UKC

Rather than hijack the other thread I would like to ask..

What are your decisions behind not wearing a helmet? 

I'm not trying to police helmet wearing, just genuinely interested. I wear a helmet and it's now an action like wearing a seatbelt in a car, it just comes naturally when I get on a bike.

Are there benefits to not wearing one?

I always use a Helmet when cycling in the UK, the infrastructure is poor and I consider it a hostile environment, and a huge issue is pedestrians wandering on cycle paths, never mind motorists. In France and the Netherlands, it is very very different, particularly the Netherlands where people share paths and know and obey the rules.
So on my forthcoming trip, on the Velo Verts I will probably not wear a helmet, but I will have a Bell.
Here is the code of conduct for Velo Verts 
 

By giving priority to the slowest, here are  10 rules  to promote mutual respect and ensure the conviviality of greenways.

When moving, stay as far to the right of the lane as possible to allow enough room for passing or crossing.

Let people know you're coming (ring a bell on bicycles),  slow down  , and keep a safe distance when overtaking or crossing other road users. Be mindful of children or pets, who may make unexpected movements.

If you are in a group, remember not to take up the entire width of the track and line up to let other users pass or overtake you.

Do not park in the middle of the road. Choose a clear space to stop. Use the shoulders or rest areas where available.

Stay within the right-of-way and its landscaped areas. Respect the plants, furniture, and facilities provided for everyone (tables, benches, information panels, etc.). Use the toilets and trash cans where available. Otherwise, take your trash with you.

Respect the properties and peace of local residents.

Dog owners, keep your pet on a leash. Avoid blocking any paths with your leash.

Riders, ride in authorized areas, at the imposed speed.

When a route is authorized for certain motorized vehicles (service vehicles, emergency vehicles, maintenance vehicles, residents' vehicles, agricultural machinery), give them room to pass.

At the water's edge, respect the peace and quiet of fishermen. Conversely, fishermen, be careful not to obstruct the path with your fishing rods (which could also be damaged).

And perhaps most importantly "Enfin, un « bonjour » et un sourire ne représentent pas le plus grand des efforts à faire en parcourant une voie verte !”
 

https://www.af3v.org/les-voies-vertes/se-preparer/#section4

Just in regards to wearing a seatbelt, it bends my head a bit that there are occasionally people who don't wear them.  I've been driving since 1991.  It's such a baked in, automatic bit of muscle memory to click in alongside chucking my phone in the side of the door and checking my mirror that I can't not do it, and I feel a bit naked without it.  

I do vaguely remember the poster campaigns about it becoming mandatory, and I remember the outcry from certain groups about it being an outrage (one guy who said he was too fat to wear one and that it would force him to give up driving)

But the cycling helmet - yeah, I always wear one when I'm on the roads despite it being a sweaty experience and not fun when you get a wasp flying through one of the holes.  

If it's a very short hop along a canal path or a bridle path I might go without.  I know I shouldn't...but I do.  Unless I'm with my grand daughters....as far as they are concerned you ALWAYS wear a helmet when on a bike.  It's the only bit of dishonesty I maintain...

If I'm riding downhill or on roads I wear a helmet.

I've sometimes commuted without where I've walked the kids to school, walking the bike, but then forgot my helmet, and rather than ride back to get it, just carried on anyway, but it's rare.

If I'm pottering around slowly on what I perceive to be safe areas, I might not bother. For example, if I'm going to our local airfield with the kids (Kenley airfield), I don't bother.

I sometimes go without for short ride or leisurely off road, but do wear one for my commute. Mine is hi-vis so that's part of the reason.

This usual reasoning given for not wearing one is it won't help in a collision with a vehicle, and in high speed collisions they probable won't do much, but it's obviously complex. There are some who get pretty evangelical about not wearing a helmet and will often come out with absolute statements, which is silly given the variables.

In 40 years of cycling, including commuting all that time, I have never has a serious collision. I've come off the bike quite a few time due to mechanical failure, evasive action, oil on the road ect.... all the kind of incidents where a cycle helmet would help.

Wearing a cycle helmet has just become second nature.  Like a climbing helmet and, more recently,  a ski helmet I just feel undressed without.

More analytically,  I have broken two cycle helmets in falls and I've no doubt they reduced head injuries to mostly superficial.

