Background: Despite the well-recognised benefit for individuals and communities of increased active travel, cycling remains a minority travel mode in many high income countries. Fear of injury is often cited as a reason. Campaigns to promote cycle helmet wear are alleged to contribute to this. However, there is little information on whether head injuries to cyclists are an important cause of death in road travel fatalities, compared with other road users.
Summary of legal status of cycle helmet wearing in the UK, paticularly where contributory negligence is claimed, from "The Cycling Lawyer" Martin Porter.
Updated document for a talk presented to the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers on 28 February 2012.
This article seeks to answer the question whether mandatory bicycle helmet laws deliver a net societal health benefit. The question is addressed using a simple model. The model recognizes a single health benefit – reduced head injuries, and a single health cost – increased morbidity due to foregone exercise from reduced cycling. Using estimates suggested in the literature of the effectiveness of helmets, the health benefits of cycling, head injury rates, and reductions in cycling, leads to the following conclusions.
Posted by Jim Davis on Thursday 22nd of December 2011
The Cycling Embassy of Great Britain are asking all supporters of civilised streets and cycling for transport to oppose a Women’s Institute resolution which calls for compulsory use of a helmet while cycling.
