New York Times article

[jonny jeez]

Pour a coffee and re-think for about 5 minutes ....

Aw come on that's not fair. Drago has a point here. The comparison between Melbourne and Dublin could be very flawed, perhaps Dubliners are essentially tighter than the Australian counterparts...or perhaps Melbournites are just lazy, either way how can we be sure they were put off because of the pressure to wear a lid.

Certainly many millions of others aren't

I have no issues with lidless riding (I may partake in the filthy habit a little more in days to come) but I do worry that there is an "argument" forming to try and convince people not to wear them. Wear them or not, its your choice. I am [still] not convinced that wearing one is *more* dangerous than not so there should be no pressure to convince me either way.

(Edit) equally if you are so easily put off riding by the danger that wearing a lid suggests, perhaps you shouldn't really be considering it in the first place.

 

[Red Light]

@ jonny jeez..
forgo the lid Jonny....you look so much better without one....

He can get his head through the hole in the door a whole lot easier without a helmet on too. Heeeerrre's Jonny!

 

[marzjennings]

Last time I was in the states there was a biker convention for the week where the amount of people wearing a helmet on their harley was easily countable on one hand. I bet the drivers don't have a go at them for not wearing a helmet.

Yes, no helmet laws for motorbikes in Texas (some states do require them though). So I guess there will be no requirements for cyclist until the bikers are forced to where helmets.

 

[jonny jeez]

@ jonny jeez..
forgo the lid Jonny....you look so much better without one....

Shhh, your not helping.

 

[Red Light]

Aw come on that's not fair. Drago has a point here. The comparison between Melbourne and Dublin could be very flawed, perhaps Dubliners are essentially tighter than the Australian counterparts...or perhaps Melbournites are just lazy, either way how can we be sure they were put off because of the pressure to wear a lid.

Yeah that must be it. People just love cycling in cold wet hilly cities and hate cycling in warm, dry flat cities. What other explanation can there be? Stupid of the Israelis and Mexicans to have repealed their helmet laws to increase usage of their bikeshare schemes rather than set up cold water sprays and artificial hills to incentivise cycling.

Seriously though its not just Melbourn and Dublin. The general rule worldwide is that bikeshare schemes in countries with helmet laws have languished and/or folded while those in countries without have flourished.

 

[jonny jeez]

Yeah that must be it. People just love cycling in cold wet hilly cities and hate cycling in warm, dry flat cities. What other explanation can there be? Stupid of the Israelis and Mexicans to have repealed their helmet laws to increase usage of their bikeshare schemes rather than set up cold water sprays and artificial hills to incentivise cycling.

Seriously though its not just Melbourn and Dublin. The general rule worldwide is that bikeshare schemes in countries with helmet laws have languished and/or folded while those in countries without have flourished.

That's all true I'm sure (happy to take your word for it) but all it says to me is that people don't want to share a bike if they *have* to share a lid as well. It doesn't tell me that lid wearing is putting people off taking up riding in their masses.

I ask this as an man ignorant on the facts, do Israel and Mexico have a decline in cycling take up or are they too experiencing an unprecedented popularity.

 

[Red Light]

That's all true I'm sure (happy to take your word for it) but all it says to me is that people don't want to share a bike if they *have* to share a lid as well. It doesn't tell me that lid wearing is putting people off taking up riding in their masses.

I ask this as an man ignorant on the facts, do Israel and Mexico have a decline in cycling take up or are they too experiencing an unprecedented popularity.

The Transport Research Laboratory did a UK study on this and found that local authorities that actively promoted helmet wearing saw a drop in cycling versus those with no active promotion which saw an increase in cycling. And then there is the evidence from countries that have introduced mandatory helmet laws and seen a dramatic drop in cycling result. And then the evidence of the relative popularity of bikeshare schemes with and without helmet compulsion. It all point pretty much to having to wear a helmet putting people off cycling.

And then there's the anecdotal side from those of us who don't wear a helmet and are button-holed by people convinced we are crazy, stupid and going to die if we don't wear one. Would you want to take part in something with that sort of reputation for death and injury?

 

[jonny jeez]

The Transport Research Laboratory did a UK study on this and found that local authorities that actively promoted helmet wearing saw a drop in cycling versus those with no active promotion which saw an increase in cycling.

Sorry to be a pain but would you have a copy or a link, All I can find is a reference to a study actually promoting helmet use (which is clearly not the one you mention) and builds on a 2003 study.

I'm happy (actively trying to) be convinced, so want to know some facts. I shall disregard the anecdotal stuff for now though

 

[Red Light]

Sorry to be a pain but would you have a copy or a link, All I can find is a reference to a study actually promoting helmet use (which is clearly not the one you mention) and builds on a 2003 study.

