Fabian Cancellara sparks helmet debate on Twitter, says all cyclists should wear one

Whoops, last post should read "less likely to do ti lidless" to refer to risk compensation

Check out the entrance to the bike shed at Rotterdam Central railway station at 8:00 am. Neither young nor old wears a helmet, and they all ride like hooligans, barely respecting the code. One almost gets a heart attack fearing for their life. And zero crashes with cars. Why? Probably because the car drivers themselves are also regular cyclists, and therefore utterly respectful of cyclists (with the helping hand of Draconian laws protecting cyclists). Safe cycling is a matter of numbers, infrastructure, legislation, mentality. Did I mention helmets?

By the way, from the discussion on the (lack of) shock absorption of helmets upon impact, it seems MIPS makes sense. Right or wrong?

I just love it when people quote stats in favour of not adding to safety. It's utter bollocks.

The pont is, whether any given safety device is proven effective 100% of the time, or not using said device is proven effective 0% of the time, is irrelevant. Its use shifts the odds in your favour.

That's not to say that wearing safety devices should be compulsory. But we shouldn't shed tears for those given plenty of warning/encouragement but who decide not to heed it. In a free society we should be free to make our choices. And that includes the right to forfeit one's own life when a simple safety feature MIGHT be beneficial.

But do carry on.

When I used to take my Caterham on the track I wore a full face helmet and Nomex fireproof suit - when I drove it on the road I didn't.
If I was in DK or NL on a normal bike I wouldn't wear a helmet as the level of danger is low - In Seattle I do as it isn't DK or NL and the danger level is higher....
So the level of helmet wear is a direct correlation to how unsafe the roads are... Therefore the govt should try to get to a very low usage of helmet wear, due to the roads being low risk...

What I never understood is why parents don't wear helmets when they ride with their children. The children are often seen wearing their own helmets, yet their own "role models" rarely have a helmet. How big a hypocrite can you be if you don't practice what you preach?

Personally I've been using hard-shell helmets for over 30 years and a hairnet head cover before that.

I was wiped out whilst riding a 'ten', due to my Look pedals the bike went under the car and I sailed over the bonnet landing in the side of a car waiting to join the carriageway. A&E visit by ambulance, lots of bruising, external and internal but no head trauma, I wasn't wearing a helmet. Damn it, if I had been wearing one I could have joined the happy band of cyclists declaring 'I would have died but for my helmet'.

One odd thing I've noticed is that people seem to either view helmets as holy life-saving miracles, or as UTTERLY worthless bits of foam.

Would a third option not be simply be to treat them in the same way we treat shinpads, or similar? I've never heard people evangelising about their divine life-giving properties, but they DO get used (on occasion), and people seem happy enough with the idea that the pads might protect them from the odd graze.

The only time I've ever had a real traffic collision (*ANECDOTE ALERT*) was also the only time I rode my normal route home without a helmet. I ended up hitting the floor with my head, resulting in some bleeding and bruising, which was all gone in around 2 weeks. A helmet couldn't have saved my life, because... well, I didn't die, but I might have left things a bit cleaner. The same way knee pads may have kept a few scratches off me knees.

I don't really WANT to wear safety equipment for something as innocuous as getting around town. I generally feel more secure on two wheels than I do on my own two feet (and I don't WALK around with my head covered in polystyrene); but there are environments on the bike in which I feel things are outside of my control; in which I feel I might suddenly hit the deck. It's sorting those environments out that is the issue. Helmets are a complete red herring.

However, even if they are no more effective at 'saving lives' than a couple of elbow guards, I don't think it's sensible to mock people for using them outright. There's too much moralising over frivolous elements of cycling as it is. Better to focus indignation and column inches into getting the few people who can make concrete differences (literally) into making real investments in improving cycling environments.

Until that happens, everything else is white noise.

[/mini blog over] [/sorry] [/going to bed now]

What I would like to ask,
Do you think Forumula 1/Indy Car racing drivers need a helmet?
Do you think a Motocycle rider doing 70mph on a motoway needs a helmet?
Do you think a pro bike rider on a closed road doing 70kph needs a helmet?
Do you think a club rider descending a hill on open roads at 60 kph needs a helmet?
Do you think a commuter at 30kph in heavy traffic needs a helmet?
Do you think a 14 year-old cycling to school on back roads at 15kph needs a helmet?
Do you think a child learning to ride a bike at 5 kph in the front yard needs a helmet?

