Chicago Reader: The Helmet Debate (John Greenfield)

The bike helmet debate stirs strong emotions. Many of us have heard stories of people who suffered traumatic brain injuries after being struck by a motorist while biking without a helmet. It's also common to hear testimony from people who believe that wearing protective headgear made the difference between life or death during a crash.

For example, in December 2012, Justin Carver, a friend of a friend of mine, was biking home from his library job in the western suburbs. As he rode through a Berwyn intersection with the light, he was struck by a left-turning teenage driver who failed to yield, and who later tested positive for marijuana.

Carver, who was wearing a helmet, sustained damage to his frontal lobe as well as injuries to much of the left side of his body. Although he became a father a year ago, he still uses a wheelchair and has major cognitive challenges.

"I have to imagine the helmet lessened the impact," Carver's wife, Kim, told me shortly after the crash. "I believe that if he didn't have his helmet on it could have been over instantly."

On the other hand, there are many people—even mainstream American bike advocates—who say helmets aren't necessary for all kinds of riding.

Gabe Klein, Chicago's former transportation chief, caught flak last fall for being photographed for Washingtonian magazine in a D.C. bike lane, astride a Capital Bikeshare bike, bareheaded.

"I purposely don't wear helmets now in photo shoots," Klein said in a follow-up article. "I would never ride my fixed-gear [bicycle] in mixed traffic, my mountain bike off-road, or my racing bike without a helmet," he continued, "but when traveling at slow speeds in bike lanes, helmetless riding is quite safe."

Denmark-based Mikael Colville-Andersen, a polarizing figure who runs the transportation consulting firm Copenhagenize as well as the influential photo blog Copenhagen Cycle Chic, takes this position several steps further. Not only is special headgear is totally unnecessary for urban commuting, he argues, but helmet use sends a message that cycling is dangerous, and can discourage others from riding. He's been known to brand the companies that sell helmets, and government and media figures who promote them, "fearmongers."

Of course, it's easy for Colville-Andersen to argue that helmets are superfluous when he lives in a city where bicycle infrastructure is first-rate, more than a third of all trips are made by bike, the rate of cycling injuries and fatalities is extremely low, and helmet use is rare.

The question of whether helmets are necessary for everyday commuting is far more complex in a city like Chicago. Here, less than 2 percent of trips to work are made by bicycle, protected bike lanes are still fairly uncommon, and we have an epidemic of aggressive and distracted driving, resulting in a comparatively high injury and fatality rates.

Full Article:

http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/cycling-helmets-crashes-debate...

Views: 468

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Paul Lazzaro on June 7, 2016 at 6:14am

The fact that there is a 'debate' is evidence of the lack of data supporting or refuting claims about the efficacy of helmet use.  I would conclude that for the whole population of cyclists, other factors (infrastructure, law, culture, etc.) must have a much larger effect on overall safety than the prevalence of helmet use.

In any individual collision, it seems intuitively correct that a helmet would provide some protection against impacts, but perhaps also increase the risk of neck injury.  My guess is that it's marginally better to wear a helmet than not, so that's what I do.

I don't think that the companies that sell helmets are evil.  I also don't think that the people who don't like them are reckless.  But I do really dislike people making claims without the data to support them, and I worry about giving the general public the idea that cycling safety is completely the responsibility of the individual cyclist (rather than the responsibility of the community to provide infrastructure) - and that all one has to do to be 'safe' is to wear a helmet.

Permalink Reply by mike w. on June 7, 2016 at 8:54am

Permalink Reply by Mike Schwab on June 7, 2016 at 9:57am
Permalink Reply by David Barish on June 7, 2016 at 10:36am

I am wary to tread onto ground that has such a volume of footprints but feel the need to comment. I understand Randy Nuefeld's view that cycling in a  northern European manner is not really dangerous and  does not require a helmet.  Slow riding. less interaction with motorized traffic. He still dons a helmet when commuting to the loop here in the city of wild onions.

