Radio 4 Join the Bike Helmet Debate

[Old Timer]

I look at it this way(this is my opinion for myself only) Is it dangerous to wear a helmet? OK there might be a few cases where a strap might catch on something and add to injury but in general I can`t see that wearing a helmet would add any danger to my riding.

Now if that is the case( and I don`t know to be honest) then wearing a helmet should save at least some injury! and certainly won`t make me more prone to injury?

Correct me if I`m wrong of course.

 

[allen-uk]

Is it dangerous to wear a helmet?

For some people, possibly. There is a valid argument that helmets, like other safety measures, can cause the user to be a little less careful, on the basis that 'my seat-belt/air-bag/helmet will protect me'.

There is also some (as yet anecdotal) evidence (listen to the BBC clip referred to in the first posting here) that car drivers treat helmeted cyclists differently from non-helmeted, for similar reasons.

Live long, either way.


A.

 

[onmebike]

OK there might be a few cases where a strap might catch on something and add to injury but in general I can`t see that wearing a helmet would add any danger to my riding.
.

There does appear to be some evidence that helmet's increase risk as touched on in the report below.

Risk compensation
Rodgers re-analysed data which supposedly showed helmets to be effective; he found data errors and methodological weaknesses so serious that in fact the data showed "bicycle-related fatalities are positively and significantly associated with increased helmet use".[67] A range of theories have been proposed to explain why helmet use might indirectly translate into more or worse accidents. In short, the analysis of helmet effectiveness is confounded by changes in human behaviour apparently induced by the presence of protective headgear.

Under the risk compensation theory, helmeted cyclists may be expected to ride less carefully; this is supported by evidence for other road safety interventions such as seat belts and anti-lock braking systems.[68][69] There is some evidence for risk compensation by children in relation to safety equipment.[70] Anecdotally, many riders report feeling safer with a helmet: "When I wear it, I feel safe..."[54] One researcher randomized his helmet use over a year of commuting to work and found that he rode slightly faster with a helmet.[71]

Motorists may also alter their behavior toward helmeted cyclists. One small study from England found that vehicles passed a helmeted cyclist with measurably less clearance (8.5 cm) than that given to the same cyclist unhelmeted (out of an average total passing distance of 1.2 to 1.3 metres).[72]

Rotational injury
It has been suggested that the major causes of permanent intellectual disablement and death after head injury may be torsional forces leading to diffuse axonal injury (DAI), a form of injury which usual helmets cannot mitigate and may make worse.[73] Helmets may increase the torsional forces by increasing the distance from the centre of the spine to the outside of the helmet, compared to the distance to the scalp without a helmet: "Bicycle helmet crash simulation experiments carried out as part of this project indicated very high rotational accelerations for a fall over the handlebars at 45 km/h. The rotational accelerations were found to be 30 percent higher than those found in similar tests using a full face polymer motorcycle helmet."[74] A 1991 study by Hodgson, in which bicycle helmets were tested for ease of skidding, found that adding facial protection to a standard bicycle helmet (in effect making the helmet full-face) brought the benefit of reduced twisting forces on the brain.[75]

Accidental hanging by helmet straps
There are occasional cases of young children playing (on or near bunk beds, trees, clothes lines, play equipment etc.) suffering death or severe brain damage as a result of hanging by the straps of their bicycle helmets.[79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87] To avoid rare serious accidents, a bicycle helmet should not be worn by children when climbing or using play equipment such as trampolines while unsupervised

 

[flecc]

I look at it this way(this is my opinion for myself only) Is it dangerous to wear a helmet? OK there might be a few cases where a strap might catch on something and add to injury but in general I can`t see that wearing a helmet would add any danger to my riding.

Now if that is the case( and I don`t know to be honest) then wearing a helmet should save at least some injury! and certainly won`t make me more prone to injury?

Correct me if I`m wrong of course.

No correction Dave, that's absolutely right, helmets will prevent some injuries.

My stance is just that the chance of injury is so slight for the most sensible cyclists that the risk is negligible. Those who seem to like falling off their bikes regularly should wear them of course. Personally I've stayed in the saddle all my long life so am happy never to wear one.
.

