would not crash if it was an option. people don't crash on purpose
Muy bien!! yo me movilizo en patines ,
Great video and I would add that over here in the UK gas engineers working in domestic houses are given Bump Caps and that's adults not children. Can you believe that. What's also happened is that helmets have become a fashion accessory and your considered uncool by many if your not wearing the latest one.
I believe that my bike helmet has saved me and possibly my life once or twice.
how come bike riders who wear helmets are far more likely to smash their head into something. Look at the statistics, Australia and New Zealand have some of the highest accident rates with mandotary helmet laws and places like Holland and Denmark where very few wear helmets have some of the lowest injurie rate.
As a life long cyclist I never understood the cycling helmet. There is no statistics that back up the need of their use.
LOVE this! Unfortunately the fear maffia is now also trying to make bicycle helmets mandatory in the Netherlands, would you believe it!
Plot twist: wearing a helmet as a kid made me not as good at avoiding head injury, and subsequently hurt my ability to protect my head in activities while not using a helmet...while this may or may not actually be true, my point is that there isn't science based on what I just said, and it's likely a relevant factor, even if small.
As a lifelong bicyclist, I believe that under the age of 15, helmets should be worn, but once mastery and habits of bike riding have been formed, it should be left to personal preference. I have ridden 29er's, 26's, 24's, hardtails, no front suspension, w/front suspension, with brakes, without brakes, in the summer, in the winter, on the roads, the trails, in the rain or sun, or snow, ALL WITHOUT A HELMET, and more importantly, mostly over the age of 16.
But yeah, I have a helmet, mostly to wear if I know there will be kids watching, just to set a good example, but 90%, I wear none. Willing to change if the evidence supports it.
15?
When i was 7 i could cycle perfectly fine, like any dutch person
@@Lunavii_Cellest Sure, but I know a kid, a neighbour of mine, who suffered head trauma around the age of 9, and theirs no way that you could convince his parents for him not to use a helmet, after that.
that said tho, being comfortable from a young age is great, so teaching kids to ride is something I'm getting into
@@Lunavii_Cellest Amen to that
@@embeddedsanctuary4348 Your shildren are using Thud Guards too, right?
how do you explain the Bristol study by Dr Walker.
Continued...
and drop in TBI for other road users. In the end the amount the rate dropped was within any acceptable margin of error (far less than 5%). Also if you take into account that the riders that quit riding were most likely the ones who would not wear a helmet, it further makes the helmet look like more of a placebo.
That may well be ONE of the reasons however I would recommend that you check into a cycling study in Bristol U.K, that showed drivers gave less space for helmet wearing cyclists.
If i compare dutch or danish cycling, it is very much different to other countries. Your bikes are slow, often only one gear and backwheel brakes (something only little children are using here). I watched a few videos from cycling in Amsterdam, everyone is relaxed and easy and not in a hurry at all. That is ok if you are going shopping or so but i commute every day to work so i want to be as fast as possible from A to B. Many cyclists here love to have fast and modern type of bike. Of course there are people with fixies (1 fixed gear only) but as Zurich for example has a lot of hills, I like my fast Pedelec (max. 45 km/h) and therefore i am as fast as every car - or even faster.
Do not get me wrong. I wish we had such excellent bicycle routes like Denmark or the Netherlands but i am not sure if the cyclists here would be happy with only 15 km/h. Then i can use our excellent Tram or Bus System, they are also so slow and one of the reasons i like my bicycle :)
+HelenaRG71 A big issue here is that helmets designed for bicycling are NOT designed for the speeds that your bicycle or mine go at. You'd need a motorcycle helmet to even come close. Bicycle helmets as promoted FOR bicycles are well-nigh useless.
Thanks. I understand. But if i would have cycle paths like the dutch, i would not make 15 km/h only, that is too slow for me... ;) I am planning my next vacation in the Netherlands to see that with my own eyes and OF COURSE ride a bicycle! Not my own of course, i will rent one, but i hope to find a modern type of bike, not a "granny type" of bicycle! *****
+Cycling in Edmonton from the Eyes of a Teen Never heard of that. I thought on the bike path max. allowed speed is 20 or 25 km/h. If you are faster, you have to use the streets...?
