My helmet most likely saved my life yesterday

[cycle tramp]

Some evidence suggests helmeted have a higher fall-off rate.

I wouldn't be surprised... speaking generally a bike rider wearing a helmet is more likely to be an enthusiast of the idea of a bicycle as sporting equipment rather than as a mobility tool.

If....we accept this premise /hypothesis then those wearing helmets are likely to take (slightly) more risks and travel at a higher speed.. even using the bicycle to exhaust themselves (as apposed to hoping you have enough energy to cycle into town, do the shopping and make it back home before the ice cream defrosts/ or cycling yo the allotment to unearth your potatoes.. you ride in a style not to exhaustyourself, but to conserve your energy for the main event).

..if we di accept this or it can be proven, then we could step back from the whole helmet debate and re-focus more effective safety measures.

[Steady rider]

It sounds appealing, but it appears more complicated, for example, Robinson's 1996 reported injury data for children in Victoria and NSW. In Victoria, the equivalent number of injuries for pre law levels of number of cyclists increased by 15% from 1990 to 1992. For children in NSW the equivalent number of injuries increased from 1310 (384 head + 926 other injuries) pre law in 1991 to 2083 (488 head + 1595 other injuries) in 1993. The relative injury rate increased by 59%, from 1310 to 2083. The relative increase in 'other' injuries of 72% and 27% for 'head' raises serious concerns. The proportion of head injuries decreased from 29.3% to 23.4% and would give the mistaken impression of a benefit if viewed in isolation.
Children's cycling speed and behaviour may have been similar and their accident rate increased in proportion to cycling levels.

Robinson (1996) stated, ‘Roads and Traffic Authority) observed reductions in numbers of child cyclists 15 and 2.2 times greater than the increase in numbers of children wearing helmets. This suggests the greatest effect of the helmet law was not to encourage cyclists to wear helmets, but to discourage cycling’. In 1991 the increased number of helmeted child cyclist from Melbourne surveys was 43 compared with 649 fewer cycling. Claims that cycling was not discouraged are misleading.

The Clarke/Gillham study of 2019 provides more examples of the increased accident rate associated with helmet wearing. Additionally, research generally shows helmet use associated with an increased risk of neck fracture for adults.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _to_Norway Appendix A for neck injury data for adults

A mandatory requirement or helmet promotion may influence the Courts and tend to reduce compensation for a non-helmeted cyclist compared to helmeted ones or indeed motor vehicle occupants or pedestrians who sustain head injuries.

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

Clarke CF, Gillham C,(2019) Effects of bicycle helmet wearing on accident and injury rates, GB National Road Safety Conference, November 2019 https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... jury_rates

There are multiple issues and research is not properly addressing the issues to gain the level of understanding needed.

A partial solution for the UK to the above could be to made by changing the advice in the Highway Code by stating,
research evidence shows cycle helmet may not provide an overall safety benefit , even if helping to reduce the risk of head injury in some cases. Evidence shows their use may increase the accident risk from falls and result in an increase neck injury risk for adults. Accident compensation due to cyclists must not be reduced based on whether they were wearing a helmet.