There would be a range of answers from people above with no clear line(s) being able to be drawn, because there is too much conflicting information. Given that we more likely to be "informed" cyclists, what hope does the rest of cycling humanity have?
I agree with Joinpoole, above, that it would be much more sensible to take a middle ground and realise that helmets provide protection in a certain set of cases. They reduce injury when a head would have hit something but also may increase the chance of a head hitting something through extra weight or inbuing the wearer with confidence to go faster.
I happen to wear a helmet 100% of the time because I like the extra protection it would give me a in a small number of cases, just the same way I choose to wear shin pads in football, a box in cricket and a 14th century knights helmet when playing darts (okay, lied about the last one)
I wouldn't wear those things for a simple knock-about in the back yard and I (personally) wouldn't want to wear a helmet if I was cycling a couple of mile down the road on a pavement (which I can living in the country I do).
Thats what we should tell people - it will provide protection but not remove injury. It is not a sunstitute for good road infrastructure and better car drivers. It is there for you and your family to have a choice

S'pose if you are riding down mountains at 60-70 mph a helmet is a good idea maybe full leathers as well. Respect or madness the distinction can become blurred. Respect I think.

In Australia bike helmets are legislated by law to be compulsory, with a $200 on-the-spot fine for non-compliance. It is rare to see anyone riding there without one. They tend not to arguments about the pros or cons of helmet use

Yar... nothing gets my back up more than helmet evangelists...

I think there are plenty of moderate views posted here, which is where we should all be... wear a helmet, enjoy some extra protection should the highly unlikely event of you banging your head in an accident.

Don't wear a helmet and don't protect yourself for the once in a lifetime event where you not only fall off, but you fall off and bang your head... not only do you bang your head, but you bang your head hard enough that protection is needed, but indeed, not quite so hard that you go beyond the protective limitations of your helmet.

Its your choice.

More than likely, as mentioned, a helmet is going to save you from some road rash and a head ache. Thats gotta be worth wearing one for some of us... but lets not get precious about needing to take responsibility for protecting yourself against something that is so incredibly unlikely to happen.

I want to preach the argument that rather than those not wearing helmets are being irresponsible, those choosing to wear protection are being extra responsible.

Oh, quickly, how many of us have experience of crashing and hitting their heads both with and without a helmet?

I have, and I'm still very much in the camp of only using helmets for racing and solo MTB rides.

Where do these professional cyclists get off having their own opinion really!

In fifty five years of cycling - including several spells as a ''pushie'' in London - I have never worn a helmet and I have never been dislodged from my saddle by either motorist, careless pedestrian or exponent of equestrianism; even the dreaded diesel slick has failed to discombobulate. I filter shamelessly, ride fast, obey traffic signals and follow the highway code but here's the thing...I keep my eyes open and my wits about me.
I anticipate that my smugness will be rewarded with an appropriate level of pain, if not permanent injury, commensurate with the opprobrium of the be-helmeted.

I recall 20 years ago attempting to ride back home from the pub, in the dark, with no lights on through the unlit Fog Lane Park, Manchester.

I went into a massive pothole and went over my handlebars, cutting my hands and forearms (but fortunately my newly bought Levi's survived with no markings).

I was wearing a helmet, but it was completely scratch free as I had miraculously avoided hitting it on the ground. I attribute this miracle to the consumption of 5 pints of beer before setting off. Beer saved my life.

On balance the statistical evidence (at a population level) and the engineering (design parameters and standards of a bike helmet) suggest that in an accident involving enough force to be seriously life threatening a cycle helmet is of no benefit. It may be that the helmet protects from more minor injuries in lower force accidents. Most "evidence" counter to this is just wrong/flawed research/deliberate bad science. Most opinion counter to this is confirmation bias from normal humans who don't understand statistical analysis and the relevant engineering/physics and want simple solutions whether right or wrong.

Compulsion to prevent minor injury and compulsion to save lives are different things and the evidence says that life saving isn't an outcome of helmet compulsion.