I have a speed pedelec (where i have to pedal myself to get support from the motor) and i can do 45 km/h if i pedal fast ;) but usually inside of the city, i do between 30 and 35 km/h depending on the traffic, pedestrians and so on. But i have a yellow license plate which means in the Netherlands i would have to use the regular streets (that’s what i think... never heard of people using speed pedelecs in the Netherlands...). We have also regular pedelecs, they count as normal bicycles, no license plate and they can do up to 25 km/h only. But as I said, if i visit the Netherlands, i will rent a nice bicycle there. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" LOL ;)
+HelenaRG71 I
posted this above but it applies to your comment as well. The vast amount of
high quality research on this topic supports the video's message. If you want
to educate yourself before you comment next time on this topic try reading some
of the huge amount of research cataloged here cyclehelmets . org/1157.html
. Two things, a lot of the links not longer work but googling the author name a
research paper title will (mostly) take you to the science based peer reviewed
journals that published these studies. Point two take note of how much of the
pro helmet research is funded by helmet manufactures. The world is a very
complex place and as Stephen Colbert tells us some times the truth isn't true
at all it's really just truthy. As for different riding environments here's a
study published in the British Medical Journal about Canada, mostly BC were the
terrain is very mountainous bmjopen.bmj . com/content/5/11/e008052.full.pdf
Add to that the very minimal ability of a bicycle helmet (styrofoam hat) to
provide any real protection I suggest that you read more about Risk
Compensation.
I think people need to be weary of statistics. A lot of people do not wear their helmets properly and that leads to accidents where helmets are not effective. I do agree that we need to continue to make it safer to ride in cities, and I think we're making good progress toward that goal in San Francisco. I also agree that wearing helmets may cause people to feel safer and then take greater risks. I like that bicycle riding is being encouraged here but I think that helmets should be encouraged.
This is a great video. Very well done. I hope to see more videos like this about various topics.
Helmet might be less protective on side hits but still way better than not having one! It would be hard to determine what could have happened to cyclist in an accident had he worn no helmet!
Do simple test, put helmet on you and take hammer(or some hard item) and gently hit on side, than remove helmet the same item with similar force and you will see a huge difference!
Helmet redistributes impart on entire had, when impact is coming from top of the head it distributes evenly on entire had and impact is reduced greatly. when impact comes on the side, it redistributes shock on half of the head which means entire shock goes on half of the head.
When impact is applied on head without helmet on lets say 2-4 sq cm (hitting had on asphalt) almost all impact is absorbed by that tiny space and there is bigger chance of life threatening damage.
Also i dont think bikes compete with cars, i have both and both have there use and none is substitute to the other.
So you advocate helmets for pedestrians? They are the ones most likely to suffer a hammer attack.
Too many miss the point of this speech. It's the ridiculous fear campaign that's scaring people off bikes. In Australia most people think cycling is suicidal, and that's despite compulsory helmets meant to keep them safe. Thing is, you could apply this same hysteria to, indeed, pedestrians, and particularly motorists, who die and are injured through head injuries in far greater numbers than cyclists. So where's the demand for helmets there? It reeks of hypocrisy and outright bigotry.
Yes it's 'obvious' that bike helmets must work, but the problem is that decades of research has shown remarkably little evidence that they really do. Like the fellow said - they wouldn't get through a cochrane review for medical evidence. And more importantly, going on about them does put people off, and cycling is good for them, so overall bike helmets, and especially their promotion, is bad for people's health. The more popular cycling is in a country, the fewer people feel the need to bother with helmets. More cyclists is much better for cycle safety than more helmets.
It's very sad that so much effort is devoted to this, and so little to actually improving cycle infrastructure, and cycling's place in society (in many places, not everywhere).
Reading the comment section, you will recognize that for most of the commentators, science is just one of many explanations. For me its the only one.
The talker's speech itself, is also very biased...
@@Luiz.Andrade He presented the evidence and arguments for his side, as the auto industry has presented the arguments only for its side.
Funny how people who argue that others are biased always fail to recognise that the information they themselves have is unbiased.
I tried to add Hungarian translation to this video but RUclips says the community contribution is switched off at this video. If you could switch it on I (and I think many others) would give subtitle to this video on rare languages (like Hungarian).
