Paradoxically, wearing a helemt makes people feel safer doing more dangerous things, so it increases the actual risk. However, the existence of cars without sufficient infrastructure makes biking significantly more dangerous, reguarless of everything anything the bike rider is doing. So in countries with functional bike infrastructure, like the Netherlands, people don’t wear helmets because it’s safer not to. In dysfunctional countries, like the US, people have to wear helmets.
Faster biking without a helmet is obviously dangerous, I don’t know if this is also related to cars. In the Netherlands, eBikes with acceleators are considered motorcycles and require helmets but eBikes that are just pedal assist are considered regular bikes and people generally use the assist to go farther not faster.
Dutchies wear no helmets because we’re stubborn that way. There’s more injuries compared to our neighbor Denmark where more than half of people wear helmets.
With the advent of eBikes there’s been a huge upsurge in cycling related injury, certainly among the elderly. However the mental ownership of bikes makes us as unwilling to wear a helmet as stereotypical southern us state males were unwilling to adapt the seatbelt.
Inverse survivorship bias ‘i never needed one’ prevails. Only one in ten wears a helmet and if you bring up this topic in conversation it gets really uncomfortable soon…
I think our boomers would rather elect literally Hitler instead of submitting to bike helmet law (something national identity). It’ll darwinise itself out in the long run.
If you’re cruising along on a road bike at 20 mph, hit a rock, and get thrown forward onto your head, you definitely want a good helmet to absorb the blow. Studies have shown that wearing helmets while cycling reduces the risk of head and brain injuries by about 70 percent, and regular bike commuters should make the decision to wear a helmet, no question. Helmet law proponents argue that these benefits would carry over to bike-share riders, but in fact, the safety picture is more complicated.
Do we need to require that you carry your helmet all day in case you decide to hop on a clunky 40-pound bike-share cruiser to go two blocks from office to lunch? The risk of severe injuries on these short jaunts is low, and in the rare cases where riders are killed, it is most often in devastating collisions with cars and trucks where, as New York City Council Speaker Corey Johnson bluntly put it, “a helmet wouldn’t even help them because of the sheer scope of the accident.” The biggest threat to city cyclists is motor vehicles who don’t see them and don’t respect their space on the road and wearing a helmet is unlikely to mitigate the danger of these bike vs car collisions.
I would call you a sweet summer child, but I’ve stood in your shoes exactly. A while ago I had a serious bike accident because I slipped from the wet pedals and landed head first on the concrete. Doc in the ER told me I was able to walk it off because I was wearing a helmet (which now had a serious crack).
I posted online about it and while a lot of people are logged the story with their own various tales, it was also the day I learned about the very vocal minority of bike riders who completely detest helmets. many of them go so far as to say that helmets are actively dangerous.
Their arguments are mostly variations on
there are no scientific studies on bike helmets
good bike infrastructure should make wearing helmets obsolete (aka the Netherlands argument)
Yes, they are rather dense. Amuses me to think of them one day having a serious injury that could have been reduced by wearing a helmet and then arguing with the doctor that if the infrastructure was better they wouldn’t have fallen off the bike in the first place
That’s changing. Electric bikes are involved in many more accidents now, and it’s advised to wear a helmet if you’re young or older (I’ve lived here 25 years now and you can see the changes).
Dutch trauma surgeons have raised concerns over the rising number of elderly people suffering severe injuries from electric bicycle accidents, AD reported on Tuesday.
While some injuries result from collisions, most accidents are unilateral, caused by incidents like falling from a stationary position or losing control due to high speed,
It sounds like it’s particularly impacting 65+ year old men - the same types who die from breaking a hip slipping and falling while walking.
I’m not sure to what degree this is caused by ebikes encouraging them to keep biking when they should have stopped, or ebikes just being more dangerous when they fall over.
Can, sure. I’m having difficulty finding the fatality rate for unseatbelted people in car crashes at 25 mph, but for pedestrians it seems to be somewhere in the single digits.
Are you really calling source on the fact that:
Biking without a helmet is dangerous.
Biking at 30 mph with a helmet is more dangerous.
?
