deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
It's that ''new start'' for cycling, IMO. Continuity almost zero. Helmets appear on the market just in time for the UK rebirth. It's part and parcel of cycling's rebirth.
Why are UK cyclists fixated on helmets
- Thread starter steveindenmark
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
mickle
innit
- Location
- 53.933606, -1.076131
Please scoosh, seriously, calm the feck down.
MontyVeda
a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
- Location
- Lancaster... the little city.
I guess there's a lot of over protective parenting going on these days too. When i was lad I used to go all over the place from about the age of seven... either with friends the same sort of age or alone, either on foot or on my Tomahawk. At a guess, my folks seemed to think anywhere within a half mile radius was OK, so long as we took care crossing that busy road.
These days some parents seem to think seven is far too young for their kids to be going off on their own, and if their kids do go out alone, they're restricted to the close proximity of their home.. any further seems to require adult supervision. So maybe over protective parenting and a concept of 'the world is too dangerous' is another factor in the fixation with protective head wear when the kids want to play on their bikes.
These days some parents seem to think seven is far too young for their kids to be going off on their own, and if their kids do go out alone, they're restricted to the close proximity of their home.. any further seems to require adult supervision. So maybe over protective parenting and a concept of 'the world is too dangerous' is another factor in the fixation with protective head wear when the kids want to play on their bikes.
- Location
- Glasgow
I think here in the UK the general non cycling public has an impression that helmets while cycling are required by law, like on a motorbike.
The other day I had forgotten my helmet in the staff room. On getting to the bike park I mentioned this to a colleague, telling her I could not be bothered going back, would just ride home without.
She told me "you better go back and get it, in case the police stops you". She does not cycle.
I find there is a perception from the non cycling public (not necessarily car drivers) that cycling in build up areas should be regulated like motor vehicle driving is. They look at helmets like at seat belts in cars, a safety feature required by law.
The other day I had forgotten my helmet in the staff room. On getting to the bike park I mentioned this to a colleague, telling her I could not be bothered going back, would just ride home without.
She told me "you better go back and get it, in case the police stops you". She does not cycle.
I find there is a perception from the non cycling public (not necessarily car drivers) that cycling in build up areas should be regulated like motor vehicle driving is. They look at helmets like at seat belts in cars, a safety feature required by law.
MontyVeda
a short-tempered ill-controlled small-minded troll
- Location
- Lancaster... the little city.
i think Scoosh has a point... every other helmet discussion ends up going down the same route within a couple of pages... this one however is mostly staying away from the usual arguments... which is a nice change.
Convo I had not even an hour ago on FB with an old (non cycling) friend
what about the helmet ? do u hv to hv a special one too
i don't wear a helmet
isn't that illegal?
no lol
oh i thought it was lol but isn't it dangerous?
- Location
- Glasgow
When I got my first new bike 
from the now retired LBS a couple of years ago, I went to pick it up helmetless. Now, the route home (just over a mile) I was planning to take was through the local park, then a bit of pavement - I was not a confident cyclist then, so I thought a helmet would be an overkill for the trip.
LBS owner, an enthusiastic racer in his 60's, told me I needed a helmet.
He said in his days no club racer did wear a helmet, neither did he, but nowadays the levels of traffic had increased so much that cycling became more hazardous.
When his shop was open, I used to take a detour away from it on a sunny day in case he rumbled me
When I cycle in an environment I consider low risk, if the day is hot the helmet dangles from the handlebars
So, yes, risk perception from the cyclist and from people the cyclist considers experts is a factor in the helmet fixation here.
from the now retired LBS a couple of years ago, I went to pick it up helmetless. Now, the route home (just over a mile) I was planning to take was through the local park, then a bit of pavement - I was not a confident cyclist then, so I thought a helmet would be an overkill for the trip.LBS owner, an enthusiastic racer in his 60's, told me I needed a helmet.
He said in his days no club racer did wear a helmet, neither did he, but nowadays the levels of traffic had increased so much that cycling became more hazardous.
When his shop was open, I used to take a detour away from it on a sunny day in case he rumbled me
When I cycle in an environment I consider low risk, if the day is hot the helmet dangles from the handlebars
So, yes, risk perception from the cyclist and from people the cyclist considers experts is a factor in the helmet fixation here.
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
Maybe that was a Glasgow thing, but in my locality the only people who wore helmets in the 60s were club racers. They wore a type of helmet resembling a bunch of leather bananas, no expanded foam and few plastics in these days
.
- Location
- Glasgow
I wrote the guy is in his 60's, not he was a racer in the 60'sMaybe that was a Glasgow thing, but in my locality the only people who wore helmets in the 60s were club racers. They wore a type of helmet resembling a bunch of leather bananas, no expanded foam and few plastics in these days
Mind, if he is 60+ today, he might have been a very young racer then
Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
To be honest, I think this does belong in the helmet sub-forum. Moving it there is a far better solution that closing it - after all, there still is some very useful and interesting debate. Closing the thread would stop all that, please don't!
Nigel-YZ1
Guru
- Location
- Somewhere else... maybe soon.
Perhaps the need for helmet compulsion in some is more about having something to feel in control of relating to cyclists.
We can't be told where we can and cannot go , except by law and highway code (if they're ever enforced). So rattling on about plastic hats is the control mechanism.
Look at the reaction to us by many on the roads. Impatience, anger, frustration. We're a random element in a world of people who need control of that road in front of them. Insisting we wear helmets is a good means of putting us in our place - "Look we made them do that! We feel better now".
We can't be told where we can and cannot go , except by law and highway code (if they're ever enforced). So rattling on about plastic hats is the control mechanism.
