Updated: Doctors demand cycle helmets for under-16s

Well put Dave, it appears to me that the advent of mountain biking, with it's extreme sport moniker, has given the general public the impression that cycling in general is a potentialy dangerous pastime.

The reason no road racers go without them is that it is a requirement to wear one. Look at most of the pro riders in training; a large percentage choose not to wear a helmet.

Quote:

I hope that compulsory helmets are introduced for all ages of cyclist in the near future.

why? so that the uptake of cycling can decrease leading to increased obesity and strain on the NHS, whilst at the same time the level and severity of head injuries from cycling-related injuries remains the same?

all the large-scale data (look at helmet compulsion in NZ and Australia) suggests that's what'll happen.

On Channel 4 the CTC's Chris Peck was asked whether 'A few cracked heads is a fair price to pay for the choice' - that's divisive, and so is the suggestion that all the brain-injured children in rehab are there because they weren't wearing a bike helmet. perhaps you should take a trip round a fat camp to see the effect obesity has on children. It's a bigger problem (no pun intended) than skull fractures, especially ones caused by cycling accidents.

do you wear a helmet as a pedestrian, or in your car, safe and sane? or when you're up a ladder? or when you're walking up and down stairs? because if you're really worried about your head, you're more likely to sustain a serious head injury doing any one of those things than you are cycling on or off road. Cycling simply isn't that dangerous, and the assertion that we should 'make it safer' merely suggests that it's more risky than it is. Add to that the fact that large scale data doesn't support the hypothesis that more helmets equal less brain damage, and those two pillars are what I base my anti-compulsion stance on.

I wear a helmet when i'm mountain biking, and on long road rides. I don't wear one for commuting or town riding. I make my 4-year-old daughter wear one as she's unlikely to exceed the 12mph that they're tested to be effective for, and she's more likely to fall from her bike at low speed and hit her head, which is what a halmet's designed to protect you from. That's my choice, and i'd like to continue to have the choice. cheers.

There seems to be a group of libertarian correspondents on this topic. Perhaps they ought to take trip round the brain injury rehabilitation units to see the effects of skull fractures on children?

At present, there is a great chance of ensuring that children do indeed wear helmets as they are cool and no road racers or serious VTT riders go anywhere without them. Why should we deter children from a form of protection?

I hope that compulsory helmets are introduced for all ages of cyclist in the near future.

Why don't doctors demand a law to force all pedestrians to wear helmets? After all, far more pedestrians are involved in accidents with motor vehicles than cyclists! This is typical 'blame the victim mentality; it would be far more powerful if doctors asked for all motor insurance to cover the costs of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians - that would make the insurance premiums higher and encourage motorists to drive more carefully. Also, don't doctors understand that a requirement to wear helmets would be largely unenforceable and would mean younger people and poorer people would be less likely to cycle? And that's just stupid.

Don't worry, no one listens to the bow tie- wearing pontificators anyway; Amir Khan's still fighting, you can still by tramp fuel cider for 10p a can at Asda, and missing one of your five a day doesn't mean a ten- stretch in Wormwood Scrubs.

I've always worn a lid but making it compulsory ... I
don't think so !

The CTC really are a great organisation, and one that manages to have some real bite when it comes to influencing political opinion.

I have been a member for many years, and would encourage everyone to join. Without them, we would be restricted to cyclepaths, whilst covered from head to foot in padding.

I, for one, never wear a helmet and would seriously resist any law that tried to make it compulsory. Introducing a law for the under 16's would be the thin end of the wedge, and make it very much easier to extend that in the future to include all cyclists.

Good "old" CTC. Go for it. Who do these doctors think they are? Oh sorry, yes of course. . . God.

So the data used in the study is unreliable, great.

My kids wear helmets at the BMX track or mountain biking or on the road. Because they both race BMX bikes, they're well aware of why they need helmets on the track and both have come off a few times. When they're just cycling in the park, they don't wear them. They may be just six and eight, but they're more proficient riders than most doctors.

As usual, Thompson, Rivara and Thompson's study from 1989 is cited. So, as usual, here are the criticisms of said study:

* The study is non-randomised. [various]

* Cyclists wearing helmets were mostly white and riding in parks or on cycle paths accompanied by adults. Cyclists without helmets were more often black or other races, riding alone on city streets. [D Robinson, M McCarthy]

* The control population had a helmet wearing rate nearly 7 times greater than that confirmed by a concurrent study for children in the Seattle area as a whole. See: Head Injuries and Bicycle Helmet Laws [D Robinson]

* The same methodology can be used on other data in the study to show that helmet use also reduces the risk of injury to other parts of the body by 72%. [P van Schaik]

* The study does not distinguish facial injuries from other head injuries, although helmets would not prevent the former. If facial injuries are excluded, Thompson's 85% reduces to 61%, but the number of cyclists wearing helmets is too small for this to be statistically significant. [McDermott et al, Journal of Trauma]

* In further re-working of Thompson's data, McDermott found that only 40% of head injuries would be reduced using approved helmets, though injury rates increased for the neck, extremities and pelvic region.

Hooray for Doctors! How would we know what to feel guilty about doing if they just shut up and sat down?