Wearing a helmet increases your risk of injury: https://road.cc/content/news/268605-wearing-cycle-helmet-may-increase-risk-injury-says-new-research
Paradoxically, wearing a helemt makes people feel safer doing more dangerous things, so it increases the actual risk. However, the existence of cars without sufficient infrastructure makes biking significantly more dangerous, reguarless of everything anything the bike rider is doing. So in countries with functional bike infrastructure, like the Netherlands, people don’t wear helmets because it’s safer not to. In dysfunctional countries, like the US, people have to wear helmets.
Faster biking without a helmet is obviously dangerous, I don’t know if this is also related to cars. In the Netherlands, eBikes with acceleators are considered motorcycles and require helmets but eBikes that are just pedal assist are considered regular bikes and people generally use the assist to go farther not faster.
For example, drivers will give unhelmeted cyclists more room while passing, on average.
Dutchies wear no helmets because we’re stubborn that way. There’s more injuries compared to our neighbor Denmark where more than half of people wear helmets.
With the advent of eBikes there’s been a huge upsurge in cycling related injury, certainly among the elderly. However the mental ownership of bikes makes us as unwilling to wear a helmet as stereotypical southern us state males were unwilling to adapt the seatbelt.
Inverse survivorship bias ‘i never needed one’ prevails. Only one in ten wears a helmet and if you bring up this topic in conversation it gets really uncomfortable soon…
Helmets are going to be required for older cyclists pretty soon though, yeah? I wonder how much that will impact things.
I think our boomers would rather elect literally Hitler instead of submitting to bike helmet law (something national identity). It’ll darwinise itself out in the long run.
Oh, is Geert Wilders against helmets? Heh.
Well any helmets outside of intensity hairsprayed blond domes
People who wear helmets bike more and therefore have a greater risk of getting hit by a car.
They’re more likely to bike more dangerously. Folks in the Netherlands don’t wear helmets and it has the highest bike usage in the world.
That also means there are fewer cars for people to get hit by.
Wat? Helmet mandates reduce cycling numbers.
https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/news/counterintuitive-argument-against-bicycle-helmet-laws#:~:text=And evidence backs up the,for uneven and discriminatory enforcement.
This is about bike shares and the author states:
I would call you a sweet summer child, but I’ve stood in your shoes exactly. A while ago I had a serious bike accident because I slipped from the wet pedals and landed head first on the concrete. Doc in the ER told me I was able to walk it off because I was wearing a helmet (which now had a serious crack).
I posted online about it and while a lot of people are logged the story with their own various tales, it was also the day I learned about the very vocal minority of bike riders who completely detest helmets. many of them go so far as to say that helmets are actively dangerous.
Their arguments are mostly variations on
Yes, they are rather dense. Amuses me to think of them one day having a serious injury that could have been reduced by wearing a helmet and then arguing with the doctor that if the infrastructure was better they wouldn’t have fallen off the bike in the first place
There’s biking and there’s biking.
In the Netherlands, for example, people wear helmets if they’re doing bike sports like road racing or BMX.
But if they’re just cruising down the street on their granny bike to get groceries, they don’t bother because that’s fairly safe.
It’s rather like the need for a seatbelt on the highway, vs the need for a seatbelt on a 25 mph neighborhood street.
That’s changing. Electric bikes are involved in many more accidents now, and it’s advised to wear a helmet if you’re young or older (I’ve lived here 25 years now and you can see the changes).
Uh so everyone???
Young, usually under middle-school age.
Older, usually 55+. People here bike into old age.
LOL I’m in my 50s and still racing
Many more accidents than what?
More accidents than traditional bikes per passenger mile, or passenger hour?
More accidents on ebikes than 5 years ago on account of more people buying them?
Can’t seem to post links.
Search for “netherlands older ebike deaths injuries” in google/ddg.
I see e.g. https://nltimes.nl/2023/08/01/trauma-surgeons-express-concern-e-bike-accidents-among-elderly
It sounds like it’s particularly impacting 65+ year old men - the same types who die from breaking a hip slipping and falling while walking.
I’m not sure to what degree this is caused by ebikes encouraging them to keep biking when they should have stopped, or ebikes just being more dangerous when they fall over.
A crash at 25 mph without a seatbelt can kill
Can, sure. I’m having difficulty finding the fatality rate for unseatbelted people in car crashes at 25 mph, but for pedestrians it seems to be somewhere in the single digits.
I’m sating this article is sensationalist shit. The information in the article does not lead to the conclusion from the title.