I wear a helmet mostly, I want to avoid minor injury in a fall or topple. I don't expect it to make a difference when hit by a truck or hitting a lamp post at 40mph. I don't want to be unable to ride just because I forgot my helmet. I've no problem with helmet promotion - it might save a few minor injuries with little downside. Like the poster above said "consider them like shin-pads". Those who want to move from promotion to compulsion can shove off because compulsion to wear non lifesaving shin-pads is proper silly.

It's a big old debate and one that'll go round for years no doubt.
Helmets have saved a number of my mates from head injuries...myself included...so I'd endorse them.
When my kids were little (and even now) I'd not be a hypocrite and wear one as an example to them. Makes perfect sense to me!
In fact I jokingly told my neighbour off for not wearing one and she went back to her house to put it on!
It's not gonna stop a car. It's not gonna make me bulletproof but it'll stop minor accidents becoming more serious head injuries.
Use your head and wear a helmet!

Everyone needs a helmet. Where else would you put your helmet camera?

has anyone from the 'helmet saved my life' brigade considered possibly learning how to ride a bike without falling off? it's not difficult, really it isn't - start slow, maybe with an adult to steady you or stablisers on the back wheel then gradually go quicker and as you gain in confidence and you'll be riding round without falling off or crashing into things in no time at all.

Until you've learned to do something as easy as ride a bike properly and safely you rather lack the authority to lecture others on road safety don't you think?

Cycling helmets are not fit for purpose - the EU standard is only to test for a stationary fall, which isn't a realistic simulation. The industry response to this should be to improve their function, not their form. Functioning helmets would move the debate from whether they are effective to whether they are prudent.

Cancellara is entitled to his view and to express it, even if I or you don't agree with it.

And, equally, we're entitled to disagree with him and say so.

That's democracy, isn't it?

But just because you or I may disagree, it doesn't justify responding with abusive language.

Happy to wake up andò find some pretty funny comments on this post, mixing up all kind of cycling, "philosophers" and "scientists".
Commuting and road cycling have wide different security needs. Especially on commuting this is about the place and your behaviour. If you are pedaling always off the roads and walking speed then all the protection you need is a rain coat. If you share the car's domain then you better to wear a helmet.
On a road cycling talk I personally consider gloves, glasses, helmet and under helmet the minimum protection pack, so I think all this is needed, not the helmet only. Wearing it I feel and I am protect against many dangerous things, like like the stuff that vehicle tires can project against me (happen once I had no glasses, luckily ended up in a three days black eye only), or any other flying things like insects. Also protect me against trees branch, and let me feel safe while riding at 60 km/h on a descent.
So my choice is to take the minimum actions to back home to my family safe, you are free to continue to show off about materials phisics and philosophy about men freedom of choice.

In April I hit a stone wall descending at 40mph after getting into a speed wobble and slid 25 yards to a halt. Broken shoulder blade, collarbone, 6 ribs, dislocated shoulder and a broken/ground away Giro helmet. I can remember the impact and sliding down the tarmac with my helmet grinding.
I am thankful I was wearing it.

This said, I didn't wear a helmet on my first ride after the accident (almost 4 months later and still unable to ride a road bike) on my hybrid because it was a gentle pace to test things out.

I will always wear a helmet on a road bike where I am riding at speed but will continue to ride in a cap on my hybrid when going to the shops or similar.

Well, lots of fors & againsts posted. Personally, I find helmets hot in summer, heavy, put pressure on the neck, not as warm as a beanie on a cold winter morning (ok, I'm not in Antarctica but even Central London in dead of winter can be cold on the bonce when you have no hair on your head...), extra item to take/wear/think about etc. etc. Also remembering the years cycling in my youth when helmets were unknown (I think).

So far I've never had a real problem riding around London since getting a bike again in the 80s, either just out for a ride or as a bike courier, & never wearing a helmet. Unfortunately now, for me, this debate is affecting me going out on the bike - I don't want to ride a bike wearing a helmet but there's so much pressure from the must-wear-a-helmet-or-you'll-die-today brigade, from the law (daft judge's rulings) & from drivers (using lack of a helmet as an excuse for their bad driving) that I find myself thinking 'sod it, I'll just jump on a bus'...

No point in arguing about it, For the everyday cyclist as long as it is personal choice whether you wear a helmet or not that's all that matters.