i was simply proposing a truce, a cease firing of endlessly repetitive statements
Helmet promoters across the world are pushing for helmet laws, people are offered less compensation if not wearing one, people are being discouraged from cycling and misled by various pro helmet reports.
Those with an interest in selling helmets or promoting them don't want discussion or debate.
I would suggest more debate to oppose and expose both helmet promotion and laws.
ps the debate may run for 50 years,
Cycling involves many issues, convenience, enjoyment, health, sport, safety, cost and the environment. Cycling is more than just about safety and in balancing all the issues people can make decisions about if to wear a helmet based on their circumstances.
There are now a number of articles, studies and statistics that indicate helmet legislation have not proved to be in the interest of the health and safety of their populations. It seems that there is no clear evidence of a benefit related to mandatory helmet use. If anything, the studies appear to indicate a number of negative effects, some examples are listed below.
In 1985, Sage et al[i], ‘Fatal injuries to bicycle riders in Auckland’, detailed that out of 20 bicycle riders fatally injured in Auckland, New Zealand, between 1974 and 1984, 16 died (80%) of injury to multiple organ systems. They stated, “This study indicates that compulsory wearing of suitable safety helmets by cyclists is unlikely to lead to a great reduction in fatal injuries, despite their enthusiastic advocacy."
Erke and Elvik (Norwegian researchers) 2007 stated: "There is evidence of increased accident risk per cycling-km for cyclists wearing a helmet. In Australia and New Zealand, the increase is estimated to be around 14 per cent."
Erke A, Elvik R, Making Vision Zero real: Preventing Pedestrian Accidents And Making Them Less Severe, Oslo June 2007. page 28 http://www.toi.no/getfile.php/Publikasj ... 7-nett.pdf
Robinson 1996 reported on the helmet laws in Australia. In New South Wales survey data on the number of children cycling counted 6072 in 1991 dropping to 3414 in 1993, down by 44%. The equivalent number of injuries for pre law level of number of cyclists increased from 1310 (384 head + 926 other injuries) in 1991 to 2083 (488 head + 1595 other injuries) in 1993. The increased injury rate was 59%, from 1310 to 2083. For NSW the helmet laws reduced children’s safety.
Robinson DL; Head injuries and bicycle helmet laws; Accid Anal Prev, 28, 4: p 463-475, 1996 http://www.cycle-helmets.com/robinson-head-injuries.pdf
The UK's National Children's Bureau (NCB) provided a detailed review of cycling and helmets in 2005, stating that the case for helmets is far from sound and the benefits of helmets need further investigation before even a policy supporting promotion can be unequivocally supported. Gill T, Cycling and Children and Young People, A review, National Children's Bureau, 2005. http://www.cycle-helmets.com/cyclingreport_timgill.pdf
In 2008 Curnow, concluded “Compulsion to wear a bicycle helmet is detrimental to public health in Australia but, to maintain the status quo, authorities have obfuscated evidence that shows this.” Curnow WJ, Bicycle helmets and public health in Australia, Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 2008 Apr. 19 (1):10-15.
Canadian data shows the average length of stay in hospital for cyclist head injury has increased by 60% between 1994/1995-2003/2004, from 4.3 days to 6.9 days and serious head injuries are reported to have increased since 2001.
Head Injuries in Canada, A Decade of Change, Canadian Institute of Health Information, August 2006