One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
-
Not to mention that removing all the bike-share cyclists will lead to a drop in the amount of cyclists, which is one of the risk factors for bikes getting hit by cars.
@juliette risk factors for people on bikes getting hit *with* cars, by traffic Engineers' bad designs, car-brained elected officials, and drivers who don't consider themselves cyclists
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette Well, I agree but...
They
️ like to call it sharing but it's really just bike rental, i.e. a business & if you run a business it's on you to do it legally. If you want to rent bikes & helmets are mandatory, you must supply the helmet as well & it's up to you to find a way that fits your chosen business model. I stress that I'm also against mandatory helmet laws for lots of other reasons, including drivers driving closer to bikers when they see helmets...
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette except that this is not a key anything, much less a serious argument against such laws. Bike share programs supply a whole bike - you really think it's beyond those programs to supply an appropriate helmet with each bike? Australia has been doing just that for decades for bike and scooter share and hire. Tourists and locals alike don't have to carry a helmet. Hygiene? Carry a small pack of antiseptic wipes or wear the helmet over a cap or soft-brimmed hat. Clearly you have no objection to protecting your health by wearing a mask. A helmet is a similar precaution. If you don't want mandatory helmet laws, that's an entirely valid view, but at least formulate a sensible argument against them, not vibes and feelpinions.
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette Bike helmets are mostly a fashion statement anyways. AND the increase the risk of having an accident, because people with a helmet feel safer than they are.
-
@juliette Well, I agree but...
They️ like to call it sharing but it's really just bike rental, i.e. a business & if you run a business it's on you to do it legally. If you want to rent bikes & helmets are mandatory, you must supply the helmet as well & it's up to you to find a way that fits your chosen business model. I stress that I'm also against mandatory helmet laws for lots of other reasons, including drivers driving closer to bikers when they see helmets...
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette Totally agree! I guess they are trying to explain it away with the same reasons we use seatbelts.
One thing that does seem to be true, at least in Austria, is that a lot of older people driving E-Bikes cause a lot of bike accidents. Not with other traffic, mind you, just on their own. Their bikes are too heavy and too fast for them. So helmets for E-Bikes are generally a good idea but that seem difficult to implement for the local legislation only for one class of bike. -
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette for motorbikes work, case of Thailand and other east Asia countries with a new mandatory helmet with a giant market of motorbike taxi a motorbike rental.
The logic motorbike=helmet of occident is don't debate.In Netherland is similar case from 2023 for snorfiets( < 25 km/h gas or electric mobility device, bike lane user).
Balaclava vending machine o pseudo‑rental to mandatory helmet in rental or share service, bike, moped or motorbike.
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette What annoys me most when people instist on helmet mandates is that the only focus on injury reduction when the discussion should be about reducing crashes. Helmets do nothing to prevent cars from hitting cyclists. Proper bike infrastructure does.
-
Not to mention that removing all the bike-share cyclists will lead to a drop in the amount of cyclists, which is one of the risk factors for bikes getting hit by cars.
@juliette (Please read past the question, I’m not being ‘that guy’.) Do you have a source for this? Since I’ve started cycling again, after a long break, I’ve had a hypothesis that all the Lime bikes make it safer (although because the riders tend to be a bit lax on the Highway Code, forcing drivers to be more attentive). I’d love to know if there’s actually something that backs that up.
-
@juliette except that this is not a key anything, much less a serious argument against such laws. Bike share programs supply a whole bike - you really think it's beyond those programs to supply an appropriate helmet with each bike? Australia has been doing just that for decades for bike and scooter share and hire. Tourists and locals alike don't have to carry a helmet. Hygiene? Carry a small pack of antiseptic wipes or wear the helmet over a cap or soft-brimmed hat. Clearly you have no objection to protecting your health by wearing a mask. A helmet is a similar precaution. If you don't want mandatory helmet laws, that's an entirely valid view, but at least formulate a sensible argument against them, not vibes and feelpinions.
@billschulz @juliette bicycle helmets don’t really do much to protect a rider except for low speed falls.
Close passes by cars are more likely when helmeted.
Overall health benefits of cycling outweigh individual risk.
The small protections that bicycle helmets afford would offer similar benefits to pedestrians, who also experience low speed falls. Nobody thinks pedestrian helmets should be mandatory. Not even for the elderly!
