Mandatory Helmet Laws & stuff (MHL discussion)

[BobtheBuilder]

I freakin hate that video. It's "proof" of nothing.

Well, it's "proof" that de-contextualised, anecdotal "evidence" isn't worth much, and that is the kind of evidence that most of the pro-MHL brigade draw upon.

[bychosis]

I freakin hate that video. It's "proof" of nothing.

Well, it's "proof" that de-contextualised, anecdotal "evidence" isn't worth much, and that is the kind of evidence that most of the pro-MHL brigade draw upon.

Agree. It’s holds as much weight as ‘I crashed once and if I didn’t have a helmet on I would have died’

[fat and old]

I freakin hate that video. It's "proof" of nothing.

Well, it's "proof" that de-contextualised, anecdotal "evidence" isn't worth much, and that is the kind of evidence that most of the pro-MHL brigade draw upon.

Agree. It’s holds as much weight as ‘I crashed once and if I didn’t have a helmet on I would have died’

How about I crashed once, wasn’t wearing a helmet and died from head injuries? It happens,

[BobtheBuilder]

Well, it's "proof" that de-contextualised, anecdotal "evidence" isn't worth much, and that is the kind of evidence that most of the pro-MHL brigade draw upon.

Agree. It’s holds as much weight as ‘I crashed once and if I didn’t have a helmet on I would have died’

How about I crashed once, wasn’t wearing a helmet and died from head injuries? It happens,

Or even, I crashed once, was wearing a helmet and died from head injuries? It happens,

[DavidS]

I crashed once, broke my shoulder, wasn't wearing a helmet . . . oh, I should add, I was driving a car.

The mix of cyclists is so obvious in Australia, the proportion of cyclists riding for transport is far lower. I stopped riding for decades after the law was introduced, just couldn't be bothered with the sweaty inconvenient lump of useless foam on my head. Are Australian drivers really that much worse than everywhere else in the world? If so, then why blame the victim, if they can't drive safely they should not have a licence.

As for infrastructure, it exists. I ride my road vehicle (bicycle) on the road and would do so without a helmet every day, in peak hour traffic.

By the way, I did like the line about helmetless cyclists breaking a limb - are you suggesting helmets somehow protect our limbs now?

The evidence on mandatory helmet laws does not stack up. The most damning stat I saw was that head injuries as a proportion of total injuries for cyclists did not reduce with helmet laws. We have a law where we must wear head protection, yet head injuries did not reduce as a proportion of total injuries: fail.

I will never support mandatory helmet laws because I don't support anti-cycling laws.

Why don't we have mandatory helmets for occupants of motor vehicles - if it only saves one life??

DS

[NhiTrac]

Ten kms IS far for many people.

Even 5km or 2.5km in my view without a helmet is no no, at least in Sydney.

There have been comprehensive studies comparing a wide range of activities that demonstrate normal cycling is extremely safe

In Sydney, safety wise, I'd rather be walking or gardening than riding a bike on the road without a helmet.

How to do it? Now there's a book on exactly this topic and the best place to start is No helmets, no problem: how the Dutch created a casual biking culture which is an interview with the authors.

Thanks. For the record, I'm all for increasing cycling, cycling awareness and better infrastructure etc.

However my issue is those that use MHL as an argument that it is a primary detractor in Australia, to promote cycling. That is, there are so much more that's an issue with the low levels of cycling and the general attitude towards a cyclist on a road; MGIF, SMIDY, MAMIL, don't pay registration, number plates, cause of all peak hour traffic jam, (ie attitude), and lack of infrastructure etc, than MHL.

And until we iron out all of those, simply letting people ride willy nilly on the road, or footpath if you're under 16, isn't going improve anything. If anything I think it'll have the opposite effect.

It’s 16 now, not 13. Other states have rolled back the rule completely - as it should be.

Cheers

As for MHL: do you put a helmet on every time you ride a bike? WHen you have finished a service and roll out the driveway to test the shifters? When you finish a long ride, stop and chat with a mate for 10min with helmet off, then hop on your bike to get to the car 100m away? In a park to go to the loo when you grab you kids bike to cut the walk?

Not being a dick, just answering your question. But yes i do

[Thoglette]

Even 5km or 2.5km in my view without a helmet is no no, at least in Sydney.

So, let's cut to the chase with three questions:
1. what exactly is the helmet going to do for you?
2. when did this last happen to you? (I'll settle for when you last saw this happen)
3a. were you wearing cycle specific clothing at the time?
or
3b. were you planning to have a shower after that ride?