The argument that using a helmet makes cycling appear dangerous  or that a helmet should not be worn  because we should focus on safer cycling and safer driving or that wearing helmets  may give drivers a sense that they can be more reckless makes zero sense to me. A helmet is not an advertisement or argument. It is not something to make other mother's think you are safe dear Yehuda. It is worn to mitigate the forces that may scramble your cerebrum upon impact. It is a tool. If there is a chance you may fall and hit your head and  if your head injury can make the lights go out permanently, you may want to opt for a helmet.  Weighing that risk is open to each rider.  Randy realizes the seriousness of an injury but feels that in certain situations the risk is minimal or de minimus.  I cannot believe he, or anybody else, would incur a greater risk because they don't want drivers to think it is ok to be driving rashly. I am not willing to make an  argument with my brain by example. I am only willing to make an argument with my brain by thinking and then expressing a thought.

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on June 7, 2016 at 11:16am

Thanks David, well said.

I don't know that I trust drivers enough to go without a helmet. Too many of them are on their phones. I realize this doesn't make me 100% safe but I do believe it does make me a little safer. I also have a rear red blinking light that I like to use when riding during the day. I ride on a lot of roads that don't have bike lanes or any separation so I think visibility is important. 

I see the case as to why insisting on a helmet (making it the law) is a bad idea. It will scare people away. I also feel there are so many other issues that could make a bigger impact so maybe they are better topics to discuss (this said by the person that posted the thread ;-):

1. Infrastructure - Continue building safer bike paths and lanes and building streets taking into account that people will be riding their bikes on it.

2. Awareness - the Cyclist PR - having a campaign targeting motorists and people in general that humanizes us as sisters, brothers, daughters, etc. and tells them to "LOOK" for cyclists and share the road. 

3. Enforcement - harsh penalties for dooring, higher fines and more tickets for parking in the bike lanes, stopping the victim blaming and harsher sentences for hitting cyclists (STOP calling it an "accident"). Respect cyclists for their right to share the road.

4. Enforcement of Drunk Drivers in General - This one is pretty disgusting. Sam (the driver in the Bobby Cann case) had prior DUIs but kept lawyering his way out of convictions and punishments. Bobby most likely would have been alive if Sam wasn't able to throw money at his DUI problem. The effective letter writing and privilege of the DUI driver who killed Hector Avalos - Robert Vais got 100 days for killing a man because he got incredibly drunk and got behind the wheel. 

So, in general, I feel like we have a lot of issues to cover but we always seem to get caught up on the helmet issue. 

Permalink Reply by Michael Peck on June 9, 2016 at 7:04am

When I was 14 or so, I wiped out on my bike and smacked my head on the street. Really, really hard. It's quite a unique experience to hear the sound of your own skull striking asphalt while also learning that the stars you see going around the heads of cartoon characters who've just been brained are less of a joke than you thought: you really do see fireworks.

I looked at the house of a friend of mine and wondered if I should go there for help. Then I convinced myself that he lived on the next block, which wasn't true—I was in front of the correct house. I started walking, and don't remember anything that happened in the next hour or so, including my neighbor seeing me walking my bike and then giving me a ride home because I wouldn't answer him. Concussions do that sort of thing.

I never, ever ride without a helmet.

Permalink Reply by Matt Talbert on June 9, 2016 at 8:11am

I fear jumping into the helmet debate but here is my $0.02 (and I apologize if this is a restatement of previous helmet threads). I consider myself a pretty safe rider. I ride on fast past rides with CCC and Turin, and race in criteriums. For the record, you are not allowed in fast group rides or in races without a helmet, and I believe even the most anti-helmet person here would find it reasonable to wear a helmet in such situations. Despite the high risk cycling I do, my worst accident was just easy pace riding on the North Branch Trail. Hit a bump and smashed my face. I got a concussion even with the helmet. I'm sure people will say "look! you got a concussion anyway," when you could logically realize I would have much worse than a concussion on my hands without a helmet. No matter how safe you are, you are not perfect and always at risk of making a mistake. It will happen, whether it's your fault or someone else's.

In the end I just don't see why wearing a helmet is so horrible. Your brain is super important. The long term effects of other injuries (i.e. broken leg or broken arm) are far less significant than brain trauma. I don't think you should be forced to wear one. I just don't think it's a wise decision to go without one.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service