Helmets for cricketers, footballers, motorists, not cyclists

For all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmet usage will be moved here.
tim-b
Posts: 2091
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 8:20am

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by tim-b »

Hi
The passing of the law led to a very large step change in helmet wearing, from less than a third to nearly 100%. The improvement in cycling casualties figures should therefore be very easily detected.

You've quoted the "nearly 100%" figure before, please show me the data because I can't see it. Sample states below:
Victoria Police data, "Of cyclist injuries recorded between 2010 and 2013: 78 per cent were recorded as wearing a helmet; 5 per cent not wearing a helmet and 17 per cent were unknown." https://www.tac.vic.gov.au/about-the-tac/media-room/news-and-events/2015-media-releases/25-years-of-mandatory-bike-helmets-in-victoria
New South Wales, "Adult helmet use rose from 28% to 77% at the time that the adult law came into force, and then to 85% upon enactment of the child law. Child helmet use remained at 31% until enactment of the child law when it increased to 77%."
"According to a statement made in the New South Wales Parliament in 2005, helmet use was then much lower than when the helmet law was enacted (Hansard NSW, 2005). The Roads and Traffic Authority had continued to monitor helmet use but the data had not been released because compliance had fallen." https://www.cyclehelmets.org/1109.html
Queensland, "For the first 18 months, the helmet law was not enforced. Helmet wearing increased initially, but 17 months later was only a little higher than pre-law (King and Fraine, 1993):
Cyclists wearing helmets:
Primary schoolchildren 72%
Secondary schoolchildren 21%
Commuter cyclists 37%
Recreational cyclists 22%"
https://www.cyclehelmets.org/1104.html#154

Regards
tim-b
~~~~¯\(ツ)/¯~~~~
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by pjclinch »

tim-b wrote:Hi
The passing of the law led to a very large step change in helmet wearing, from less than a third to nearly 100%. The improvement in cycling casualties figures should therefore be very easily detected.

You've quoted the "nearly 100%" figure before, please show me the data because I can't see it. Sample states below:
Victoria Police data, "Of cyclist injuries recorded between 2010 and 2013: 78 per cent were recorded as wearing a helmet; 5 per cent not wearing a helmet and 17 per cent were unknown." https://www.tac.vic.gov.au/about-the-tac/media-room/news-and-events/2015-media-releases/25-years-of-mandatory-bike-helmets-in-victoria


So a jump to "merely" ~80%...

I've had it in my head for years that the jump was up to about 80% rather than ~ 100%. The main point is that there was an outsized jump in wearing rates that didn't seem to create much in the way of difference to serious accident rates. The data available are not the cleanest, so not conclusive, but the point here is if you want to warrant a major public health intervention then you really ought to back it up with smoking-gun evidence, or at least smoking-gun evidence that there are no tangible downsides, and that is very sorely lacking.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
tim-b
Posts: 2091
Joined: 10 Oct 2009, 8:20am

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by tim-b »

Hi
"Merely 80%", yes, but not "nearly 100%". Nearly 100% appeared to be wrong in July 2020 and still circulates despite it being queried on this forum then
I'd be interested to know what the rates of helmet wearing are in Oz almost 30 years on; if mobile phone use in the UK is anything to go by then the majority will flout the law
Regards
tim-b
~~~~¯\(ツ)/¯~~~~
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by pjclinch »

tim-b wrote:Hi
"Merely 80%", yes, but not "nearly 100%". Nearly 100% appeared to be wrong in July 2020 and still circulates despite it being queried on this forum then
I'd be interested to know what the rates of helmet wearing are in Oz almost 30 years on; if mobile phone use in the UK is anything to go by then the majority will flout the law


I don't see that UK drivers on phones is a clear jump point to Australians on bikes without lids.
Much of driving criminality is cultural: lots of drivers are happy to e.g. speed because it's a cultural norm and not really considered wrong by many. As you can see from social media, riding without a helmet even where it's legal is worthy of widespread public censure, in part as cyclists are an outgroup (so reporting speeding is "grassing", reporting on bare headed riding is a public duty keeping ne'er-do-wells in line). It's also the case that it's much easier to see if a cyclist is non-conforming because that'll be the case for all of their time on the bike and they're not partially obscured by a box that is relatively to overtake.
So I think your assumption is a big stretch.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
mikeymo
Posts: 2299
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by mikeymo »

pjclinch wrote:(so reporting speeding is "grassing", reporting on bare headed riding is a public duty keeping ne'er-do-wells in line).


Do many people call the police to "report" cyclists without helmets? I assume that's what you mean by comparing it to "reporting speeding".
mikeymo
Posts: 2299
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by mikeymo »

Mike Sales wrote:
mikeymo wrote:The uptake of seat belts, and the legislation mandating their use (which are two different things, a point seemingly lost on those who endlessly trot out Australian studies on helmet usage) may have some influence on driver behaviour. But I would say it is the far more general increase in the amount of car comfort and safety features that has led to a "distancing" of some drivers from other road users.



You have utterly missed the point about Australian helmet studies, and those in NZ.
The passing of the law led to a very large step change in helmet wearing, from less than a third to nearly 100%. The improvement in cycling casualties figures should therefore be very easily detected.
That there is no noticeable change is significant.
Unless your point is that helmets unwillingly worn don't work properly!
Belts are not the only safety feature on modern cars. Air bags, safety stiffening etc. make accidents more survivable.
Paramedic rescue, and improved medical treatment have also reduced road deaths, as has the reduction in cycling.
You should also read up on Smeed's Law.