[warthog1]

Agree. It’s holds as much weight as ‘I crashed once and if I didn’t have a helmet on I would have died’

How about I crashed once, wasn’t wearing a helmet and died from head injuries? It happens,

Or even, I crashed once, was wearing a helmet and died from head injuries? It happens,

Crashed recently. Bloke R clavicle in 3 places. R scapula. 9 ribs. L1 vertebra.
Pelvic rami fracture.
Had a helmet on and had a 5+ minute LOC and a R frontal-temporal cerebral haemorrhage.
I am confident I'd have been in spot of bother without the helmet, but yeah I don't support MHLs

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2kYkMC62aZ4mkX7u7

[BobtheBuilder]

Crashed recently. Bloke R clavicle in 3 places. R scapula. 9 ribs. L1 vertebra.
Pelvic rami fracture.
... I am confident I'd have been in spot of bother without the helmet, but yeah I don't support MHLs

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2kYkMC62aZ4mkX7u7

Ouch, that looks pretty full-on!

Perhaps, perhaps not, but regardless, most cyclists wouldn't ever go that fast to suffer injuries like that and those that do (like yourself) overwhelmingly choose to wear helmets, because they realise their level of riding is inherently risky - though that raises the thorny issue of risk compensation, i.e. feeling safer and therefore acting riskier, cancelling out the safety benefit.

[warthog1]

Ouch, that looks pretty full-on!

Perhaps, perhaps not, but regardless, most cyclists wouldn't ever go that fast to suffer injuries like that and those that do (like yourself) overwhelmingly choose to wear helmets, because they realise their level of riding is inherently risky - though that raises the thorny issue of risk compensation, i.e. feeling safer and therefore acting riskier, cancelling out the safety benefit.

I am an ageing bloke who just stuffed up.
Another rider moved left when I was moving up the bunch.
I ended up on the dirt as I went too far left to avoid
Dunno if the helmet made me riskier or not.
I suspect I'd have been the same if helmet use was not customary and mandated. It is just a passtime I enjoy.
My point is if I smash my head into the ground it is likely a helmet will provide some protection.
Given the the choice I would have it on before the strike. I would however rather avoid the strike.

I do not support mandating every bicycle rider wear one every time. There are riskier activities and safer ones on a bike.
Yes fast bunch riding is riskier.

[fat and old]

I hadn’t realised your stack was that bad Warty! Healing ok?

I assume that the bike is the Devil incarnate in your wife’s eyes?

[warthog1]

I hadn’t realised your stack was that bad Warty! Healing ok?

I assume that the bike is the Devil incarnate in your wife’s eyes?

Yes it is not her favourite passtime of mine.
I am not stopping though and have pushed its' importance for my mental health. I am correct to run that line so I'm sticking with it lol

It was just a hard fall onto the deck at about 40ish km/h when I lost the front trying to get back on the road. Shouldn't have caused that much trauma imo.
I am no longer bullet proof anyway
Yeah healing well but my bone density in the lumbar vertebrae came back as lowish, osteopenia according the cd I received. Yet to see the gp about it.
Taking a bit of calcium, magnesium and zinc in the meantime.

[bychosis]

However my issue is those that use MHL as an argument that it is a primary detractor in Australia, to promote cycling. That is, there are so much more that's an issue with the low levels of cycling and the general attitude towards a cyclist on a road; MGIF, SMIDY, MAMIL, don't pay registration, number plates, cause of all peak hour traffic jam, (ie attitude), and lack of infrastructure etc, than MHL.

And until we iron out all of those, simply letting people ride willy nilly on the road, or footpath if you're under 16, isn't going improve anything. If anything I think it'll have the opposite effect.

I don’t think that most think that MHL is a primary detractor, it’s just an easy fix to increase cycling, which increases awareness and therefore safety. Ie more bikes->more safe. All it takes is the stroke of a pen to make share bike schemes easier (don’t need to hunt for a helmet) and to increase incidental transport, that is you don’t need to ‘kit up’ to roll down to the shop at lunch, just throw a leg over.

And they aren’t wanting to let people ride “willy nilly” on the rod, there are plenty of other rules about how to ride a bicycle on the roads - not many stating we should abolish keep left, indicate etc.

As for MHL: do you put a helmet on every time you ride a bike? WHen you have finished a service and roll out the driveway to test the shifters? When you finish a long ride, stop and chat with a mate for 10min with helmet off, then hop on your bike to get to the car 100m away? In a park to go to the loo when you grab you kids bike to cut the walk?

Not being a dick, just answering your question. But yes i do

Good on you then. I suspect a majority of MHL supporters don’t throw a helmet on EVERY SINGLE TIME they hop on a bike. I know one such MHL supporter that happily cruises down the beach on his fat bike or around the caravan park sans lid, but won’t venture anywhere else without one lest he cop a fine. I.E. a lot of helmet use is purely to prevent a fine. I also know of at least one person that will not ride a bike because he refuses to wear a helmet, but happily dons a motorcycle helmet. It’s a weird world.

