"We know helmets are useful in low-speed falls, and so definitely good for children, but whether they offer any real protection to somebody struck by a car is very controversial.
"Either way, this study suggests wearing a helmet might make a collision more likely in the first place," he added.
Hmm... Okay... So your logic for not wearing a helmet is as such:
- It helps in low-speed falls and accidents.
- It may or may not help in high-speed accidents, but doesn't hurt.
Remind me again why I wouldn't wear one? I've seen/heard of plenty of cyclists who get into trouble, and few have been hit by a car going full-speed. Most bike accidents that I've seen are relatively low-speed.
- I've got big hair. If I wear a helment, I have to fix my hair when I arrive wherever I want to be. This implies that if I had to wear a helmet I just would not use my bike
The risk is not relevant to me. It's risky to travel to egypt, I'd still do it. It's risky to walk alone in a dark street in a dangerous part of town - I'd still do it. Why do I do it? Because staying safe is great when it does not directly affect my lifestyle or my fun at life - and wearing a helmet has a very direct consequence - it makes it almost impossible for me to ride a bike anywhere important. I can't always arrive and go look for a mirror to fix my hair.
Wearing a seat belt of a car on the other hand does not have that consequence. A seat belt has no cost, but a helmet has a heavy price.
No, the logic is that it helps in low-speed falls and accidents, but it makes drivers more likely to hit you and doesn't really help much if do. So maybe it's better to wear a helmet--I'm have to look at the data more. But it doesn't seem obvious what the answer is. Here's a statistic:
700 bicyclists died on US roads in 2007. Over 90 percent died in crashes with motor vehicles.
What sorts of crashes though? There's getting hit by a car going at 50mph (goodbye world) versus, say, clipping a car door as it opens and going over your handlebars.
In the former your survivability is suspect even with protective gear, in the second I can see a helmet come into real use.
No, I'd say it's still pretty obvious. Without knowing what percentage of accidents are from car strikes, the latter may not matter. From what I've read, in most city conditions, you're far more likely to get hit by someone opening their door, or bump into something when avoiding people or slow moving cars. In both cases a helmet is pretty helpful.
Maybe someone should design a helmet that looks like it's not a helmet somehow. Maybe it's disguised as a beehive hairdo.
Well, I bet you're right that the former type of accident is more common, but the latter is almost certainly more dangerous when it happens. I do agree that helmets that don't look like helmets would be ideal.
http://www.bhsi.org/walkerstudy.htm
"We know helmets are useful in low-speed falls, and so definitely good for children, but whether they offer any real protection to somebody struck by a car is very controversial.
"Either way, this study suggests wearing a helmet might make a collision more likely in the first place," he added.