My kids are not allowed getting on there bikes before putting there helmets on, I even make them wear them when they ride there scooters and use there roller blades. We live in a small village with lots of bikers and roller bladers a few wks ago a girl was roller blading past our house without a helmet had a nasty fall and crack her head open ambulance came took her to hospital

I do sometimes wonder if the leathers I was wearing when I had my big smash, and whose back protection almost certainly saved my life[1], may also have been instrumental in the speed I was riding at before I braked a fraction of a second too late for a sharp bend.

Then again, maybe not, but it's certainly true to say that I wouldn't have ridden at that speed if I were wearing flip-flops, shorts and tee-shirt.


[1] Although 9 vertebrae were crushed from the spine-on impact, much of the force had clearly been transferred to the ribcage, breaking all the ribs at the front as well as the sternum.

Never seen it quite as you describe, and in most other situations the risk can be mitigated by ensuring you stand well away from moving traffic on the piste and keep an eye on them as well.

Not so long ago I was out with my older daughter, 6 years, for a bike ride. There is not much traffic where we live but still I insist that she cycle with helmet and on the sidewalk. For some reason...still have no idea how she did this, but she fell and did not have time to put her hands out. Landed SMACK bam on the helmet and the whole front right side was smattered into pieces.

Panic and schock but she was perfectly fine and just had a few bruises. Now to all of those who think that helmets are not such a great idea, just the thought of what her head would have looked like without helmet makes me shiver. I rather take the moan and annoyed look on my kids faces when I say for the 3m or 3km you still got to put your helmet on.

I dont care if they want to make it a rule for kids or not, I just use my commen sense and know that it is better to put the bubble box over that soft nutshell.

I personally don't like making laws for things that suppose to be common sense, like in this case...I would never let my son ride his bike without a helmet that would be totally irresponsible, there are absolutely no reasons for letting your child ride his/her bike without a helmet...none...zip...zero...

I can't believe they still don't wear helmets over there. When I lived in switzerland I used always ride everywhere like everyone else with no helmut but oh boy now I know the possible outcome. My father here in Australia has gone through 4 years of hell from being hit by a truck riding a bike to work and WAS WEARING HELMET. God help him if he didn't wear it. As it is he has now an aquired brain injury and the onset now of a form of dementia. More people need to get behind the importance of wearing a helmet. Not just for children but for everyone.

Another thing that could be a another law to pass is those that are riding with ipods plugged into their ears. I nearly hit a rider back from the shops the other day.

I used to wear a helmet, but then it literally rotted away from the perspiration is caused, and someone asked me if I'd looked at the evidence. So I looked at the evidence and threw away the helmet, and fifteen years later, I'm still alive. I can assure you that my decision at least, was not made from vanity, no matter how desperately helmet proponents want it to be so.

Do what I did and check out the facts, handily now in a single place cyclehelmets.org

You might be surprised to find out that helmet wearing is not associated in any scientific sense with reduced risk, either in cycling or skiing. Certainly the largest ever research project into cycle helmets found a small but significant increase in risk with wearing.

I went to watch Le Tour de Suisse yesterday. All the pros wear helments (it's the rules) - if you wear a helmet, you look pro :-). Same for skiing.

Since it's the rule for pro cyclists to wear helmets, has the death rate for them gone up or down since the rule came in? As far as I can find out, the death rate has gone up (about three times) not down, but the numbers are so small that I'm not sure that they are in any way significant. If there is a helmet effect, it appears to be either negative or no change in risk, just like the highly reliable population data from places with helmet laws.

If helmet laws don't make professionals safer, why should it make anyone else safer?

The entire cycle helmet industry is built on bad science and endlessly repeated myths, like the "helmets prevent 85% of deaths and injuries" which comes from a single source, has never been repeated by any other researcher has been completely disproved on peer review and isn't even supported by the original researchers any more! Despite that, it's still the most repeated "fact" about cycle helmets, and is a useful way to decide whether an article has any semblance of reliability: if it quotes that figure, it's nonsense.