Look at the reaction to us by many on the roads. Impatience, anger, frustration. We're a random element in a world of people who need control of that road in front of them. Insisting we wear helmets is a good means of putting us in our place - "Look we made them do that! We feel better now".
Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
I suspect that this pressure over helmet wearing comes from a number of different sources.
We've had quite a few people say that they feel safer wearing a helmet due to the fear over high traffic densities. More have said that they wear one to allay the fears of their loved ones about cycling on busy roads. This is not something that can be condemned in any way: if a helmet means that someone gets on a bike rather than in a car, that's unreservedly a good thing. Of course, that cycling is not at all dangerous is a topic that has been done to death many times before and will doubtless come up again. But the fact remains that, rightly or wrongly, cycling is seen as a risky occupation.
It therefore seems logical to reduce that perceived risk by wearing a helmet. It seems like common sense, doesn't it? It's a logical step that's reinforced by the unceasing campaigning by Headway, the BMA and others over helmet use. They're doctors, so surely they must know... But this is highly one sided: the actual science is very much more ambivalent over the benefits of helmets in cycling: this is a message that simply does not get through. When bold statements from authority figures supporting helmet use go unchallenged, it is no wonder that the idea that helmet = safe is so widespread. There simply is no debate whatsoever in public circles over whether helmets are beneficial, specialist interest sites like this excepted. (And @Eddy if you read @User's link, you'll find that it refers to actual research papers. They are an objective report of the science done, they have to be otherwise they are unlikely to be published - and any biases in the methodology or interpretations are deeply damaging to the authors. Most scientists are extremely keen to avoid such controversy, if they wish to keep their positions).
There is also the fact that, unlike Europe, few UK cyclists are utility cyclists. It is not regarded as a means of transport, but as a sport instead. Indeed, most club cyclists will be found to be clad in the full helmet and lycra regalia. Until recently, there have been very few utility cyclists so this image of the helmet and lycra clad sportsman has been the only available one to new cyclists. I find it interesting to find that sports cyclists on the continent follow the same pattern. Since the perception of cycling is derived from sport, it is little wonder that most new cyclists don a helmet - and little wonder over the expectation that cyclists must wear helmets in society in general.
Anyway, enough of my babbling...
We've had quite a few people say that they feel safer wearing a helmet due to the fear over high traffic densities. More have said that they wear one to allay the fears of their loved ones about cycling on busy roads. This is not something that can be condemned in any way: if a helmet means that someone gets on a bike rather than in a car, that's unreservedly a good thing. Of course, that cycling is not at all dangerous is a topic that has been done to death many times before and will doubtless come up again. But the fact remains that, rightly or wrongly, cycling is seen as a risky occupation.
It therefore seems logical to reduce that perceived risk by wearing a helmet. It seems like common sense, doesn't it? It's a logical step that's reinforced by the unceasing campaigning by Headway, the BMA and others over helmet use. They're doctors, so surely they must know... But this is highly one sided: the actual science is very much more ambivalent over the benefits of helmets in cycling: this is a message that simply does not get through. When bold statements from authority figures supporting helmet use go unchallenged, it is no wonder that the idea that helmet = safe is so widespread. There simply is no debate whatsoever in public circles over whether helmets are beneficial, specialist interest sites like this excepted. (And @Eddy if you read @User's link, you'll find that it refers to actual research papers. They are an objective report of the science done, they have to be otherwise they are unlikely to be published - and any biases in the methodology or interpretations are deeply damaging to the authors. Most scientists are extremely keen to avoid such controversy, if they wish to keep their positions).
There is also the fact that, unlike Europe, few UK cyclists are utility cyclists. It is not regarded as a means of transport, but as a sport instead. Indeed, most club cyclists will be found to be clad in the full helmet and lycra regalia. Until recently, there have been very few utility cyclists so this image of the helmet and lycra clad sportsman has been the only available one to new cyclists. I find it interesting to find that sports cyclists on the continent follow the same pattern. Since the perception of cycling is derived from sport, it is little wonder that most new cyclists don a helmet - and little wonder over the expectation that cyclists must wear helmets in society in general.
Anyway, enough of my babbling...
classic33
Leg End Member
Speaking as someone who was hit by a car driven bt a drunk driver and wearing a helmet at the time, why did I deserve to be hit?
Going back to the thread, two things have become engrained over the years, each feeding the other.
If your serious about cycling, you aquire all the gear. Part of this gear is the helmet.
Helmet required, there must be some danger involved. Danger involved means something needs to be done to make it seem safer.
One feeds the other.
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
And there's now a second rebirth, particularly in London after Boris bikes, whereby a bike is just a cheap means of getting from A to B. That means ordinary clothes and no special equipment.
Anecdote alert - earlier in the thread I anecdoted 1 in 8 on an early commute through Hyde Park. Yesterday I walked, slightly later, from Barbican north-eastwards. This time I'd put the number of bare-headed riders at about 1 in 6 - again, mostly in ordinary clothes.
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
Another anecdote - the reason I was walking from Barbican was to do some training for some newly-qualified professionals working in risk. Asked what the riskiest thing I'd ever done was I pointed out that it wasn't cycling. One of the other trainers launched into an anecdote about someone who'd come on a previous edition of the course with a broken arm and a black eye because he'd gone out on his wife's bike without a helmet, and come off.
I pointed out that the helmet wouldn't have mitigated the broken arm or black eye, and in any case helmets were unproven, and invited anyone who wanted to to discuss it later. Oddly, none of them did, but I did get the compliment from the other lecturer that I was clearly applying risk assessment to real life.
I pointed out that the helmet wouldn't have mitigated the broken arm or black eye, and in any case helmets were unproven, and invited anyone who wanted to to discuss it later. Oddly, none of them did, but I did get the compliment from the other lecturer that I was clearly applying risk assessment to real life.