 

[allen-uk]

The programme carried on with the cycling safety theme this week.

This clip is only 6 minutes, and is worth listening to, although not conclusive one way or the other:

more or less Sound Bite

Allen.

 

[Straylight]

Interesting stuff, particularly the bit about cyclists feeling safer, so possibly being more careless. I think that there's no substitute for experience, and that cycling is often treated as something that requires little thought or practise. I've had many crashes in my life, and can only say that one of those had nothing to do with any action or inaction on my part, that was when I was literally rammed from behind by a Volvo. All the rest were not so black and white, and though they may not have been wholly or even mostly my fault, there's always the thought that perhaps a little extra vigilance on my part, could have made a difference.

I know for a fact that I'm a better cyclist now than I was 10 years ago, but also that I still make mistakes, and so continually caution myself against overconfidence. To me, it's a case of knowing where the limits are, then riding comfortably within those.

I suppose my point is that being so vulnerable and exposed, along with all the near misses, has made me a better rider.

 

[Patrick]

I look at it this way(this is my opinion for myself only) Is it dangerous to wear a helmet? OK there might be a few cases where a strap might catch on something and add to injury but in general I can`t see that wearing a helmet would add any danger to my riding.

Now if that is the case( and I don`t know to be honest) then wearing a helmet should save at least some injury! and certainly won`t make me more prone to injury?

Correct me if I`m wrong of course.

That's exactly why I always wear a life-jacket when I'm cycling, it doesn't make my riding any more dangerous, and if I'm ever caught in a flash flood or accidentally ride into a river it could save my self. Then there's my anti-rhino charm, I know there's a minuscule risk of it getting caught and throttling me, but I've never heard of anyone surviving a rhino attack whilst cycling so better safe than sorry.

A bit less facetiously, your argument isn't wrong but it does implicitly assume that there is a significant risk of the type of accident for which there is a significant chance that your helmet will protect you, which is questionable.

Patrick

 

[flecc]

Interesting stuff, particularly the bit about cyclists feeling safer, so possibly being more careless.

Following the introduction of compulsory seatbelt wearing, the government's Roads Researh Laboratory published evidence of a marked and permanent car drivers speed increase. Their conclusion was that the seatbelt made drivers feel safer, leading to subconcious speed increases.

I think similar is likely to be true of any safety additions in any field.
.

 

[onmebike]

Following the introduction of compulsory seatbelt wearing, the government's Roads Researh Laboratory published evidence of a marked and permanent car drivers speed increase. Their conclusion was that the seatbelt made drivers feel safer, leading to subconcious speed increases.

I think similar is likely to be true of any safety additions in any field.
.

It's also peculiar that the safety conscious cyclist's whom wear protective helmet/clothing etc aren't necessarily safety conscious with regard to road safety or speed. By this I mean, protecting oneself by wearing a helmet is perfectly understandable if also practicing safe cycling within the law on perfectly legal ebike's.
Wearing a helmet to protect oneself, then riding an illegal ebike at 25mph+ does seem a bit counter productive as the increased speed probably increases the risk along with the severity of injury should there be an accident.

 

[Old Timer]

It's also peculiar that the safety conscious cyclist's whom wear protective helmet/clothing etc aren't necessarily safety conscious with regard to road safety or speed. By this I mean, protecting oneself by wearing a helmet is perfectly understandable if also practicing safe cycling within the law on perfectly legal ebike's.
Wearing a helmet to protect oneself, then riding an illegal ebike at 25mph+ does seem a bit counter productive as the increased speed probably increases the risk along with the severity of injury should there be an accident.

