Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

[yugyug]

My pleasure warthog. I think a lot of his writing is pretty funny, and astute too. I liked the previous article where he refers to his child carrying long tail bike as the "smugness flotilla". Ha!

[warthog1]

My pleasure warthog. I think a lot of his writing is pretty funny, and astute too. I liked the previous article where he refers to his child carrying long tail bike as the "smugness flotilla". Ha!

[human909]

This is data from Germany a country with cycling rates much greater than Australia and helmet wearing rates much less....



So where is the argument for mandatory helmets for cycling?

[BenGr]

This is data from Germany a country with cycling rates much greater than Australia and helmet wearing rates much less....



So where is the argument for mandatory helmets for cycling?

Needs to be weighted against total trips of each type. Probably won't change the order too much but would make walking much safer than cycling.

[yugyug]

This is data from Germany a country with cycling rates much greater than Australia and helmet wearing rates much less....



So where is the argument for mandatory helmets for cycling?

Needs to be weighted against total trips of each type. Probably won't change the order too much but would make walking much safer than cycling.

But walking is probably not safer than cycling if done by distance travelled, which I think would be a better way to assess it. That method would also lower the head injury rate for cars though.

[BenGr]

This is data from Germany a country with cycling rates much greater than Australia and helmet wearing rates much less....



So where is the argument for mandatory helmets for cycling?

Needs to be weighted against total trips of each type. Probably won't change the order too much but would make walking much safer than cycling.

But walking is probably not safer than cycling if done by distance travelled, which I think would be a better way to assess it. That method would also lower the head injury rate for cars though.

Time travelled would work.

[human909]

Raw injury rate, per trip, per time travelled, per distance travelled. These all yield different results with different meanings.

The raw rates as presented are a good basis of societal focus of injury reduction. The point was that we can talk all we want about helmets for bicycles, if we really care about injuries in our society we would be focusing on motor vehicle drivers and their behavior. This is especially important because when it comes to motor vehicles harm is often the fault of others.

Bicycles like a thousand other physical activities do pose a risk of head injuries, those singling cycling out for MHLs seems odd. It originally came from protect the children ideology, now it comes from a blame the outgroup victim ideology.

[DavidS]

Was in Northern NSW recently, lovely to see so many people riding around safely without a magic hat. Wish we had the same situation in the cities. Lots of people riding too, wonder if these two thing might be linked.

DS

[human909]

people riding too, wonder if these two thing might be linked.

Nah.... It is just a coincidence that Darwin has the highest cycling rate of Australian cities. Surely it must be their "cool dry climate" and not their lax approach to helmets.

[rustguard]

Lol I have been away from the forums for a while. I remember when this was locked by admins to try and stop the debate; three hundred pages later.

Same old tired arguments-

Against compulsory helmet laws=

What they say- "Cycling no worse than anything else so why the big fines, Statistics from around the world show nothing positive from compulsory laws
and enforcement. Cycling helmets are second rate piece of foam and only engineered to withstand a jogging speed crash"
What they mean- 'I just want have fun riding my bike and be free to jump on the bike to go up the shop without worrying about huge fines and jail time'

For compulsory helmet laws=

What they say- "Heads are soft and bleed alot when hit, so you have to wear a helmet because I dont want to pay your medical bills.
I fell over and hit my head and my helmet cracked opened so they work really well. Statistics can be changed to support any view"
What they mean- 'The thought of someone I care about having a head injury is so bad that I will throw logic away stop people from
doing anything fun. I was so dizzy from the weight of the helmet and my head overheating that i fell off my bike
and cracked my helmet' lucky it has the Australian standards sticker on it or no way would this work against a
real impact. Everyone will laugh at my kids unless we make them wear helmets too. people who dont agree with
me should be sent to prison and are stupid'

[mikesbytes]

LOL, to each other we probably look like this;


but to everyone else we probably look like this;

[myforwik]

It was a massive failure of the QLD enquiry into cycling not to recommend the removal of helmet laws. The submissions and evidence from all over the world agree that helmet laws are an overwhelming net negative.

Sadly once something is regulated, it's almost impossible for people to let go. even when you are the last hold out on earth, they will still cling to it.

The helmet laws where lobbied by the motor industry, who have crushed cycling in Australia. Excluding recreation, cycling is now at an all time low for commuter trips. Plus most of the big cycling bodies (example BQ) are funded through motor lobbyists. BQ were even against the 1m passing rule. That's how pathetic cycling has become in Aus.

[rustguard]

BQ were even against the 1m passing rule. That's how pathetic cycling has become in Aus.

If that is true it is disgusting and a complete sham

[il padrone]

It was a massive failure of the QLD enquiry into cycling not to recommend the removal of helmet laws.

The QLD enquiry did recommend that the government consider the possible removal of the helmet law. The Minister point-blank ruled it out.


