Laura Trott changes her mind on helmets

@noether, good post!

I'm also against compulsion, although wear one myself, and was glad the missus had one on when the rear of her helmet took an impact in a tumble last year..

As per usual there's a lot of BS on here when it comes to trying to prove the case for or against the actual wearing of them - people find the evidence and stats they want to support their views. What's becoming clear is that the hard facts to show helmets make a huge difference to safety simply aren't there, when we're talking about two tonnes of metal vs polystyrene plus skull. However even the most experienced cyclist can come off, often in an unpredictable way, so I do think it's a wise precaution, but it must be 'each to his own' in this matter.

The vehemently pro- or anti-helmet brigade won't listen to reason, though and can't get over their own bias in this debate, that's evident in comments on here and also some of the articles themselves.

Personally I think anyone going out on the road without wearing a helmet needs to think again. I was knocked off my bike last November on a Sunday afternoon by a car on the A59 in Lancashire. The driver pulled out of a car park on the opposite side of the road to turn right in the direction of my travel. About 50 yards later I was unconscious in the road after this car hit me a glancing blow but enough to knock me off. I had no chance to react to the situation and but for my helmet which had two severe cracks I am not sure whether I would have been here today.
It doesn't matter how good a rider you are there are times when incidents happen which are not your fault and that you cannot react to and this was one of them.
Fortunately in this case the driver stopped ( said the sun was in his eyes and SMIDSY). A helmet may not have helped in a head on collision but in my case I think it saved me from much more serious injury.

The Great UK Helmet Debate.

As pointed out during many such debates, the 30+ years Danish/ Dutch experiment on the whole population as cohort should serve as the basis. Cycling should be divided into 2 main categories: (a) urban & leisure transport at an average of 15 km/hr, (b) sport at an average above 25 km/hr. Since (a) can revolutionize the very way we live in the most positive way imagineable AND the cohort experiment mentioned above shows marginal safety improvement of wearing helmets, if any at all, helmets should not be made compulsory. The disadvantages - putting people off biking - massively outweigh the hypothetical advantages. Safety under (a) can be dramatically improved by better cycling infrastructure, education and truck safety measures. The helmet debate is irrelevant.

For the small minority of us under (b), I can only speak of personal experience, I fell once or twice during my 50 years cycling life,interestingly recently, and was glad I wore a helmet. I look forward to further research into helmet safety, has MIPS died a quiet death?

Legislation forcing the compulsory wearing of helmets would discourage people - who are incidentally also car drivers - from using bicycles on their daily errands and paradoxically make roads LESS safe for ALL bicycle riders.

Helmet debate.

Rudeness.

For those of you wondering where the evidence is, try www.cyclehelmets.org

It seems to me that, at least for normal; everyday cycling (hard riding and mountains might be different) then there's no evidence that helmets are effective overall. So for every injury they 'save' they must be causing another e.g. by risk compensation (drivers or cyclist) , or 'rotational' injuries . They're only really designed for simple spills at about 12 mph. A shattered helmet might have given no protection because the 'catastrophic failure' (in mechanical engineering parlance) means it absorbs little or no energy, which get passed on to the skull regardless. I.e. no difference, at least when hitting a flattish object. And there there's the principle of victim blame / burden of care. (The rape analogy is not far fetched in my view) ), Plus helmet promotion deters people from cycling, by making it seem more dangerous than it is, whereas more people cycling is a key way of making it safer. Even so health benefits outweigh risks 20 to 1 - it's dangerous not to cycle. Finally by falling back on helmet promotion, officialdom is able to avoid taking real measures and insurance companies, courts etc can claim ' contributory negligence' from injured cyclists.

As the law stands at the moment re: cycling helmets, people can do as they wish and good luck to them if they choose not to wear one. That's their prerogative and hope they are stay safe.

I personally wear one whatever type of ride I'm doing 'just in case' I had an accident where I head a potentially serious head injury. Yes, there are other types of (fatal) injuries that can happen, but I can only do my best to make myself visible and ride confidently. There is always the chance that other road users are not as vigilent and could seriously injure or kill me. And the same goes when I drive. There is always a risk. But by wearing a cycling helmet I do feel that I am lowering that risk, even if just by a small amount. Why chance it?

Laura T can try my helmet for size any time

I guess she prefers sitting on the fence on this one. I bet she wouldn't be able to race without one, something to do with insurance cover perhaps or UCI rules?

for me, it is crazy not to wear a helmet, it is crazy to wear headphones.
i dont think they should be legislated for and i dont think it is valid to use them as mitigating evidence where another road user is to blame for an accident.
however, i want to minimise my chances of accident and injury.
so i completely agree with LTs and BWs opinions here. As role models it is helpful for them to champion safe cycling.
in its infancy, the CTC campaigned against the use of cycle lights on the grounds they indirectly encouraged car drivers to be less vigilant of cyclists. No one would suggest such a policy now would they???

If we can't all agree on mandatory helmets can we at least agree that Voltaire never said, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"...?