So, what now?
I started ride down here in caldwell texas and now I see more and more people on bikes now
lmao tough crowd, Mikael is hilarious!
Mandatory helmet laws are killing the 90% of cyclists who just want to leisurely ride their bikes around. All the kids, teenagers and adults who don't pretend they are in the Tour De France. These people don't need or want stupid chunks of plastic on their heads. Helmets should be a choice for any age group.
I am glad you have discovered not only the absolute truth but also the polite way to communicate it. This is no discussion and thus a pointless waste of time.
Now in my country we barely have 18km of bike lanes and we have a high rate of fatalities I ride without helmet because I belive I am encouraging others to ride... although I am taking the risk for a greater good rather than just being egoist and worry about my own safety. Despite that I really hope to never be involved in an accident where a helmet could have prevent injuries or save my life.. at least till we get more bike paths.
Eskiriatai Do what's best for your own safety.
+Eskiriatai It's not your responsibility to deal with other people's fears by reducing your own safety. If _you_ think a helmet is appropriate for the trip you're going to make, then wear one. I cycled through the Netherlands and I felt like I didn't need my helmet, but when I got off the ferry in the UK, and was in more aggressive traffic, I was glad to have it.
I am a semi/pro cyclist, and if I didn't wear a helmet, I'd be dead rn. I broke 4 helmets when I bashed my head in the floor at 50km/h.
You're talking about road racing right? I never ride at 50km/h or even close, so I see no need to wear a plastic hat.
Pro & semi-pro racing car drivers wear helmets, i don't wear one when i'm driving to the shops.
The speeds you ride at are far more of a factor than what you are wearing on your head. if you're really concerned about your safety, slow down.
@@zivkovicable Have you ever ridden up a hill or mountain, very easy to travel at 50kph descending.
@@stevefirman9557 It's also easy to use your brakes to slow down.
@@zivkovicable OK that answers my question you haven't done any climbing. Do you do any group riding?
I would never wear four helmets at once but ok ;-)
When I was in my teenage years to my late twenties I would not have been caught dead in one of those goofy helmets - just how a LOT of people are at that age. If I hadn't developed the habit of riding nonstop during that time it's doubtful I would have ever gone back to bicycling when I was older & not so vain. If you feel more comfortable wearing a helmet fine; but I don't & not only do not want people forcing me to wear one but also don't want to hear condescending comments from people who do.
"Each of these studies has been disputed with either the way they were conducted and/or the conclusions they came to"
Can you show me?
Great presentation!
Drie wiel.
Yes I have a road bike and I use it to get to work and always when I'm cycling I have my helmet on my head. United Kingdom isn't cyclist's paradise.
I have the clouths you are writing about and thin 25mm tires and I ride between cars, vans and lorries. But I'm not taking more risk as you claim it's not my fault that driver didn't notice 2 x 200 lumens light s on my bars and hit me instead of giving me way as the road signage was showing.
I wear a helmet but I object to compulsory helmets. It's a ridiculous idea that I should be required to wear a helmet to cycle to a shop, 100 metres away, on a quiet country road.
The experiments were published. The research was conducted by Dr. Ian Walker of the University of Bath for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. He attached a ultrasonic distance sensor to a bike & measured exact distances left by overtaking vehicles. He found that drivers were twice as likely to get close to the bicycle at an average of 8.5cm.
For me the less than 15mph protection a plastic helmet may give, isn't worth that average 8.5cm multiplied by all the cars I encounter,
Great talk - thanks Mikael
10:35 intro to Mikael's public service announcement billboard: "please don't kill or maim any pedestrians or cyclists with your car today."
Think I'll keep wearing my helmet.
What a shame.
Hope you wear one while walking, while taking a bath, while using the stairs. Fact is your odds of head injury is already incredible low on a bicycle.
@harshbarj So hitting a head while walking is the same as hitting the concrete while riding the bicycle at 50kmph?
me too. It's not my skills i don't trust, is people around me.
@@harshbarj yeah, riding fast around 4 or 16-wheeled loonatics, is the same as using stairs or waking a bath... Go on.
I dont always wear a helmet, it usually depends on the lenght of the ride if I decide to wear one.