In the words of Ghenghis Khan, "A human activity, and a law about that activity, are not the same thing."
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by The utility cyclist »

mikeymo wrote:
pjclinch wrote:(so reporting speeding is "grassing", reporting on bare headed riding is a public duty keeping ne'er-do-wells in line).


Do many people call the police to "report" cyclists without helmets? I assume that's what you mean by comparing it to "reporting speeding".

There certainly was a significant change in policing and it continues even more so regards people on bikes not wearing helmets, have read reports of cyclists assaulted for not wearing one. https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australi ... &mkt=en-sg Taking away the focus from those doing the harm and onto the vulnerable road user means worse outcomes, their system is such that it doesn't need grassing to beat down on cyclists not wearing a helmet or any other 'crime', plod actively go out their way to beat down on cycling/cyclists quite literally.
mikeymo
Posts: 2299
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by mikeymo »

The utility cyclist wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
pjclinch wrote:(so reporting speeding is "grassing", reporting on bare headed riding is a public duty keeping ne'er-do-wells in line).


Do many people call the police to "report" cyclists without helmets? I assume that's what you mean by comparing it to "reporting speeding".

There certainly was a significant change in policing and it continues even more so regards people on bikes not wearing helmets, have read reports of cyclists assaulted for not wearing one. https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australi ... &mkt=en-sg Taking away the focus from those doing the harm and onto the vulnerable road user means worse outcomes, their system is such that it doesn't need grassing to beat down on cyclists not wearing a helmet or any other 'crime', plod actively go out their way to beat down on cycling/cyclists quite literally.


That's the great thing about the internet, isn't it? You can always find some example that proves your case.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 3607
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
Location: The first garden city

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by The utility cyclist »

mikeymo wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
Do many people call the police to "report" cyclists without helmets? I assume that's what you mean by comparing it to "reporting speeding".

There certainly was a significant change in policing and it continues even more so regards people on bikes not wearing helmets, have read reports of cyclists assaulted for not wearing one. https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australi ... &mkt=en-sg Taking away the focus from those doing the harm and onto the vulnerable road user means worse outcomes, their system is such that it doesn't need grassing to beat down on cyclists not wearing a helmet or any other 'crime', plod actively go out their way to beat down on cycling/cyclists quite literally.


That's the great thing about the internet, isn't it? You can always find some example that proves your case.

So actual evidence of something happening, not just that one but others I've read about, but we know for a fact that police took their eyes away from motoring and focused on people riding bikes without plastic hats, or are the increased fines in certain states just a figment of imagination?
mikeymo
Posts: 2299
Joined: 27 Sep 2016, 6:23pm

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by mikeymo »

The utility cyclist wrote:
mikeymo wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:There certainly was a significant change in policing and it continues even more so regards people on bikes not wearing helmets, have read reports of cyclists assaulted for not wearing one. https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australi ... &mkt=en-sg Taking away the focus from those doing the harm and onto the vulnerable road user means worse outcomes, their system is such that it doesn't need grassing to beat down on cyclists not wearing a helmet or any other 'crime', plod actively go out their way to beat down on cycling/cyclists quite literally.


That's the great thing about the internet, isn't it? You can always find some example that proves your case.

So actual evidence of something happening, not just that one but others I've read about, but we know for a fact that police took their eyes away from motoring and focused on people riding bikes without plastic hats, or are the increased fines in certain states just a figment of imagination?


Thank god for Australia. That's what I say. Such a useful source of evidence.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by Cyril Haearn »

No chance of useful evidence now, many years later :?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by pjclinch »

mikeymo wrote:
pjclinch wrote:(so reporting speeding is "grassing", reporting on bare headed riding is a public duty keeping ne'er-do-wells in line).


Do many people call the police to "report" cyclists without helmets? I assume that's what you mean by comparing it to "reporting speeding".


No, I mean stuff like social media pile-ons.
If e.g. CUK or Cycling Scotland put a picture of an unhelmeted cyclist on their Facebook/Twitter feeds there's a pile-on from cyclists and non-cyclists alike shaming them for setting such "bad examples" (not entirely dissimilar to the implications that often drift through these threads that anyone who doesn't partake is clearly a moron who's only cheating death by dint of luck).
Where someone actually reports illegal driving the pile-on is in significant part about "being a grass", because phone use, speeding etc. is widely normalised and it's classis "othering" of outgroups by members of a culturally dominant group.

There would, of course, be little point in reporting bare headed cycling in the UK, even if it was illegal. "Everyone knows" that without registration plates cyclists are completely untraceable and break any laws with impunity...

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Anyone who reports motor crime is to applauded

I think using a phone is a bit different from other motor crime, lots of people disapprove of it..
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by pjclinch »

Cyril Haearn wrote:Anyone who reports motor crime is to applauded

I think using a phone is a bit different from other motor crime, lots of people disapprove of it..


I quite agree it should be reported, but look at the recent case of Guy Ritchie being banned after being filmed by a cyclist when stationary in traffic (still illegal). While there was much support for the cyclist there was a huge pile of censure too.

But a cyclist involved in the perfectly legal practice of riding in the UK without a helmet will get a whole load of social media grief. And in the Real World too: I've had abuse shouted at me for daring to ride around with my kids without any of us being in helmets. Having spent years doing Bikeability Scotland at the primary school my kids went to (and I think I can fairly say doing it well too) I was told I was "setting a bad example" and would either have to wear one or stop doing it. I stopped.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Helmets for cricketers, footballers, not cyclists

Post by pjclinch »

mikeymo wrote:
That's the great thing about the internet, isn't it? You can always find some example that proves your case.


If one's case is that it's all a bit more complicated than many think and there is a great deal of conflicting evidence it is pretty good for that, yes...
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
Post Reply