Six-figure damages awarded against Swiss ex-pro cyclist who caused death of fellow rider during race

The whole helmets/no helmets thing is a difficult thing to actually quantity and put a number to. There simply isn't the data freely available to the punters like us to be able to say either way, and superpython's suggestion to look on Wikipedia is farce. To get any useful conclusions you'd need to know exactly why the incident occurred, what was the cause of death, what protective equipment was being used and then how many people are cycling. Just a few examples of how the data is skewed: If a cyclist dies of a head wound this doesn't indicate that they would have survived if they hadn't hit their head because they may have a ruptured liver. In which case the record would show the death of a helmeted cyclist. And more simply being run over by a camera car is nothing to do with the cyclists headwear.
Unless someone wants to do all the analysis I'll continue to wear a helmet as from what I've seen they can save lives.
If you don't want to wear a helmet don't, but don't try convincing others not to based on some hypothesis that you can't prove.

There's a growing school of thought that helmets in skiing are not necessarily a good thing.

I'll just leave this article here and I am sure you can all make your own minds up
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/sports/on-slopes-rise-in-helmet-use-bu...

It's about time that someone started the Reduce Cycling Confidence movement. It is the path to massive improvement, if not eradication, of cycling mortality statistics. 

I blame improved braking. Clearly braking ability affects confidence on descents, into corners and anywhere that you need to stop in a hurry - braking has improved over the last 15 years (oh, maybe not for carbon rims but the future is dark there). There is worse to come, as widespread adoption of disc brakes will mean massive increases in deaths.  We need to take all brakes off bikes and, even with helmets, riders will be so cautious that there will never be another death. Once we have that outcome helmets would be a redundant concept and laws can be changed.

I'd write more but I'm about to go on a road ride, with helmet, that would make Evel Knievel blanche. I never used to do that sort of thing but these days it seems mandatory.

Go to bed Mr Python, it's getting late. 

that smell might just be you?   Helmets are THE variable in the last 15 years?

I call furphy on the 'helmet leads to accident'.  Disclosure - I do have to wear a helmet in Australia but I'm happy to take a helmet when touring overseas. I don't believe that a helmet will 'save' me, but I do know that you can take a bit of a knock if you come off and silly or unexpected things can happen, even when travelling at a slow or moderate speed on the flat (e.g. the cat that ran into my front wheel in France).

I don't rocket down a descent thinking I can push an extra 5 kmh due to some flimsy bit of kit on my bonce. Descending is still a function of skills, bike, experience, adrenalin, keeping up with others etc. A helmet doesn't change my skill level and it doesn't change bike performance, so it doesn't influence my decisions. I'm pretty sure most experienced riders are the same. And I'm fairly sure that less experienced riders can make all sorts of errors, with 'I have a helmet' among the least likely of factors involved in an accident.

The more interesting point in this article is that riders are responsible for managing their vehicle in an appropriate way - as opposed to 'I can do what I like, when I like'.

What the f**k has this story or incident got to do with helmets? Take your rant elswhere. Wear one or not: your choice, but this is nothing to do with the accident in question.