I'm 45 and rode my bicycle a lot until the age of about 14. I have never seen anyone wear a helmet on a bicycle when I rode my bike back then. Motorcycle helmets - yes but I would have been laughed at if I wore one while riding a bicycle. I'm saying it's a bad idea to wear a helmet but rather sharing my experience. BTW, motorcycle helmets are not required in the state I live in now (Soith Carolina).
If you have ever fallen or crashed while riding a bicycle and hit your head on the concrete (I have, twice. I’m an avid road cyclist) you KNOW you should wear a helmet. One of my crashes was caused by my front tire blowing. This could happen to anyone. My helmet was cracked; my head was unharmed. WEAR A HELMET!
im from nanny state, Australia. people treat you like a pedo if you ride without a helmet. I hate the bloody things. I have friends that stopped riding the day the laws came in so they worked, they got people off bikes, exactly what the polititians wanted.
spoddog1 I agree. The less convenient you make cycling, the less likely people are going to do it. No space for bikes, compulsory helmets etc makes cycling a niche, rather than normal activity.
Well said, you can't even ride a bicycle along a deserted beach legally without a helmet! If my memory serves me correctly it was a 41% decrease in bicycle riders Overnight!
+greggy weggy Overnight? Well, if it's literally overnight, then maybe that's how many didn't have a helmet.
I prefer to wear a helmet in town and busy roads, but the idea of compulsory helmets is just daft. Adults can assess their own risk. If anything should be compulsory on bikes in traffic it should be mirrors and bells - the things that reduce the chance of being hit by making you more aware and allowing you to make others aware of you.
Figuratively obviously! People just didn't buy a helmet and stopped riding their bikes full stop!
I have mirrors on all my bikes which are of use mainly on the local cycleway, but why should bicycles have to have mirrors when it is the cars that are causing the rear end accidents! Does that mean that car drivers can lessen their liability because the cyclist should have seen them coming up from behind, especially on hills when the speed differential could be many tens of kilometres per hour? Bells are already compulsory on bicycles in Australia, they are just about the first thing most people remove from bicycles because most think they can yell louder.
+greggy weggy Mirrors let you see what is behind you as you know, from using them. Not having one doesn't reduce the liability of a bad driver behind you if they hit you but you can't sue him/her if you're dead, and if you're mangled but alive, the compo isn't a great substitute for having had the warning to dive to the side and have the driver done for dangerous driving.
It's easy to just turn your head and look on a good road with no potholes and frequent junctions, but in a busy city with jaywalkers, potholes, and everything else, it's a lot quicker to glance in a mirror and then immediately return your gaze to the road ahead.
I'm not saying that mirrors _should_ be compulsory, I'm saying that if I _had_ _to_ pick an item to make compulsory, I'd say mirror or bell _before_ helmet. I think it should really depend on your circumstances of where you're cycling. I've cycled across Northern Europe and in some places (like the Netherlands) it's a lot safer than going through the centre of London. In Rotterdam, or Copenhagen you don't need a helmet. In central London you need a helmet, and a guardian angel or a tandem bike with a rear gunner :)
Bells are compulsory in Oz? I didn't know that. I don't think it was the case when I lived there. Bells have their use, but again pedestrians jaywalking with headphones or inattentive drivers with windows up and radio blaring, they won't hear you anyway - I once had an old style horn on the bike, and that got their attention. I rarely shout, and I tend to use the bell from a good distance back to let people know to pay attention, I think it's more polite than shouting at people who are drifting across a street or bikepath without looking just cos they can't hear an engine approaching.
Mikael has a point about governments scaring people away from cycling . I'm from Ireland here a couple of weeks back the government brought in a law against cycling on the pavements and sidewalks apparently its an inconvenience to people and that all bike users should use the road which is fine if you know the rules and laws of the road like box junctions
Simple: percentages can be misleading. We balance perceived benefits with risks. The risk to consider is not how likely it is that a deadly accident has been caused by a head injury, but how great the benefit of wearing a helmet in any type of accident is (deadly or not). Subtle but important. Chances for serious head injury are significantly reduced by wearing a helmet on the bike while chances for serious head injury in a car accident are already low because of various other technologies.