BTW, rustguard, if it's all soo boring, and you have nothing positive to contribute WHAT the fruit are you doing here?

[human909]

Recommendation 15 47
The Committee recommends that the Minister for Transport and Main Roads:

-introduce a 24 month trial which exempts cyclists aged 16 years and over from the mandatory helmet road rule when riding in parks, on footpaths and shared/cycle paths and on roads with a speed limit of 60 km/hr or less and

-develop an evaluation strategy for the trial which includes baseline measurements and data collection (for example through the CityCycle Scheme) so that an assessment can be made which measures the effect and proves any benefits.

They even include this great image in their report:

Against compulsory helmet laws=
...
What they mean- 'I just want have fun riding my bike and be free to jump on the bike to go up the shop without worrying about huge fines and jail time'

Actually, many of the people here aren't advocating an end to MHLs for their own personal benefit. Many would continue wearing their helmet. The strongest factor is getting MORE people cycling.

[rustguard]

BTW, rustguard, if it's all soo boring, and you have nothing positive to contribute WHAT the fruit are you doing here?

I never said it was Boring, just the same old argument. which unfortunately needs to be expanded until these fascist laws are removed.
As to what I am doing here, I was subscribed to another thread and upon entering my user CP i noticed this as my most active topic and clicked to look where it went.

Actually, many of the people here aren't advocating an end to MHLs for their own personal benefit. Many would continue wearing their helmet. The strongest factor is getting MORE people cycling.

Yes quite right i should have included that

We had a 'Blitz' here in perth last week where one nasty police woman and other officers were harassing and taxing poor cyclists going about their everyday grind minus a helmet; and promising to keep doing it. It makes me sad and a little angry when people defend this sort of thing

[mikesbytes]

These Blitz's are just political sabre rattling and use valuable police resources that could of been used to prevent or investigate a crime

[Xplora]

There WAS a crime, mike... a tiny subset of the population exposed themselves to a tiny chance of life ending injury and exposed others to a "approaching zero" chance of injury by their rare lawless behaviour!!

It's worth bearing a thought that the homicide squad isn't a proactive unit for a reason. Blitzing traffic behaviour from a nonevent segment like cyclists is ridiculous.

[Thoglette]

It makes me sad and a little angry when people defend this sort of thing

This just in : Study That Spurred Bike Helmet Fetish Was Repudiated By Its Own Authors

The authors of a study that helped foment the public and governmental obsession with bike helmets later issued research that undermined their initial findings.
The 1989 study, by Frederick P. Rivara, Diane C. Thompson, and Robert S. Thompson, found that helmet usage reduced head injury by 85 percent, and the risk of brain injury by 89 percent.
Network blog Wash Cycle reports that other researchers were not able to replicate the results — a red flag. And a few years later the original researchers issued a report, recently reprinted, that basically repudiated their landmark study

Risk for serious injury was not affected by helmet use (OR=0.9).

Rivara, Frederick P., Diane C. Thompson, and Robert S. Thompson. "Epidemiology of bicycle injuries and risk factors for serious injury." Injury Prevention 1997; 3: 110-114 [date corrected]

Still got to wade through the damn thing to see what it actually says...

[rustguard]

And a few years later the original researchers issued a report, recently reprinted, that basically repudiated their landmark study

I wonder if the report also listed their sponsors?

[trailgumby]

They're at it again: helmets for home renovators.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/homesty ... gwd8s.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[trailgumby]

BQ were even against the 1m passing rule. That's how pathetic cycling has become in Aus.

If that is true it is disgusting and a complete sham

It is true.

Bicycle Network are also against it. Supposedly there's no evidence that it makes any difference. Never will they get a cent of mine while they hold that position or while they receive funding from RACV.

[fat and old]

It's worth bearing a thought that the homicide squad isn't a proactive unit for a reason.

Actually, they are, at times

[human909]

They're at it again: helmets for home renovators.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/homesty ... gwd8s.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So rather than focus on like education and prevention of falls during the use of ladders. They again focus on foam hats. It is crazy.

(Ladders scare me a little when I use them. This is despite the fact that I hang off the sides of 100m+ cliffs for recreation. Cliffs are solid, ladder are wobbly little things.)

[rustguard]

They're at it again: helmets for home renovators.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/homesty ... gwd8s.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Whilst Ladders are one of the most dangerous things a person can be involved with, If my memory serves me correctly they were still second behind visiting the bathroom. maybe a better option- wear a helmet when they go for a leak? Anyhow being a worksite they wont be working off of a ladder if the show expects to be covered by insurance. Of course any journalist would have found that out and not even wrote the article.

cant believe this person was young Journalist of the year. Exactly why I refuse to buy a newspaper (now an oxymoron) and advise anyone I know to do the same