Check out http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ > In 2012 for nearly 2/3 of bicycle accident fatalities the rider was not wearing a helmet.

Check out http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ > In 2012 for nearly 2/3 of bicycle accident fatalities the rider was not wearing a helmet. That's irrelevant, since it indicates nothing about what fraction of those 2/3 would have survived if they'd been wearing helmets (as an example, if someone is hit my a truck at 50 mph, it really doesn't matter if he's wearing a helmet or not). Also, what fraction of cyclists wear helmets? I'd be surprised were it so much as 1/3; if it's less, then that would indicate that helmet-wearers are more likely to die than non-helmet-wearers (due to risk-tolerance on the part of both cyclists and drivers, c.f. http://www.cnet.com/news/brain-surgeon-theres-no-point-wearing-cycle-helmets/ http://www.cnet.com/news/brain-surgeon-theres-no-point-weari...). There are three types of head strike injury: those with so little force that no death or severe injury would occur, with or without a helmet; those with sufficient force to inflict death or serious injury without a helmet, but which a helmet would prevent; and those with so much force that a lightweight foam-and-plastic helmet wouldn't help. > This used to be an even higher percentage but fortunately the # of fatalities has decliend signficantly in the last 20 years. It looks to me from that IIHS graph that it merely reflects the fact that more people are wearing helmets now than previously.