I think this is still an evasion of the point. I'm saying that what validates using a helmet is that even if your chance of hitting your head is half as high as when when the kinetic energy when you do, is likely to be much higher.

But i don't disagree that traffic ought to be optimized for cyclists and other "soft" travellers, rather than for motorists. Wearing a helmet doesn't have any bearing on the most dangerous risks of riding a bike.

I'm also in a compromised position where I'm hard pressed to alleviate the fall in any way using my arms.

In most cases safety harnesses are superfluous when experienced roofers are working, but that one time it safes your life they'll be happy they wore it. And it's really not very different.

The seatbelt also only saves your life every time you crash your car.

What this argument is, is "just bet on it not being relevant". Okay. But I'm not gonna.

If you don't want to wear a helmet, don't. But when i ride my bike it's much faster than when i was, so if i take a fall, I'm strike my head with more force...

1 time.

Moving at 20 km/h.

Do you know how often i move at that kind of speed without any kind of seatbelt or anything? Only on my bicycle. My shower is, sadly, stationary.

Fo you know how many people i know whos had a fall that would've brained them on a bicycle, but were saved due to their helmets? Several.

How many who had the same thing occur while walking? Only one, who had borrelia.

Own the decision not to wear one instead: "I know i am more likely to suffer head injury, but its a risk im willing to take"

And stop misrepresenting the facts. 3/3

He is right on the point that death due to inactivity is a much bigger problem. However, do a bit of online searching and you'll quickly find that people wearing a helmet are 68% or so more likely to avoid serious head injury than those who don't.... 2/3

In everything he said there the helmet isn't the problem. The problem is effectively peoples attitude towards them.

After searching around, it seems very much like he is misrepresenting his case on purpose: yeah, older research suggests legislation making helmets mandatory will lower the amount of cyclists...

1/3

People don't usually die because of head injuries, people usually die of cardiovascular disease.

Decreasing "unsafe" biking use in favour of "safe" car driving kills people, this is a pretty lethal modal shift.

But, of course, there's no easily seen direct causation so it doesn't speak to our mammalian brains.

As a compromise I can get behind mandatory e-scooter helmet laws. Oh no, e-scooter share programs are impacted? Woe woe

(But no mandatory bike helmets, obviously)

In Toronto, bikeshare is now operated by the Toronto Parking Authority (a gov't agency), and usage has soared.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfz6AsYycA8

Not only for #bikeSharing. #Cycling is attractive for me, because it's as convenient as walking, using the public transport, or driving a car — no extra clothes needed. I just get on my #bike and ride.

If a special #dresscode were required, like wearing a #helmet, I'ld probably stop using my #bicycle. And e.g. buy a #car, so I don't have to follow silly dresscodes.

Where’s that (Kiwi?) traffic safety ad where the two drivers stop time before a collision, one begging the main road driver to slow down, and it’s too fast?
@raymaccarthy @enobacon @juliette