I was once at a time trial a very long time ago when we used to use toe clips and straps. I was witness to a rider coming back form the time trial into the car park where we all were chatting about the times etc. Out of the corner of my eye I saw this guy put out his hand to his car to stable himself to loosen his toe straps. He slipped off the car and fell and hit his head. He didn't get up and died in the ambulance on the way to hospital and left a wife and two kids. That was at 0mph

I would say that if he was wearing a helmet he would of survived the nock on the head. But you never can tell, plus helmets probably weren't as good then as they are today.

This might seems that I am pro helmet and I am when riding my bike in training and racing. But everyday use to ride down the shops etc I don't bother. This is called personal choice people should have the right to choose what they do in every day riding. When it comes to races or organised events then that's a different matter it make sense to wear a helmet.

This I know doesn't make much sense from a safety point of view especially when I point out that you can die on your bike at 0mph.

Many of us would think that it is a cut and dried case of you either wear a helmet or you don't. I think though it depends on circumstances, and how each individual weighs up the risk.

I could though change my mind on this subject and there would be nothing wrong with that. Just as there is nothing wrong with this young lady Laura Trott changing her mind.

The best thinkers aren't afraid to change their minds. I didn't agree with her stance on having to wear helmets but she's gone up in my estimation not because she has change her thinking closer to what I believe but because she has strength of character to change her mind when she knows us and the media are going to make a big hoo har about it. At the end of the day it doesn't matter what Laura thinks what matters is that everybody should have the CHOICE and accept the consequences of their choice.

Dutch

Dutch.

I didn't realise that wearing a helmet (plus a flappy piece of fluorescent nylon) would save my life when a truck runs over my pelvis and causes the most common, fatal injury to cyclists.

"I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." - Voltaire

Laura Trott is a great racing cyclist, but that doesn't mean that she should qualify as a special authority on the safety of cycling in every day cycling.

I doubt that she has studied the effects of the wearing of cycle helmets in any kind of scientific way, and until she has, perhaps her opinions should not be accorded any kind of prominence?

For those that want a summary of the evidence, based on the effects of the New Zealand cycle helmet law and looking at the possible explanations for its effects, do go to http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/12/27/the-effects-of-new-zealands-cycle-helmet-l....

This piece briefly analyses the evidence with various references, including answers to the "helmet saved my life" comments such as those of Ms. Trott with regard to her sister.

And no, it won't change anybody's opinions, because once entrenched, no evidence ever will.

Personal opinions should be held at personal discretion.

I wear a helmet, but I don't care if you don't.

In the States, some helmet laws are compulsory for certain age groups. Additionally, in order to ride w/o a helmet on motorcycles in some States, you must show proof of insurance that would cover your medical expenses if injured.
This is done to protect the public from having to pay for your care. Seems fair to make the rider bear the responsibility for their own actions. It does not however, alleviate another's actions from causing your injuries. To each his/her own.

I like it when people change their opinions. It reminds you that there may actually be some point in debate.

As far as I'm concerned Laura Trott can change her mind as many times as she likes (resists temptation to use obvious emoji)

As far as I'm concerned Laura Trott can change her mind as many times as she likes (resists temptation to use obvious emoji)

I'll add to the "wouldn't have been injured if I hadn't had a helmet" statistics, just for ped's benefit, since he's never heard them before. I went down on my right side after losing the front wheel on a wet roundabout. I came down mostly on my right shoulder, then my helmet struck the tarmac - the resulting rotation drove the right side of my face into the ground and I suffered considerable grazing and a couple of big cuts on my right cheek, nose and front of my chin, along with a chipped tooth. The helmet was lightly damaged on the right side and the peak snapped off.

I reckon that (as unprovable a supposition as Jimmy Ray Will's), had I not been wearing the helmet that day (and my head had therefore been lighter by a few hundred grams and smaller by about 3 cm) I'd have still injured my shoulder and hip, but my head would not have struck the ground - and I wouldn't have spent 3 weeks looking like an extra from a disaster movie. If I could go back, knowing that I'd still take that corner too fast would still go down, I'd forego the helmet.

As it happens, I mostly wear a helmet again now, having ridden without one for several years. There are several reasons: *I* think, with no statistical backup, that the accident I had is roughly as likely as an accident where a helmet would help (so it becomes a coin-toss); I got used to wearing one to butt branches out of the way on the mountain bike (one genuinely valid use for helmets); it makes my wife happier (based on a similarly non-statistical approach); it's useful for mounting my camera (another genuinely valid use for helmets). None of these reasons are good reasons for anyone else to wear a helmet, so I'll vocally support everyone's choice to decide for themselves.

I should note that I've come off my bike on quite a lot of occasions - particularly the mountain bike (my riding style is a triumph of enthusiasm and momentum over skill). I can only think of one other time where I've hit my head. Did the helmet help there? Who can tell? The helmet did not seem to be badly damaged and I wasn't at all - perhaps it saved my life.

My opinion of Trottie has just gone up several notches