I'm happy (actively trying to) be convinced, so want to know some facts. I shall disregard the anecdotal stuff for now though

TRL286 Table 16

TRL487 Figure 3

 

[jonny jeez]

TRL286 Table 16
View attachment 13299
TRL487 Figure 3
View attachment 13300

Thanks RL but is there anything a little more current. not sure I even understand that graph

 

[Red Light]

Thanks RL but is there anything a little more current. not sure I even understand that graph

Well if you don't understand that graph I don't think there is a lot of purpose in sending you off to other papers you won't understand either. You are perfectly at liberty to reject whatever evidence there is (I get the strong impression you are asking for it more in the hope of picking holes in it such as its age, rather than in hope of learning something. BICBW)

P.S. The graph indicates that those places with higher helmet wearing rates are typically associated with lower cycling levels and those with lower helmet wearing rates are typically associated with higher cycling levels.

 

[jonny jeez]

RL, you've got me wrong there.

I am genuinely interested in this "effect", read my posts on this thread and you'll see that i am on the cusp of becoming a convert. But I like to reach my own conclusions so, if there is recent evidence to support the thought that lid wearing is actually putting people off, I'd like to read it.

What I don't like though is an idea that a movement is trying to dissuade lid wearing. let individuals choose what's right for them (as i am doing so and as you may help me to)...oh and i'm not suggesting YOU are starting a movement here either.

So now we have that cleared up, can you help me? I 'd like to study any relevant info and it seems that you are someone able to lay their hands on it.

I'd appreciate your help

J

 

[davefb]

Well if you don't understand that graph I don't think there is a lot of purpose in sending you off to other papers you won't understand either. You are perfectly at liberty to reject whatever evidence there is (I get the strong impression you are asking for it more in the hope of picking holes in it such as its age, rather than in hope of learning something. BICBW)

P.S. The graph indicates that those places with higher helmet wearing rates are typically associated with lower cycling levels and those with lower helmet wearing rates are typically associated with higher cycling levels.

it doesnt really though does it..

its a scatter chart.. it doesnt have the same years on the axes.. it also seems to have massive variations..

there are also no data plots at all in the "high cycling percentages and low helmet rates"

what is interesting is that the biggest %ages appear to be flat towns with large student numbers.. oxford/york/cambridge ( erm, well not sure about York's number of students)..

how were the numbers worked out?

personally, I just don't think there's a direct relationship on the rates, I'd think it more relates to age / type of cyclist... ( in a vague way)..

 

[Red Light]

it doesnt really though does it..

Which is why I said it "indicates" and used the word typically several times. Yes on its own it has its limitations and there is a lot of scatter in the data but one needs to look at it alongside the other evidence that is out there at the national level, where helmet compulsion has been introduced and the success of bikeshare programmes. Individually none of them except the helmet compulsion data is conclusive but collectively they all add up to point to helmets discouraging people from cycling whether they are mandated, promoted or just used.

 

[Red Light]

That's all true I'm sure (happy to take your word for it) but all it says to me is that people don't want to share a bike if they *have* to share a lid as well. It doesn't tell me that lid wearing is putting people off taking up riding in their masses.

I ask this as an man ignorant on the facts, do Israel and Mexico have a decline in cycling take up or are they too experiencing an unprecedented popularity.

Mexico is difficult to tell what happened because they repealed their year old helmet law on the day they launched their bikeshare scheme. So too many things changed too quickly or at the same time to divine much I'm afraid. But if you want something up to date have a look at the recent Sydney study by Rissel and Wen on "The possible effect on frequency of cycling if mandatory bicycle helmet legislation was repealed in Sydney, Australia: a cross sectional survey" in Health Promotion Journal of Australia 2011; 22: 178-83. As you will probably need a subscription to view it I have copied the results of the study below.

Results: One in five (22.6%, 95% CI 18.8-26.4%) respondents said they would cycle more if they did not have to wear a helmet, particularly occasional cyclists (40.4% of those who had cycled in the past week and 33.1% of those who had cycled in the past month). Almost half (47.6%) of respondents said they would never ride without a helmet, 14.4% said ‘all the time’, 30.4% said ‘some of the time’ and the rest were not sure. One third (32.7%, 95% CI 28.5-37.0%) of respondents did not support mandatory helmet legislation.
Conclusions: While a hypothetical situation, if only half of the 22.6% of respondents who said they would cycle more if they did not have to wear a helmet did ride more, Sydney targets for increasing cycling would be achieved by repealing mandatory bicycle helmet legislation. A significant proportion of the population would continue to wear helmets even if they were not required to do so.​