My uncle is a serious cyclist, and one day he got into a high speed crash. His helmet was cracked down the center. If he hadn't been wearing it then it would have been his skull that cracked. I will always wear a helmet, no matter how many literature experts tell me not to.
There is a big difference between sports bikes and recreational/transport bikes..in a cycling country the majority has a "normal bike" where a helmet is useless.
"If he hadn't been wearing it then it would have been his skull that cracked." People say this all the time, and most of them believe it, but it's really not true. Polystyrene helmets split in half very easily in quite mild collisions. Heads are actually quite tough (that's the point). They will help avoid scrapes and bruises, but are not much use in a crash where your skull is actually in danger of getting cracked. Which is why the evidence of efficacy from 30 years of research is so weak. Sure, wear one if you like, they don't do much harm either, just be aware that promoting them _harms_ cyclists health overall.
Helmets increase the surface area of your head, which makes you more likely to hit your head in a crash. If your uncle had not been wearing a helmet, he might not even have hit his head.
Hahahaha, no. We'd all be in BIG trouble if our skulls were as weak as styrofoam.
If you read Max Weber's post again carefully it says his uncle's helmet was cracked down the center. Can we assume that his helmet was put on properly? And his head sits squarely on his shoulders with or without a helmet? The would it not be reasonable to say that it would have been his head 'cracked down the center' had the helmet not been present? By how much is 'the surface area of my head' increased? The helmet material is designed to dissipate the force from a blow to a small area into a bigger area, while also absorbing the energy of the blow. That is how any helmet works. A bicycle helmet gives some protection but it is better than none at all.
Act confidently and speak loudly enough and even a writer can pretend to be an engineer.
A study published in the MJA under the lead of Dr Michael Dinh from the Uni. of Sydney found that cyclists without helmets were 5.6 times more likely to suffer any head injury than cyclists wearing a helmet and 5.5 times more likely to suffer a severe head injury.
Median inhospital costs in non-helmeted patients ranged from $72,000 compared with helmeted patients' treatment which averaged $24,000.
If helmets can avoid 90% of motor vehicle FATALITIES GOOD, sounds perfectly logical to me.
I had an accident on bike at 40-45 km/h. Thank's God I had a helmet and got only minor injuries on elbows/knees
Konstantin Sushchyk Anecdotal evidence.
jaga690 I was standing on my bicycle, accelerating hard, and at about 30km/h my chain snapped. The immediate shift in weight dropped me to the ground almost immediately, and I hit my head before sliding on my side across five lanes (stopped, as this happened at a major traffic signal). A moderate road burn along my arm, leg, and stomach was all I suffered, and I'm not sure I'd have been able to take myself to a doctor had I not been wearing the helmet. It was dented and fissured, but still in one piece when I threw it away.
That said, I don't think the typical ~20km/h top speed commuter needs a helmet. They are useful off road and for more aggressive (fast, not playing chicken with motorists) riding, but do nothing for automobile-bicycle accidents in most cases. I definitely wouldn't have been accelerating so hard on a commute without a quick bike and wearing a helmet, so you can add one to the statistic of people doing unsafe things while wearing helmets. Maybe specifying more dangerous riding when selling helmets would be appropriate, as I don't think they're entirely useless.
Anecdotal evidence is still evidence.
"Oh im glad i didnt wear a helmet, this accident could be much worse". said no cyclist ever
Not true I was able to walk away without any treatment at all after
doing a somersault with my feet firmly locked into my pedals. I landed
on my shoulder blades and rolled out at about 30kph, still have a small
scar on one shoulder blade. If I had been wearing a helmet the extra
diameter could very well have prevented said somersault leaving me with a
neck injury possibly broken or a rotational brain injury or both. Look
up diffuse axonal brain injuries + bicycle helmet. these so called
helmets do not protect the brain and only offer nominal protection to
the scalp and skull.
@ensayofr Its hard to tell what exactly you are trying to say maybe you don't speak English well but if you're comparing using ropes while mountain climbing to wearing a styrofoam hat whilst bicycling how do you perceive those two things being in anyway related? They clearly have nothing to do with each other.
