10 ms·

I once read a convincing argument that, in some cases, American's resistance to helmets caused helmet laws to have a net negative effect on health. The author

I once read a convincing argument that, in some cases, American's resistance to helmets caused helmet laws to have a net negative effect on health. The author claimed that the laws caused enough of a reduction in ridership that the lost exercise outweighed the reduction in injury. I've attempted to find the paper again, but I can't seem to track it down.

mb7733 6y ago
I believe you're thinking of Australia. There are very few (if any?) places in the US with helmet laws for adults.
- blang 6y ago
  King county Washington[1]. [1] https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/violence-injury-prevention/traffic-safety/bicycle-safety.aspx#:~:text=It's%20the%20law!,age)%20must%20wear%20a%20helmet.&text=Avoid%20fines%2C%20fees%2C%20and%20injuries%20by%20wearing%20a%20bike%20helmet https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/violence-injury-prev...!
  - Analemma_ 6y ago
    It seems to be very rarely enforced. I ride in Seattle without a helmet all the time and have never had a problem.
    - imperio59 6y ago
      Like most laws in Seattle, they are rarely enforced, and if you do get arrested or cited, current prosecutors aren't actually interested in doing their job very much either.
    - sneak 6y ago
      Out of curiosity: why do you ride without a helmet?
      - bobthepanda 6y ago
        Helmets are big unwieldy things. They're not easy to carry, and are shaped such that even if you had a bag big enough for one, it would probably crowd out a lot of things that might also go in the bag (e.g. very few bags might hold a 15-in laptop and also a helmet) It is inconvenient to take spontaneous or quick bike rides if you have to lug a helmet around everywhere. Also, there is at least some debate about whether or not wearing a helmet actually makes drivers less careful around you, since it looks like you're better protected. https://qz.com/1474671/scientists-are-still-debating-whether-bike-helmets-are-actually-safe/ https://qz.com/1474671/scientists-are-still-debating-whether...
        angst_ridden 6y ago
        Personal anecdote, probably irrelevant. When we were kids in the 80s, we bicycled to school. My parents heard about bike helmets (which were pretty new at that time) and bought them for us. I kept mine on the back rack, because I thought they were utterly uncool. Then one day, a guy wasn't paying attention, ran a stop-sign at high speed when we were still in the intersection, and hit my sister's bike's front wheel. There was no way she could have gotten out of his way. I can still hear the THWACK of her helmet hitting the pavement. The helmet did its job, and absorbed the impact by cracking. She got out of the experience with a few days of pain. I've always worn a helmet after that.
        bobthepanda 6y ago
        I don't think anyone argues that in specific incidents helmets are safer. The question is whether or not the second order effects of compulsory helmets outweigh the benefits for the individual, namely; - helmets make biking more inconvenient and compulsory usage of helmets suppresses cycling rates. In addition to the argument that is is a net negative because people get less exercise, there is also a second argument; because cyclists are less common, drivers are less familiar with how to interact with them, which leads to poorer judgement and more accidents per capita for the people still cycling. (In some cases, unfamiliarity also breeds anger and resentment; many a cyclist has a story of getting run off the road, drivers rolling coal at them, etc.) - drivers are generally overestimating confidence and safety when it comes to cycling. They may generally act more dangerously around people who look like they know what they're doing (e.g. the stereotype of the Lycra-clad road biker), which leads to more and deadlier accidents. As far as your sister's accident goes, there are two modes of thinking about it. One is to create more regulation, which generally tends to encumber the more vulnerable user (e.g. mandatory helmets), and depends on pretty much constant, vigilant enforcment; the other is to physically engineer a road environment where a high-speed intersection collision is less likely, if at all possible. (This may involve things like a tight roundabout to force slow speeds and paying attention; raising the crosswalks or even the entire intersection; narrowing the road and installing chicanes so that one cannot speed in a straight line down a road; or creating a shared space by removing all curbs and road markings so that one must pay attention because the environment is so uncertain and confusing.)
