Almost 9 in 10 people back headphones ban and compulsory helmets for cyclists say survey

If helmets protect, why can't we tell? When wearing in Oz trebled because of the law casualty rates did not change.
What is the explanation for this.
In none of the jurisdictions where helmets have been made mandatory has there been a clear reduction in casualty rates. How can this be?

You want a proof negative, which you can't tell. How do we know if air bags save lives, how do we know live boats save lives? Well you can't tell how many people survived an incident, unless there is statistics which show that following seat belts/live boats introduction that significant numbers have avoided dying by the same means. The problem with statistics around bike helmets is that it is likely that no one reports their bike accident because they survived and didn't require hospital treatment, and this is the trick.

But, do you really think a bike helmet does nothing? And has never helped? I don't think you can argue that it doesn't and never has. I'm not saying how significant it is, but you make yourself look ridiculous by saying that it doesn't protect. You can make your educated choice about wearing one every time you go out, I'm not stopping you. But you cannot deny 'a helmet affords a greater level of protection to your head, than not wearing a helmet at all'. The question over how effective it is warding against the average cycling injury is a different question. And whether the compulsory wearing of one has a positive effect on cycling is another. The debates by 'experts' generally come down to the later - trading off the safety aspect against the deterrent of an unwanted expense.

Repeated studies are roughly inconclusive, with a possible bias set into the study, with statistics difficult to obtain. ER and brain specialists have come out in favour, and other medical 'experts' not - I don't dispute that it is unclear, I just dispute the fact that people completely disregard them and say there is no benefit to wearing them. That is false - you'd have to tell me that my friends would not have smashed their heads open when they fell off their bikes and hit their helmets instead.

I saw someone wearing a cycling helmet backwards once, that was funny as f***!!!

I am not surprised by the overwhelming opposition to the imposition of strict liability for motorists in the event of an accident involving a cyclist. There wasn't even a majority in favour amongst the 'more cyclist than motorist' group. I agree, it goes totally against the principle of innocent until proven guilty that is fundamental to the British justice system.

I did raise an eyebrow at the 59% who think that punishments should be harsher for cyclists that 'cause accidents'. If we are talking about pedestrians, perhaps fair enough. Otherwise, I would have thought that (serious) injury / death was probably a harsh enough outcome for the kamikaze cyclist.

We can all see how this is going, can't we? The slow, insidious creep towards compulsory helmets. But there may be an answer.

If we are being forced down the "data shows that helmets will save cyclists' lives" route, then the same data gathering methodology will also show that drivers' lives will be saved too, if they also wear helmets. And far more drivers die directly as a result of head injuries than cyclists.

We should be using this clear and unequivocal fact, wherever this thorny issue is raised, because it's one of the most powerful arguments that we have at our disposal.

So this YouGov "survey" contains between 75 and 280 cyclists, depending how you cut it. Rather a high risk of atypical results with such a small sample, so subdividing the responses like in this start of this road.cc article is rather inappropriate: the error margins are just too high once you do that.

Why can't this topic just be left alone and up to personal choice

I completely agree about headphones.

The amount of other riders you say "morning" to who are really close but can't hear you is growing.

(unscientifically)

Whilst I never wear headphones whilst cycling, it makes no sense that cyclists are somehow asking to be run over by wearing them. Surely the driver behind must take care to look where they are going?

If I’m rear ended, does it matter that I could hear that I was going to be rear-ended a few moments before it happens or should I just accept that motor vehicles can bully me off the road?

On the other hand it is too scary listening to the noise of cars accelerating behind me and motorcycles revving their engines impatiently trying to hint to me to get out the way because I don’t pay road tax have insurance etc. (yawn).

I think I’m going to start wearing headphones as it will my make commute more pleasant.

PS: How does wearing headphones make me less visible to motorists?

As an aside it'd be interesting to know of the incidences of head injuries in the pro peloton pre and post helmet compulsion and see if they've gone up or down.

As a regular commuter to work I play any music I want through the MP3 player and speaker on my phone. I play the volume at full blast. On the busy road I can just about hear it, but on the Canal banks its fine. I don't think it disturbs any pedestrians as they tend to have earbuds in anyway.

Why is The (Sunday) Times running a poll like this which stirs up opinion contrary to its "Cities Fit For Cyclists" campaign? Just seems dumb and counter-productive.

Maybe they should have added in the question, "Knowing that Johnson has had multiple affairs outside of his marriage, one which resulted in a child that he has absolutely no participation in raising, do you think Boris should 'keep it in his pants' and stop being a dirty philandering bastard?"

Yes it is (100% safe) next piece of rubbish?

My vote: helmet should be a choice. lets remember cycling is not dangerous, but the car that hit you. 20yrs + of cycling and I can decide when to wear a helmet, commute in London or tearing down a slope in the alps 'yes', doing under 10mph on a tow path 'no'. Not sure why people have such an obsession intruding upon other peoples free will, I keep myself to myself so expect the same from others.

Just as some days, I want to get all the gear on and others I just want to jump on the bike, in old shorts, a t-shirt, trainers, nothing more, to nip to shops or pub. Sure someone will say I am going to die any minute without a helmet, but 20yrs plus of me making my own mind up of where and when seems to work, just as when I have to make any other risk assessment. If you want to wear a helmet I will not be offended, mind the high viz is vile, but your choice, let me make mine. Think of how righteously smug you can be if I crash and die.

