The controversy of helmet use - #saveacyclist

Helmet use is subject to a lot of varied opinions in the UK. Some people are undoubtedly for the use of helmets, some are against and whether to encourage helmet use or not is always a hot topic between cyclists. On nearly every road safety related news article I read on cycling websites, there is always a comment about how everyone should wear a helmet along with a reply that completely disputes that wearing one is beneficial to safety.

As the creator of the Save a Cyclist campaign, I am often asked what my position is on wearing a helmet. To be honest, I wear one myself and I would always encourage people to wear them but I wouldn’t have a problem if somebody decided that they didn’t want to. It’s a personal choice after all but something my dad told me always seems to ring true on this subject, “always err on the side of safety”. It seems to make sense that most people want to wear a helmet because they feel safer and they believe that it will reduce the risk of head injury should they have a fall. What doesn’t make sense to me is why the anti-helmet contingent of cyclists in this country always seem to bear down on anybody that implies that using a helmet is a good thing.

There is always the argument that there is little to no evidence that proves that wearing a helmet is safer than not wearing a helmet. It seems to me that someone must have said this in an article somewhere and so anti-helmet cyclists have turned it into somewhat of a cliché (without actually doing the research themselves) that they can throw into the mix whenever someone brings up the subject of helmets. The truth is, there is a wealth of evidence out there. A quick search on Google scholar or one of the journal databases shows this.

Now I can see the anti-helmet crew already frothing at the mouth getting ready to shout me down. I put this to you, do you ever check the reliability of your sources when you are fed statistics which seem to prove that helmet use is in no way beneficial to a cyclist’s safety? Are the articles or studies you read, unbiased and are any of them peer reviewed? Because if they’re not, then you can’t use them as factual evidence to prove a point just because of your personal beliefs. Similarly, people can conduct their own research to prove that the biased opinion they have is correct or to sell their product. Now this works both ways in terms of helmet safety as a study conducted by the manufacturer of bicycle helmets is more likely to find a way to prove that they do reduce head injuries and benefit cyclists whereas an anti-helmet researcher will find a way to prove otherwise.

Now, a quick scan of the articles that come up when you search for “bicycle helmet effectiveness” on Google scholar all come up with similar conclusions. Guess what, it isn’t that they aren’t effective. Here are a few examples (note that the sources seem reliable):

• Trauma injuries sustained by cyclists (conducted by the Department for cranio-maxillofacial and oral surgery, University of Innsbruck) “Wearing protective clothing such as a helmet is demonstrably beneficial and so we suggest that the obligatory use of protective wear should be introduced.”
• Bicycle helmet efficacy: a meta-analysis (conducted by the Australian Transport Safety Bureau) “The evidence is clear that bicycle helmets prevent serious injury and even death.”
• Prevention of bicycle-related injuries: Helmets, education and legislation (conducted by The Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, Departments of Pediatrics and Epidemiology, University of Washington, and the Department of Preventive Care, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington) “Helmets have been shown to reduce bicycle-related head injuries for cyclists of all ages involved in all types of crashes including those with motor vehicles. Helmet use has been promoted using educational campaigns, helmet subsidies, and legislation. Careful evaluation of these strategies has shown that these interventions increase helmet use and decrease the incidence of bicycle injuries.”.

Now I could go on, but I think you get the point. If you think there is no evidence to support the fact that helmets reduce the risk of head injury then you are wrong and you just haven’t looked for it.

Just to point out, this is not to say that there aren’t  reliable studies out there that indicate that helmet use isn’t beneficial to cyclists. Indeed, I understand that in some cases a helmet will not make a difference and that if the trauma is substantial enough then the forces acting on the skull and brain can still lead to major damage. The point is, that it is not acceptable to say that they provide no benefit whatsoever when there isn’t a large evidence base to prove this and on the contrary, most studies indicate that they are beneficial in reducing the risk or severity of head injury.

It seems that most cyclists will know somebody who believes their life has been saved by wearing a helmet. Most cyclists will also know someone who refuses to wear one and believes that making it compulsory will actually put people off cycling, as it is a safe sport. There’s also the “facts” flying about that they only work between certain speed restrictions or that motorists pass you closer because they don’t see you as vulnerable. It is a subject with no “right or wrong” answer, as maybe some drivers will give a non-helmet wearing cyclist more room. Or maybe they appear to give them more room when actually they are just considerate drivers and would give any cyclist a considerable amount of room. Or perhaps some will think you are stupid and therefore decide to pass you closer to “teach you a lesson”.

To me, the perception of cyclists in general has to change. We have to have better infrastructure to cycle on (separated bike paths) and drivers need to be more educated on cycling safety. The roads of the UK are dangerous, and that is what puts people off cycling. It is our own survival instinct that makes us want to be as protected as possible when we go out to tackle the roads on our bikes. I personally wouldn’t feel safe without a helmet on and therefore I would not enjoy my bike rides. Along with the overwhelming amount of evidence to suggest that wearing a helmet does reduce the risk of a head injury, I don’t understand why we should be discouraged to promote the use of helmets by those who are so anti-helmet.

I would very much like to see a rock solid, reliable study that proves helmets don’t benefit cyclists in any way, but even if you show me one there are still a hundred others out there that will contradict it. I know what I believe anyway.

At the end of the day, it is a personal choice. I will not jump on someone who says they are against wearing helmets. That’s fine, just don’t try and spiel a load of nonsense off to me that there is no evidence whatsoever to support the wearing of a helmet. People need to be pro-active about their safety in this day and age and whether a helmet will be effective or not in every accident/injury situation is irrelevant if ultimately the wearer feels safer by wearing one.

I leave you with this from pro cyclist Dean Downing…

I never used to where a helmet in training and my dad always told me off for it. Feb 2009 I hit the deck big time in Spain breaking my collar bone and splitting my head needing 15 stitches. That year I was due to become a Dad, so it made me think more about the consequences of hitting the road hard. A helmet is always going to protect you more than a cotton cap. It's worth wearing one, I know that much.

The floor is yours for thoughts and opinions…

picture featured in the Daily Cycle Flickr Group – added by Spin Baby