    - tiew9Vii 6y ago
      A stark difference to Sydney, Australia. I regularly see commuters getting fined cycling without helmets. The police favorite one is fining all the tourists on rental bikes. Most of the rental bikes don't have helmets as they go missing and as a tourist they are oblivious it's law to need a helmet while cycling in Australia. A big fine to! Most get tricked in to the relaxed tourism marketing image portrayed without realising Australia is one of the most litigious places in the world and bit of a nanny country.
    - MeinBlutIstBlau 6y ago
      It's like the law where if you ride your bike on the road or sidewalk. It's 100% up to how busy the cop is that day and if he REALLY wants to write you a ticket.
      - bobthepanda 6y ago
        Also, because this is the US, and Seattle in particular, police discretion means that some populations get the brunt of enforcement. Nearly half of helmet citations in Seattle are against homeless people. And that was where they could corroborate homelessness using easily identifiable records (noted in press, police reports, or the address on file was a homeless shelter) https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helmet-citations-go-homeless-people https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helme...
    - diebeforei485 6y ago
      It seems to be selectively enforced against certain demographics. There was a discussion[1] in /r/Seattle earlier 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/kebyab/nearly_half_of_seattles_helmet_citations_go_to/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/kebyab/nearly_half...
- leetcrew 6y ago
  could be on the books but not enforced. in my city helmets are required when riding those electric scooters. you're also exposed to the same DUI laws that apply to actual cars. doesn't stop a bunch of drunk college kids from riding them around with no helmet every night.
  - iso947 6y ago
    There are more head traumas from car occupants than cyclists, it’s odd that there aren’t laws mandating helmets for drivers - 20% of Traumatic brain injuries Resulting in hospitalisation were caused by car crashes - about 1,000 a week.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      I think the relevant statistic would be head trauma per miles traveled. But cars do get a lot of exceptions to standards society expects from other situations.
      - iramiller 6y ago
        Given the wildly different rates of speed involved, incidents per unit of time would perhaps be more directly comparable.
josephcsible 6y ago
De Jong, Piet, The Health Impact of Mandatory Bicycle Helmet Laws (February 24, 2010). Risk Analysis, 2012, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1368064 https://ssrn.com/abstract=1368064 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1368064 http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1368064
- ortusdux 6y ago
  That's the one! From the conclusions: "A (positive) net health benefit emerges only in dangerous bicycling environments under optimistic assumptions as to the efficacy of helmets and a minor behavioral response."
kfarr 6y ago
Yes and it's mind-blowing that municipalities are still trying to enact that crap. Most recently: Nearly half of Seattle’s helmet citations go to homeless people https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helmet-citations-go-homeless-people https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helme...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
watwut 6y ago
I think that what it does is that it reduces casual "biking to go shopping, work, school" trips. The safest ones and the ones that do good for health. It does not reduces sport "I am going to get workout now" trips - the most dangerous ones. (But still pretty safe!)