[Comedian]

So, I really wonder about scooter and bike share helmets with Corona Virus. I really do think being forced to wear a share helmet in this climate it's really right.

I personally just wouldn't do it. If I got hassled I'd take it on the chin.

[Mike Ayling]

Even 5km or 2.5km in my view without a helmet is no no, at least in Sydney.

So, let's cut to the chase with three questions:
1. what exactly is the helmet going to do for you?

It protects me from magpie attacks!

Mike

[fat and old]

So, I really wonder about scooter and bike share helmets with Corona Virus. I really do think being forced to wear a share helmet in this climate it's really right.

I personally just wouldn't do it. If I got hassled I'd take it on the chin.

Noticed a LOT of Jump bikes being used in the Melb CBD on Sunday, most wearing the supplied helmet. I couldn't believe it tbh.

[bychosis]

So, I really wonder about scooter and bike share helmets with Corona Virus. I really do think being forced to wear a share helmet in this climate it's really right.

I personally just wouldn't do it. If I got hassled I'd take it on the chin.

Noticed a LOT of Jump bikes being used in the Melb CBD on Sunday, most wearing the supplied helmet. I couldn't believe it tbh.

You are probably more likely to catch it by gripping the handlebars then touching your face.

[DavidS]

Even 5km or 2.5km in my view without a helmet is no no, at least in Sydney.

So, let's cut to the chase with three questions:
1. what exactly is the helmet going to do for you?

It protects me from magpie attacks!

Mike

It protects me from fines.

Not much else really.

DS

[fat and old]

I’ll kick it back up the top.....

My personal, non scientific, non peer reviewed anecdotal observations:

Cycling everywhere has gone through the roof.
The amount of helmetless riders had increased proportionately.

The only difference I see is less cars.

Could safety be the issue facing the increased uptake in cycling?

Is the MHL argument a red herring, placed by people who just don’t like being told what to do?

Ignore or discuss as you will.

[BobtheBuilder]

Here in Ireland, where I'm semi-marooned there are - like almost the entire world - no MHLs. Cycling has gone way up here, as has walking and running. But we have had much stricter lockdown measures where since mid March we weren't allowed more than 2kms from home and only for strict essentials - and we were only allowed out within that 2kms for brief exercise. This expanded a week ago to 5km and very limited interaction with other households. There have also been way fewer cars on the road, which has been lovely. Took a while for people to adjust, they still kept walking right on the very side (in Ireland it's quite common, particularly in rural and near-rural areas, not to have footpaths or even a verge between the road and walls/hedges), but now people are wandering right in the middle of the road on quiet roads and there are heaps more people, with kids, walking and cycling around. By the look of some the physiques and bikes (good condition, 20 years old) this is not a standard activity for many of those people!

So, I'd say perceived safety is an issue in cycling uptake. It's been often commented that requiring helmets sends a message that cycling is inherently dangerous, so that could be one of the reasons, apart from inconvenience, that MHLs decrease cycling rates so substantially.

[Thoglette]

Could safety be the issue facing the increased uptake in cycling?

Is the MHL argument a red herring, placed by people who just don’t like being told what to do?

No, it’s just the second thing on the list.
Feel free to use your Covid time to go back through my posts on this topic and read all the referenced surveys.

[DavidS]

So, I'd say perceived safety is an issue in cycling uptake. It's been often commented that requiring helmets sends a message that cycling is inherently dangerous, so that could be one of the reasons, apart from inconvenience, that MHLs decrease cycling rates so substantially.

So true.

Had too many arguments with people about bike helmets and their claim that you have to wear them because cycling is so dangerous. Absurd argument, not cycling is dangerous, cycling is healthy.

DS

[fat and old]

Could safety be the issue facing the increased uptake in cycling?

Is the MHL argument a red herring, placed by people who just don’t like being told what to do?

No, it’s just the second thing on the list.
Feel free to use your Covid time to go back through my posts on this topic and read all the referenced surveys.

I don’t get no Covid time. None at all

[warthog1]

So, let's cut to the chase with three questions:
1. what exactly is the helmet going to do for you?

It protects me from magpie attacks!

Mike

It protects me from fines.

Not much else really.

DS

It protected me from a potentially life changing traumatic brain injury.

It was on a fast bunch ride.
Does not follow that mandating every rider use one every time is fair or reasonable.

[Thoglette]

I don’t get no Covid time. None at all

Same here: it's been a strange, strange time.