Since the 1980s, we’ve been told bike helmets are the key to safe cycling. What if that wasn’t true?
I’m sure you know the Netherlands has one of the highest daily bicycle usages per capita in the world. But did you also know that in Holland, only about 0.5% of cyclists wear bike helmets? And that they have the lowest cycling fatality rate per kilometre cycled in the world?
How could this be?
Well, it’s actually easy.
Helmets actually have very little effect on overall cyclist safety. But they do present an impediment to cycling. It’s another thing you have to spend money on. For bike shares, you have to carry your own or use an, ahem, well-worn public helmet. For commuters, we don’t always want to show up at work with “helmet hair.” And sometimes, helmets just feel like… one… more… thing.
Plus, mandatory helmet laws paint a picture that cycling is inherently unsafe. This is bolstered by aggressive helmet-wearing campaigns, often citing brain injury studies, meant to create a fear of going helmet-less.
Gosh—if cycling is so unsafe, why would anyone do it? Well, in jurisdictions where helmet laws are in place—fewer people do.
And when you remove even a small percentage of the total population from the cycling community, we all miss out. Because there is safety in numbers. More cyclists encourage governments to build cycling infrastructure (the real key to safety). More bikes means less particulate pollution in city air. And more active people means better health for all.
And do helmets even offer that much safety?
Well, did you know a UK study found that motorists will keep a safe distance from helmetless riders but will make close passes on helmet-wearers? Yikes!
Plus, did you know that, according to Head Injuries in Canada: A Decade of Change combined with Hospital Trends in Canada, annual cyclist head injuries comprise about 0.0002% of our total hospital admissions and less than 20% of all cycling-related hospital admissions?
In addition, Transport Canada data shows that more than 80 per cent of all cyclist fatalities involve a motor vehicle. Thusly, dedicated bike lanes will save more lives than bike helmets.
(Add to the fact that bike helmets are only safety-rated to 27 km/h, it means that impacts with motor vehicles—the number-one cause of cyclist deaths—aren’t even well-covered by these brain buckets.)
But am I against bike helmets?
No! I generally wear one, actually.
But note the photo I opened with. This is a perfect example of proper helmet usage—young kids, more prone to accidents and just learning about safety, wearing helmets. Adults using their discretion, based on the environment (quiet suburban street). Perfect. No notes.
The facts are these: Protected bike lanes save cyclists. Cities need cycling critical mass to justify protected bike lanes. More people cycling makes everybody—and the Earth—healthier.
And helmets discourage all of that.
Leave a Reply