That would actually be true if ilegal bikes were actually ridden for speed rather than the extra power that one might need with lets say! a missing limb, a breathing problem or God forbid a heart attack

 

[onmebike]

That would actually be true if ilegal bikes were actually ridden for speed rather than the extra power that one might need with lets say! a missing limb, a breathing problem or God forbid a heart attack

I wasn't aware it was only people with health problem's riding illegal ebike's in which case I stand corrected.
I can see the benefit of a higher torque where as you mention, a missing limb, condition's causing irreversible weakness or breathing difficulties are concerned as these condition's won't improve with exercise.
Cardiac rehabilitation on the other hand relies on exercise. Normal cycling being among the recommended methods.
The increased assistance offered by a more powerful ebike surely has a negative effect on the benefits of cycling as an exercise.
Regarding safety while cycling, increased power must increase risk, otherwise setting a limit in law would be pointless.

 

[flecc]

I've always maintained that a legal limit of power is indeed pointless.

The power required is a matter for the designer, not legislators whose business is more properly that of speed regulation.

Designers know how much power is needed, and in conjunction with marketing departments can design for those who wish to keep fit and for those like the disabled who need high assistance.
.

 

[allen-uk]

these conditions won't improve with exercise.

True enough, onmebike. If my leg starts to grow back, I'll let you know...

But exercise in general is a Good Thing, for amputees as for anyone else, and viz a viz electric bikes (powerful and less so) it's all about approach - use it like a moped and you probably won't improve your fitness.

Which is why I started that thread about it being so hard to PEDAL my Wisper! I want exercise, I enjoy mobility, but a powerless bike is just too difficult; I want(ed) the electric bike as a compromise, and it works. I keep the power as low as I can (so rarely on High, usually on Medium), and I keep the gearing as high as possible, too, giving me (in my old grandfather's words) "something to push against".

(Mind, Old Grandfather was writing in his diary in about 1890 when he was cycling round northern India on a bike he described as having 'neither gears nor brakes', so what he'd have thought about our Wispers and Kalkhoffs, I don't know.)

Allen.

 

[onmebike]

I've always maintained that a legal limit of power is indeed pointless.

The power required is a matter for the designer, not legislators whose business is more properly that of speed regulation.

Designers know how much power is needed, and in conjunction with marketing departments can design for those who wish to keep fit and for those like the disabled who need high assistance.
.

I agree, legislators concern should be primarily speed but isn't that where we are at the moment? A power level that is more than capable of achieving the 15mph limit with a little in reserve should the restriction be removed.
Increase current power regulations and you increase the potential speed of the unrestricted ebike. You'll then be moving towards the realms of the moped with regard to speed and it will become harder to make a case for ebike's not needing licence's, driving test's, road tax and insurance.

 

[onmebike]

True enough, onmebike. If my leg starts to grow back, I'll let you know...

But exercise in general is a Good Thing, for amputees as for anyone else, and viz a viz electric bikes (powerful and less so) it's all about approach - use it like a moped and you probably won't improve your fitness.

Which is why I started that thread about it being so hard to PEDAL my Wisper! I want exercise, I enjoy mobility, but a powerless bike is just too difficult; I want(ed) the electric bike as a compromise, and it works. I keep the power as low as I can (so rarely on High, usually on Medium), and I keep the gearing as high as possible, too, giving me (in my old grandfather's words) "something to push against".

(Mind, Old Grandfather was writing in his diary in about 1890 when he was cycling round northern India on a bike he described as having 'neither gears nor brakes', so what he'd have thought about our Wispers and Kalkhoffs, I don't know.)

Allen.

I appreciate everything you say and can understand your comments about the wisper being difficult to pedal without power. I'm not sure an illegal bike would be any easier without power either.
Do you neccessarily need an illegal bike to achieve what you want from cycling? I ask because your comments appear to make a very good case against the need for more power. I admire your ability to overcome difficulty and find it amazing that those like yourself with much to complain about rarely do so.
My comments were regarding the general safety issue's and more powerful ebikes, I didn't consider individual needs?

 

[HittheroadJ]

I think the need for more power largely originates in hills & wind.

In a flat country with no wind the power would be sufficient, even with a load.
Most ebike-systems give less power as you approach the speed limit on the grounds that we should not be going faster.

Why is there a need for a low power-restriction if most practical benefit is actually enjoyed when we are facing a hill or a strong wind.

