Why are UK cyclists fixated on helmets

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Big Nick

Senior Member
The OP's question was about the specificities of UK attitudes to helmet wearing. Possible factors have already been mentioned, some of which have been recurrent, and, as far as I can see, anybody who has experience of cycling in the UK (and preferably in other countries too) has a valid opinion to give. Valid because it's a social question that relates to a number of factors acting at the same time, not because it's the kind of valid (or true) conclusion that comes out of pure logical syllogisms.
Errrrr.........ok
 

Big Nick

Senior Member
I have not read all of this thread but here are my thoughts. Helmets are a personal choice but I choose to wear one on cycle journeys longer than a trip into town. I hate to think about an off on the open road but it might give me edge. In an urban area a helmet may actually do more good, lots of hard kerbs etc to bang your head on. Again its a personal choice and should stay that way.
Apparently you're not allowed to give that sort of response!!
 

Shut Up Legs

Down Under Member
I think helmets are a good way of avoiding the real topic of cycle safety, so that we focus on the fact a cyclist was or wasn't wearing one rather than looking at whether we give cyclists respect on the road and look out for them.
That's exactly what's occuring here in Australia.
 

Shut Up Legs

Down Under Member
My son, my cycling buddy and I have all had a bang on the head while wearing helmets. In each case the helmet broke and the texture of the road was imprinted in the outer shell. That all three of us survived (son was unconscious for a couple of minutes) is enough to convince me that a helmet can swing the outcome of an accident in favour of surviving.

The OP is being disingenuous; surely he knows that on the continent far more people commute on slow sedate town bikes in separate cycle lanes, whereas in the UK we are forced to share the roads with incompetent drivers, meaning fewer cyclist and a higher accident rate?
I have to agree with that. I suspect that if Australia ever repealed its mandatory helmet law (in some bizarre alternate universe), I'd continue wearing my helmet, because I have absolutely NO trust of Australian motorists.
 

Shut Up Legs

Down Under Member
My take on it is that its the Health and Safety culture of the UK that is moving towards that if you see a hazard then you must do something to reduce that hazard, whether or not there is actual evidence that it does. Where I work has the same attitude, they do risk assement but do actually not understanding what risk actually is. Risk takes into account the hazard and the likelyhood of it happening and the severity of injury, however the UK in general and my place of work especially seems to confuse risk with hazard only and so if there is a hazard then you must reduce it no matter how likely or effective your chosen method is. So I have to wear a plethora of PPE for hazards which have a very minor chance of occurence and if did occur would only result in minor injury, where in fact if risk assement was correctly undertaken, you would not have to wear the PPE as the probability of the hazard occuring and injury occuring is so low to not make it worth the effort.
Exactly. If this risk assessment was properly performed in Australia, it would be the motorists and pedestrians who would need helmets more than the cyclists.
 

Shut Up Legs

Down Under Member
There is a very, as in VERY, determined helmet lobby in the UK.

I've posted this before but it's worth a re-post.

I was working in my shed when I pulled a pair of pedals from a hook under the shelf. They were tied together and the second one snagged and then sprung free, catching me above the eyebrow. It beld profusely and within seconds I was blinded by blood running into both eyes.
I felt my way into the house and found the phoned my wife, who was out shopping, and she came home and ran me to the hospital.
The A&E nurse treated me, super-gluing the gash above my eyes and washing off the blood, then
filled in an accident form.

Q. How did it happen?
A. I hit my head with a cycle pedal.

Q. Were you wearing a helmet?
A. No! I was in my shed and pulled it onto my head!

Nurse fills in form with 'Cycling accident-No helmet.'
Me. Hang on it wasn't a cycling accident, the pedal wasn't on a bike, I was in my shed and why the **** should I wear a cycling helmet in the shed?

The row escalates and the A&E Sister turns up in the cubicle.

Sister. What's the problem?
Nurse. He hit his head with a bike pedal.
Sister, That's a cycling accident, was he wearing a helmet?
Me. I was in my shed why should I wear a helmet???
etc. etc. etc.

End result? They put it down as a head injury due to cycling and I was not wearing a helmet!

Does anyone think that if I'd pulled a carburettor onto my head it would have been a motoring accident, with no seatbelt? Or pulling an aircraft radar unit onto my head it would have been an air accident?

Theory.
The statistics are being fiddled and the helmet lobby are part of it.
Conclusion.
That's something that my experience reinforces and the net result has been that I no longer wear a helmet. What's more, I'm quite prepared to ignore any future law mandating helmets. If they want to cheat the statistics, I'm up for challenging the law.
:laugh: I love it! It's like something out of Douglas Adam's "The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy".
 

buggi

Bird Saviour
Location
Solihull
A cap does the job nicely. Sometimes I take one off and my hair looks way better than before the ride!
hmmm i have quite big ears. They are not that big really for every day life, i don't trip over them or anything but too big to suit a cap!
 
Top Bottom