For kids, my experiences tell me they are pretty useful. My little boy has had two recent spills from his bike, in the first one he ran into a step and catapulted into the steps ahead of him and the most recent tumble resulted in his head connecting with one of those stupid new tubular metal bars about 10 cm off the ground on the pavement which protects the new saplings.

With this second accident, the bike then fell on him with the handlebar/brake handle hitting him squarely on the side of the head.

Each of these incidents would probably have resulted in a bloody painful injury and likely a trip to the local triage if he hadn't been wearing a helmet. Instead, he got away with a leg full of bruises and a few patches of gravel-rash on his forearm.

I'm not too arsed about funky research and statistics. As a mum, my son's helmet has served its purpose on two occasions and I wouldn't consider letting him toddle off on his bike without it. It also means I have to wreck my hairdo wearing one, too, to avoid looking like a hypocrite but it works for us.

Having said that, I don't think the government need to get involved. I already tell my son that the police arrest anyone if they're caught not wearing a helmet, dirty liar that I am...

To me they are right. A helmet duty for children would automatically reduce the number of those cycling and increase the vast number of young "indoor people". Let's add to this that nothing serious happened to the hundreds of friends/colleagues I had during schooltime. The exception was Felix, a friend of my brother who never had a bycicle but in military service at the rank of Fourier suddenly had one, crossed a wooden bridge and fell on his back. Such a helmet would not have helped him. He got paralyzed and did suicide a few years later

No no no no, Switzerland already is an over-regulated country, and if it is continued you when entering your bath for a shower will have to wear some rescue equipment and the legislators will care that you do not get injured when using a pissoir

Well clearly wearing a helmet didn't help, so I guess expecting god to do would be about as effective.

Sorry about your dad, of course.

Helmets are effective for very mild shock on the head, like if you are standing on your bike, fall and hit your head on the floor. But the helmet doesn't protect the neck, a part very often injured.

For exemple, I wore an helmet, knees protects, elbows protections and wrists protection when I was doing rollerblade. It didn't protect me when I felt in a very stupid matter and subluxated my shoulder.

My point?

Helmets have a very limited protection and for very specifics form of injuries.

Well, I believe that the poster is indicating that they feel the injuries would be worse if her dad didn't wear a helmet.

I can't believe there are so many people against wearing them. I have read a little bit from those against wearing helmets and I just don't buy it. Statistics can be a useful, but they can also be manipulated to give results desired. Anyways, there seems to be enough anecdotal evidence that people feel they help (esp for small kids) and personally I don't buy the more risk taken and cars drive closer arguments. Again, this was from a very small study from what I read and I don't know that I trust the motivation of those carrying out the study.

But, if the Mayo clinic, a very highly regarded medical institution in the US recommends the use of helmets, that is good enough for me.

Sorry, you misunderstood something here. People are not so much against people wearing such stuff but absolutely against making wearing it compulsory . The vote in parliament was not against the helmet as such. But against a new law.

Didn't Jerry Seinfeld have something to say about the helmet law?

I know some people seem to just be against the regulation of it, which is fine. But, after reading up on it and reading some posts here, I get the feeling that a lot of people think that wearing helmets is actually a bad thing to do...

No; mostly just an unknown thing. There's a chance they help, and a chance that in some situations they make things worse. People are supporting rational evidence-based decisions, rather than knee-jerk caused-by-fear decisions (which is not meant as a dig against anyone).

I couldn't possibly speak for everyone, but to try and maybe clarify, I think people are against overly regulating one's personal choice in such matters and believing that wearing a helmet will therefore automatically make cycling safer based on a narrow study.

I think everyone is in agreement that wearing a helmet would offer reasonable skull protection for a low speed tumble resulting in a whack against a curb, post, tree, etc., which is usually what happens with kids.

However I think there is justifiable debate on whether the helmet would offer much protection in the event of a catastrophic crash, e.g. an adult travelling at a reasonable speed in traffic then smashing into the road or other vehicle.

A friend of mine suffered a fractured skull (nothing to do with cycling and not for any reason he should have been wearing a helmet) and the effects of a head injury were brought uncomfortably close to home. 15 years down the line he's pretty much fine but with a few very minor but irreversible effects.