Maybe the law-givers should have allowed us to go close to the speed-limits uphill and then started calculating how much power we'd need.

I am aware that there might be concerns about the public using that power to go way over the speed-limits on the flat, but they can easily do that anyway.

Cars do not get fined for having the potential to go over the speed limit, but only for actually exceeding it.

Aside from that the speed limit of 15Mph is a wee bit too low. 17 or 18 Would be more realistic. Over those speeds eBikes should be more easily / affordibly allowed as a special kind of mopeds.

Just my 2c.

 

[allen-uk]

Do you necessarily need an illegal bike to achieve what you want from cycling? I ask because your comments appear to make a very good case against the need for more power.

My comments were regarding the general safety issues and more powerful ebikes, I didn't consider individual needs

No, misunderstanding. I have no great desire for the illegal type of bike - 15-17 mph-ish is fine for me. But as flecc says, Power, now there's a different thing. I don't want to scoot about at 25mph, or anything like it, but I would certainly appreciate a battery/motor set-up that would more easily take me up those vertical hills.

Or maybe not (just talked myself out of it!) The best exercise I get is having to pedal my nuts off going up those vertical hills, just maintaining about 3 mph to stop myself falling off.

So no, I vote against higher speeds, but I vote FOR increased power. I suppose you can't have the latter without allowing some herbert to modify their bike and get the former.

Allen.

 

[Old Timer]

I think the need for more power largely originates in hills & wind.

In a flat country with no wind the power would be sufficient, even with a load.
Most ebike-systems give less power as you approach the speed limit on the grounds that we should not be going faster.

Why is there a need for a low power-restriction if most practical benefit is actually enjoyed when we are facing a hill or a strong wind.

Maybe the law-givers should have allowed us to go close to the speed-limits uphill and then started calculating how much power we'd need.

I am aware that there might be concerns about the public using that power to go way over the speed-limits on the flat, but they can easily do that anyway.

Cars do not get fined for having the potential to go over the speed limit, but only for actually exceeding it.

Aside from that the speed limit of 15Mph is a wee bit too low. 17 or 18 Would be more realistic. Over those speeds eBikes should be more easily / affordibly allowed as a special kind of mopeds.

Just my 2c.

Being someone that is getting on a bit with dodgy knees and a recent heart attack I agree. Something that goes just slightly above 15mph I don`t see as a problem (lets say 18mph) but what I need at times is assistance up hills or against a strong wind (more so after lets say a 20mile ride) when my knees are starting to play up.
For instance I stuck a second hub on a bike after my heart attack so that I could use the bike early on after the illness but was worried about getting up hills or against strong winds that we get up here. I only used it when my health at that time and my knees complained when those above conditions arose and can`t see a problem with it.

I`ll agree that like most things in life, you get a new bike or add more power and you will probably try it out flat out but then just settle back into using it when you need help, not speed.

 

[flecc]

Increase current power regulations and you increase the potential speed of the unrestricted ebike.

Not necessarily so. Many hub motor bikes only run to their voltage speed and have no restriction, I have had two like this, and very few have a derestriction function anyway.

Whether they can be derestricted to be illegal is a red herring anyway, since most 250 watt e-bikes can have a higher voltage battery and controller fitted to get a pro-rata speed increase. Also the chain drive 250 watt ones can have their speed increased by a simple sprocket change.

Higher powers would therefore make no difference to this situation, but they would improve steep hill climbing which is still rather pathetic on most e-bikes and also better empower the disabled.
.

 

[onmebike]

Not necessarily so. Many hub motor bikes only run to their voltage speed and have no restriction, I have had two like this, and very few have a derestriction function anyway.

Whether they can be derestricted to be illegal is a red herring anyway, since most 250 watt e-bikes can have a higher voltage battery and controller fitted to get a pro-rata speed increase. Also the chain drive 250 watt ones can have their speed increased by a simple sprocket change.

Higher powers would therefore make no difference to this situation, but they would improve steep hill climbing which is still rather pathetic on most e-bikes and also better empower the disabled.
.

Can the hill climbing ability not be improved without the need of increased power?