mb7733 6y ago

I believe you're thinking of Australia. There are very few (if any?) places in the US with helmet laws for adults.

blang 6y ago
King county Washington[1]. [1] https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/violence-injury-prevention/traffic-safety/bicycle-safety.aspx#:~:text=It's%20the%20law!,age)%20must%20wear%20a%20helmet.&text=Avoid%20fines%2C%20fees%2C%20and%20injuries%20by%20wearing%20a%20bike%20helmet https://www.kingcounty.gov/depts/health/violence-injury-prev...!
- Analemma_ 6y ago
  It seems to be very rarely enforced. I ride in Seattle without a helmet all the time and have never had a problem.
  - imperio59 6y ago
    Like most laws in Seattle, they are rarely enforced, and if you do get arrested or cited, current prosecutors aren't actually interested in doing their job very much either.
  - sneak 6y ago
    Out of curiosity: why do you ride without a helmet?
    - bobthepanda 6y ago
      Helmets are big unwieldy things. They're not easy to carry, and are shaped such that even if you had a bag big enough for one, it would probably crowd out a lot of things that might also go in the bag (e.g. very few bags might hold a 15-in laptop and also a helmet) It is inconvenient to take spontaneous or quick bike rides if you have to lug a helmet around everywhere. Also, there is at least some debate about whether or not wearing a helmet actually makes drivers less careful around you, since it looks like you're better protected. https://qz.com/1474671/scientists-are-still-debating-whether-bike-helmets-are-actually-safe/ https://qz.com/1474671/scientists-are-still-debating-whether...
      - angst_ridden 6y ago
        Personal anecdote, probably irrelevant. When we were kids in the 80s, we bicycled to school. My parents heard about bike helmets (which were pretty new at that time) and bought them for us. I kept mine on the back rack, because I thought they were utterly uncool. Then one day, a guy wasn't paying attention, ran a stop-sign at high speed when we were still in the intersection, and hit my sister's bike's front wheel. There was no way she could have gotten out of his way. I can still hear the THWACK of her helmet hitting the pavement. The helmet did its job, and absorbed the impact by cracking. She got out of the experience with a few days of pain. I've always worn a helmet after that.
        bobthepanda 6y ago
        I don't think anyone argues that in specific incidents helmets are safer. The question is whether or not the second order effects of compulsory helmets outweigh the benefits for the individual, namely; - helmets make biking more inconvenient and compulsory usage of helmets suppresses cycling rates. In addition to the argument that is is a net negative because people get less exercise, there is also a second argument; because cyclists are less common, drivers are less familiar with how to interact with them, which leads to poorer judgement and more accidents per capita for the people still cycling. (In some cases, unfamiliarity also breeds anger and resentment; many a cyclist has a story of getting run off the road, drivers rolling coal at them, etc.) - drivers are generally overestimating confidence and safety when it comes to cycling. They may generally act more dangerously around people who look like they know what they're doing (e.g. the stereotype of the Lycra-clad road biker), which leads to more and deadlier accidents. As far as your sister's accident goes, there are two modes of thinking about it. One is to create more regulation, which generally tends to encumber the more vulnerable user (e.g. mandatory helmets), and depends on pretty much constant, vigilant enforcment; the other is to physically engineer a road environment where a high-speed intersection collision is less likely, if at all possible. (This may involve things like a tight roundabout to force slow speeds and paying attention; raising the crosswalks or even the entire intersection; narrowing the road and installing chicanes so that one cannot speed in a straight line down a road; or creating a shared space by removing all curbs and road markings so that one must pay attention because the environment is so uncertain and confusing.)
  - tiew9Vii 6y ago
    A stark difference to Sydney, Australia. I regularly see commuters getting fined cycling without helmets. The police favorite one is fining all the tourists on rental bikes. Most of the rental bikes don't have helmets as they go missing and as a tourist they are oblivious it's law to need a helmet while cycling in Australia. A big fine to! Most get tricked in to the relaxed tourism marketing image portrayed without realising Australia is one of the most litigious places in the world and bit of a nanny country.
  - MeinBlutIstBlau 6y ago
    It's like the law where if you ride your bike on the road or sidewalk. It's 100% up to how busy the cop is that day and if he REALLY wants to write you a ticket.
    - bobthepanda 6y ago
      Also, because this is the US, and Seattle in particular, police discretion means that some populations get the brunt of enforcement. Nearly half of helmet citations in Seattle are against homeless people. And that was where they could corroborate homelessness using easily identifiable records (noted in press, police reports, or the address on file was a homeless shelter) https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helmet-citations-go-homeless-people https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helme...
  - diebeforei485 6y ago
    It seems to be selectively enforced against certain demographics. There was a discussion[1] in /r/Seattle earlier 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/kebyab/nearly_half_of_seattles_helmet_citations_go_to/ https://old.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/kebyab/nearly_half...
leetcrew 6y ago
could be on the books but not enforced. in my city helmets are required when riding those electric scooters. you're also exposed to the same DUI laws that apply to actual cars. doesn't stop a bunch of drunk college kids from riding them around with no helmet every night.
- iso947 6y ago
  There are more head traumas from car occupants than cyclists, it’s odd that there aren’t laws mandating helmets for drivers - 20% of Traumatic brain injuries Resulting in hospitalisation were caused by car crashes - about 1,000 a week.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    I think the relevant statistic would be head trauma per miles traveled. But cars do get a lot of exceptions to standards society expects from other situations.
    - iramiller 6y ago
      Given the wildly different rates of speed involved, incidents per unit of time would perhaps be more directly comparable.

josephcsible 6y ago

De Jong, Piet, The Health Impact of Mandatory Bicycle Helmet Laws (February 24, 2010). Risk Analysis, 2012, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1368064 https://ssrn.com/abstract=1368064 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1368064 http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1368064

ortusdux 6y ago
That's the one! From the conclusions: "A (positive) net health benefit emerges only in dangerous bicycling environments under optimistic assumptions as to the efficacy of helmets and a minor behavioral response."

kfarr 6y ago

Yes and it's mind-blowing that municipalities are still trying to enact that crap. Most recently: Nearly half of Seattle’s helmet citations go to homeless people https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helmet-citations-go-homeless-people https://crosscut.com/news/2020/12/nearly-half-seattles-helme...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

watwut 6y ago

I think that what it does is that it reduces casual "biking to go shopping, work, school" trips. The safest ones and the ones that do good for health. It does not reduces sport "I am going to get workout now" trips - the most dangerous ones. (But still pretty safe!)