The great bike helmet debate is back!

On Feb 21 2023, Dan Walker, a British media personality, was hit by a car. He fell, blanked out for 20 minutes, and woke up to paramedics next to him. He narrowly missed going under the wheels of the car that hit him. He thanked his helmet for having saved his life.

Firstly, I'm glad Mr. Walker is doing ok. Best of luck to him in his recovery. Secondly, I hate how his helmet became the central story.

The Problem with Helmets

There are two main issues with helmets for people riding bikes.

1. Helmets on cyclists' heads can reduce the perception of risk in drivers, and they tend to pass by closer to such cyclists(see this Forbes review of an academic study). This increases the actual risk to people riding bikes, as the main risk to cyclists is not the ground, but rather, an interaction with a car that then leads them to the ground. Typically painfully.

2. Focus on helmets when a cyclist (typically gets hit by a car then) gets hurt typically makes it extra easy for people to ignore the real elephant in the room - our car-focused infrastructure. Our infrastructure is the real villain here. It enables accidents and that too at speed. More details from Bike Durham here. In effect, it's easy to blame the victims (people riding bikes) than improve our infrastructure based upon maximum convenience for those in multi-ton vehicles that grow larger, heavier, and more dangerous every year.

I also have a problem with helmets when they are mandated by law. This exacerbates both Issues 1 and 2. Further, such a law disincentivises cycling. For example, when people forget to bring a helmet, or when people realize lugging a helmet around is annoying, or when people's helmets get stolen, people will get annoyed with cycling and stop doing it. Or at least reduce it. Which would be terrible for our aims to build healthier communities and to reduce carbon emissions (and updated for EV's) and to reduce tire particle emissions.

A focus on bike helmets, while not as onerous as a law mandating them, still disincentivises cycling. Sadly, I don't expect this to change. It's a lot easier for politicians to blame a dead or injured cyclist on their lack of a helmet (or not wearing it properly, or not replacing it in time, or not wearing a good enough one) rather than fix our infrastructure. And on we go, not fixing the larger issues we should really be focusing on.

Notes

I don't have a problem with helmets, in fact I think they are quite useful, I'd never go trail biking or mountain biking without one! However. However, indeed.

I find the focus on bike helmets weird. We don't ask runners to wear helmets, or drunk people to wear helmets, although they are also at risk of slipping/falling/hitting their head. Cyclists go faster than either but most people, especially children, women, or the elderly, cycle slower than a moderately fit runner.

For more information, I also highly recommend fully reading the Bike Durham article linked above and here again and also the sources they link for further reading.

I wish all a safe, healthy, happy, and fun commute!