Could there possibly be any worse knee jerk reaction to divert attention away from the real issues for cyclists, shame on you Boris!

Ban earphones - we are outside so we can hear the traffic, not inside a noise-proof box, probably with earphones on listening to the radio and making phone calls. If you have ever ridden with earphones then you will know this is rubbish!

Compulsory helmets - would reduce the number of cyclists and thereby undo all the good done from the recent growth in cycling by increasing pollution and health costs. You will not make cycling safer by having less cyclists.....simples!

As a lifelong cyclist myself, the recent high level of fatalities is very sad, but it is not because of helmets, earphones, hi-viz or even running red lights for that matter.....it's because motorists and lorry drivers either don't look for us or can't see us.

Lack of a safe cycling infrastructure and poor driver awareness of cyclists is undoubtedly the main reason for fatalities, so in the meantime.....

Ride where you can be seen and always ride as though you haven't been seen.....simples!

The NHS deals with about 70,000 serious head injury incidents each year.

The most common causes of head injuries are falling over, motor vehicle crashes and assault. A significant proportion occur in the home or playground.

Cycling related head injuries are a small fraction of the thousands of head injuries the NHS deals with each year, probably less than 1%.

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Head-injury-minor/Pages/Causes.aspx

About 65% of head injuries are also alcohol related.

So the most effective legislation to reduce the incidence of head injuries in the population are ;

1. Compulsory helmets when in a motor vehicle
2. Compulsory helmets when moving about the home
3. Compulsory helmets when drinking in the pub
4. Compulsory helmets for children when playing

Funny how the media, medical profession, and authorities never mention these.

On a wider scale, smoking causes 100,000 premature deaths a year in the UK.

So an outright ban on smoking would have a far greater impact than a helmet law. Funny how smoking is left to the individual's informed choice but cycling helmets must be forced upon people.

It is an odd world....

Another conveniently weighted poll that does not address the real problems, that is poor driving standards and a lack of enforcement of driving standards on the roads.

A lot of people die in bed perhaps they should wear helmets too.

I want to know what's coming behind me and can't understand why anyone would wear earphones, I suppose in the city there is always something coming up behind you though.

Helmets need to be a choice, because unlike seat belts airbags and motorcycle helmets, they really aren't life savers for anyone but kids, most of us ride too spastic to have the thing protect against anything serious.

I wear mine ONLY because they are compulsory for races, TTs and events, so train in one.

When out with the kids I don't wear one (they do) as I find the air noise around them affects my spatial awareness and I am on max alert looking out for the kids.....which brings back the headphone thing......

HOWEVER ....as advised by my uncle who was a pro in the 50s, I ALWAYS wear specs, as nothing is more dangerous than something getting you in the eye!

So make specs compulsory!

Regarding bells on bikes:

I have to say, having fitted 100's of bells to new bikes being build and sold off workshops in Evans and Cycle Surgery the past few years to meet BS6102 Pt.1

the "stock" bells are absolutely terrible and will either not be heard in the traffic, or will end up snapping or rotating around the handlebar

the only effective bells I have found are the oversized "Ding Dong" bells (stock on pashley bikes), the oversized bells often sold with a "I LOVE my bike" graphic or the awesome "air zound" compressed air system

years ago I saw a courier use an Air Zound which made a woman pedestrian fall over in shock when he parped the horn to warn her from stepping into the street

'59 per cent of those respondents agreed that wearing of helmets should be compulsory'

that may be what the man in the street thinks but it's my head, not his, so it's none of his damn business. In the words of John Stuart Mill

“Over one's mind and over one's body the individual is sovereign.”

or to quote Sid Vicious

''I've met the man in the street and he's a c***t''

so he can keep his magic plastic hat of invincibility and stick up his a...e

What part of 'freedom' do people not understand, we live in a free country, I'd like it to stay that way. Bans and mandatory helmet laws are nanny state gone mad.

We want safer routes for cycling, not passing oppressive laws that make people want to cycle less and cause them to think cycling it inherently dangerous - it isn't.

I have really tried to stay away from this, but as a cycling Emergency Medicine Consultant in a large urban hospital that sees 100K patients a year and 25 % children, this is my view.

I see a lot of adults with head injuries, usually involving alcohol and interpersonal violence. Maybe they should put on a helmet before a great night out? Obviously those who misuse alcohol and drink at home who fall downstairs should helmet-up too, not that will prevent their broken neck.

Children over 2 with head injuries are either car v pedestrian, or falls from a height, usually trees or high walls. Maybe we shouldn't allow children to play out without a helmet and wrist protectors?

Reflecting on it, I can only remember two significant cycling injuries (both adults), one ice driven and one from a fork failure. There are many more prevalent causes of injury in children than cycling.

Helmets won't save you from multiple injuries from being run-over, nor will they save you from a spinal injury, but they do offer useful head protection. "Bulls-eye" to a car windscreen is nasty, and helmets are useful here. For what it's worth, I always wear a helmet, but I respect others choice not to. Personally I think if you riding involves going 40mph downhill, you are mad if you don't wear a helmet, and if in traffic then the risk of a car not seeing you and your head hitting the windscreen makes it the right choice.

So wear a helmet for:
Peloton speeds
Roads shared with cars
Something that might chuck you off, like ice

No point for:
Tow paths in decent weather
If you have cycle lanes separate from traffic, as you should.

When can cycling go back to being something a weirdo minority do? I liked it that way, when the media and politicians left us alone.