Without a bicycle helmet I'd be dead by now. Twice. If I'd listen to this guy "rational conclusions" I would have been 6 feet under today. Last year I was hit with a car. The driver didn't pay attention to red light nor me. I was airborne and then I landed hard on my head an shoulder. My helmet was broken as well as my clavicle. Guess what, my head was intact. Besides headache I was fine.
I'm torn. I agree that we are battling a culture of fear. However, I must be one of the few cyclists who have benefited from wearing a helmet. Fell off my bike and hit my head on the corner of a concrete planter. Quite sure I would have been left with a horrible head injury had I not been wearing it.
A friend also survived a head on collision with a car (his head actually hit the bumper) thanks to a helmet. He was told by a doctor at the scene he would have died without it.
I totally agree. I think they're a waste of time. Mind you, the health warning concerning the materials from which Bicycle helmets are made of.
"people with helmets are more likely to crash than those without." this is due to the fact that those who wear helmets are often times commuters, more serious riders or competitive riders. due to the fact that they ride more often than people without helmets makes them more liable to crashing. in addition to this, he mentioned that helmets are only designed for head on collisions at low speeds. about a year ago, i was riding at Spirit Mountain Bike Part when i face planted at full speed into the ground, hitting the side of my head. my helmet definitely saved me from at least a concussion.
Sorry, but that's not a valid argument. You can't KNOW if you WOULD'VE been more seriously injured of not for that piece of plastic & styrofoam.
all I need is the Crash were a Helmet saved my life to tell me its better to wear one...
+chris partin
It is better to wear, one, but I think the quote has been taken out of context. Telling cyclists that they must wear a helmet is not the quick and easy solution - building better infrastructure is the better option. Make cycling safer. Many countries would prefer to fund a cheap public awareness drive to encourage helmet use, rather than spend money on proper bike paths and other infrastructure.
Did it save your life, though? Or was your helmet just fucked up afterwards? It takes a lot more to break your head than it does a helmet.
The problem is that bike accidents won't be drastically decreased by making traffic safer. An accident can just be with one person involved. And I know a very big crowd who will need bicycle helmets even if traffic was made safer: Mountainbikers.
Yeah I'm still going to wear a helmet. I've already had a brain injury I do not need another. However I really do like the point he brought up about the bicycles being incredibly efficient in urban areas. Or in my case is Segway because I can't use a bicycle. People need to get out of their cars and find other ways to get around that are better for the environment and their wallets.
its a personal choice if you choose to wear a helmet or not. I wear it on and off it all depends on the type of ride and time of day.
Statistically... He is correct. I'm not gonna wear one.
No helmet laws, ever
I had a cousin that got hit by a car while she was on her bike, dead because she hit her head, but who knows if the helmet could have saved her life, but if she knew she was going to get hit by that car that day do you think she would have put the helmet on?
A logical argument: Would putting a barrier of any form around your head possibly protect your head in the event of an accident? Yes, wear a helmet, it may save your life.
+Ewan R No, and he explains why. Just ride the damn bike.
Er, no he doesn't explain why. He just complains that helmets seem such a burden that more people stop riding than buy helmets and he sees that as a net negative. But I see that as the result of decades of conditioning. Eventually people will become comfortable with helmets and riding rates will increase.
***** Well he does explain. First, there is the net negative as you put it. This is very important though because by lowering the number of cyclists on the roads you not only deprive society of all the benefits (health and otherwise) but you also make it more dangerous for the existing cyclists - since there is a correlation between safety and number of cyclists. You theorize that this would change in time - but that is a hell of a risk to take considering helmets have killed cycling whenever they were made mandatory.
Second, helmets promote the notion that biking is dangerous. This goes hand in hand with point 1 but merits being singled out. The car companies promote bike helmets even though you are more likely to sustain a head injury in a car... and even though car helmets exist. They know fucking well that helmets kill cycling and this is precisely what they are after. They want the illusion of danger to be with bikes, not with their metal death traps.
Third, there is the issue of risk compensation. People are generally more likely be more reckless when wearing a helmet. They essentially increase the likelihood of accidents.
Fourth, they dont do all that much. This is just the icing though. The cake is in the points above.
So just forget about those pieces of garbage and go biking. If anyone says you should wear one see if they are willing to put on a helmet when driving their car :)