Can exacerbate neck injuries due to additional rotational forces.
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette (also, I am not an expert, don’t personally like wearing a helmet, and subject to confirmation bias just like everyone else … I’m for personal choice on this one.
-
@Arapalla @marco_m_aus_f @juliette Well, in that myopic sense they do. They also reduced the miles travelled by bike by an even more drastical margin. As the exercise related to riding a bike helps to prevent cardiovascular deseases, several studies have concluded that helmet laws lead to a net negative effect on the health of the whole population.
-
@Arapalla @marco_m_aus_f @juliette Cycling decreased faster than injuries. Risk to the remaining cyclists actually increased.
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette
Not just bike sharing. Places that have experimented with making bicycle helmets mandatory have repeatedly found out that this removes the convenience of a bicycle. If people are required to put on a helmet, grabbing the bicycle is no longer quicker and easier than getting in a car.The result is that the winner of mandatory bicycle helmet laws is the car lobby.
Next time someone suggests mandatory bicycle helmets, ask them if they drive a car...
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette I fell off my bike 10 yrs ago while commuting to work on a dedicated cycle path, there was a short spell of bad weather and my head bounced off the hard floor. I was wearing a helmet and felt groggy and sick but I imagine it would have been much worse if it was my skull making direct contact with the concrete. I will stick to wearing a helmet! Please be careful about the advice you give out if you haven't experienced the sharp end of your own advice! Wear a cycling helmet when cycling!
-
@juliette risk factors for people on bikes getting hit *with* cars, by traffic Engineers' bad designs, car-brained elected officials, and drivers who don't consider themselves cyclists
-
@juliette (Please read past the question, I’m not being ‘that guy’.) Do you have a source for this? Since I’ve started cycling again, after a long break, I’ve had a hypothesis that all the Lime bikes make it safer (although because the riders tend to be a bit lax on the Highway Code, forcing drivers to be more attentive). I’d love to know if there’s actually something that backs that up.
-
@juliette I fell off my bike 10 yrs ago while commuting to work on a dedicated cycle path, there was a short spell of bad weather and my head bounced off the hard floor. I was wearing a helmet and felt groggy and sick but I imagine it would have been much worse if it was my skull making direct contact with the concrete. I will stick to wearing a helmet! Please be careful about the advice you give out if you haven't experienced the sharp end of your own advice! Wear a cycling helmet when cycling!
@JaxxAI I’m not saying to not wear a helmet individually , but that as public policy to reduce total injuries, mandatory helmet laws have been demonstrated with data to be counterproductive: https://rothar.ie/blogs/velostories/thehelmetparadox
-
@juliette except that this is not a key anything, much less a serious argument against such laws. Bike share programs supply a whole bike - you really think it's beyond those programs to supply an appropriate helmet with each bike? Australia has been doing just that for decades for bike and scooter share and hire. Tourists and locals alike don't have to carry a helmet. Hygiene? Carry a small pack of antiseptic wipes or wear the helmet over a cap or soft-brimmed hat. Clearly you have no objection to protecting your health by wearing a mask. A helmet is a similar precaution. If you don't want mandatory helmet laws, that's an entirely valid view, but at least formulate a sensible argument against them, not vibes and feelpinions.
@billschulz here’s the science behind my statement. It’s not a vibe, it’s widely documented with data: https://rothar.ie/blogs/velostories/thehelmetparadox
-
One of the key negative impacts of mandatory bike helmet laws is that they are essentially a death sentence for bike share programs.
Those programs win because they are convenient and encourage spontaneous cycling. That just doesn’t work if a person has to carry a helmet everywhere just in case they decide to cycle. Tourists are not going to pack a bulky helmet. Shared helmets are a hygiene nightmare.
Protect cyclists with bike infrastructure. That’s what works.
#helmets@juliette Agreed, I see what you bring up as a strong point. On the other side, there is a lot of comments here suggesting "helmets don’t really do much". Here is a study which reports that "Head injuries were found to be reduced significantly with helmet usage by 60 percent, brain injuries by 58 percent and facial injuries were reduced by 4 percent. [...] Fatal injuries were shown to decrease significantly by a prominent 73 percent" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-35728-x Saying helmets don't work is harmful