I pretty much always wear a helmet. Maybe once or twice I've gone to pick up my bike from somewhere I left it, realized that I forgot to take my helmet and figured that I had a reasonably quiet route home where I was pretty confident that I could ride safely. But generally if I get on a bike I'll put a helmet on first.

That said, I do think that helmets get overemphasized in the context of cycling safety. The window of accidents that are serious enough that you'd be in trouble without a helmet but not so serious that you're in trouble even without seems fairly narrow - no helmet is going to help you if you get pulled under a construction vehicle, for instance - and plenty of people get killed every year while wearing helmets, so when I see people trying to make helmets a major topic of discussion in the context of safety I feel like they're just trying to find an easy target to go after to deflect attention from harder but much more important issues like road design and driver behaviour.
 

I always* wear one - I've had a couple of crashes where the dent in my helmet has clearly saved my head from something much worse.

* Only exception to that might be if I'm popping into town to get a hair cut.

I always wear mine - as others have said, it's become second nature.

My cousin skidded on a drain cover in the rain and had a silly slow speed fall where he failed to unclip and whacked his head on the curb when he was a teenager - it's likely that his helmet saved his life. I've worn mine since then.

My commute is on a mixed use path along a river - it's common to have to swerve to avoid dogs, or people with headphones who haven't heard my bell. I can absolutely see my self having a similar silly slow-speed fall on that path at some point, probably prompted by a dog emerging unexpectedly from a bush.

My missus generally doesn’t wear one depending on what style her hair is that day. She doesn’t cycle fast and we’re only ever off road on easy tracks. It’s a minor irritation to me as I keep reminding her it’ll be me that has to rescue her if she hits her head on a rock or tree. 

I don’t wear a helmet – the safety improvement from a light polystyrene cap isn’t big enough to warrant the hassle of wearing one for pootling around Edinburgh, likewise I don’t use protective clothing.

They weren’t a thing when I started cycling so helmet use never became something I was trained to feel vulnerable without. I’m not sure, given that head injuries occur to pedestrians and drivers, why polystyrene helmet use while cycling has become such an issue of importance (especially as a matter of judgement for non-cyclists).

I’m sometimes a mix of perplexed and amused through the winter when I observe quite a lot of cyclists in Edinburgh cycling at night with a helmet and no lights – personally I’d rather be seen by other road users than put a couple of coffee cups of helmet to the test by being knocked off my bike by a driver.

I would feel very vulnerable without a seatbelt while driving – but the evidence of game-changing safety impact is irrefutable for that.

I wore clipless for a few months. Despite never forgetting to unclip, I decided they introduced an unnecessary addition risk and got rid of them.

The number of times I've been saved by a quick foot dab. I have a trials background, so being able to quickly dab a foot when needed feels very natural to me.

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

They have, it is called The Netherlands. Mind you do need a good lock 🔐 

Wouldn't dream of riding without one. I've been mocked for wearing one on a 2 mile commute but the ground is just as hard on a short journey as it is on a long one. Possibly ingrained behaviour as we had a family friend whose child had months in the ICU from an innocuous fall. 

Luckily only broken one helmet so far and that was mountain biking downhill and being too cocky, ended up in a situation where I needed to remove myself from the vacinity of the bike in a pretty uncontrolled manor, skidded about 5 metres hitting various bits of log and rock on the way. Where the dents in my helmet were was quite sobering, both temples and the base of my skull/spine connection. Dread to think what would have happended without the helmet. I was black and blue from head to toe. 

This is one of the main reasons I wear a helmet. Slips, skids, tumbles where my head might be the first thing to hit the ground. 

I largely avoid cycling on roads but I would never do so without a helmet. Within the past couple of weeks reinforced for me when 2 friends on the same day came a cropper on a road cycle. Possible concussion for one of them could've been far worse given the state the helmet was left in.

Ditto.

It's not a legal requirement, for a number of reasons.

Evidence shows drivers employ risk compensation when passing a cyclist with a helmet; i.e. they drive more dangerously.

A helmet is a sweaty experience.

Like Kinley, helmets weren't 'a thing' when I started cycling 57 years ago. I don't drive, so I have cycled to school, college and work every day since then, and survived the few offs I've had due to ice or animal. I've avoided many vehicles... It may be a heuristic trap, but I think I'll be okay. I don't wear a helmet when walking, either. Or skiing...

I didn't used to wear a helmet at all when I was younger, aside from downhill mountain biking, despite cycling to and from college everyday and riding BMX as a hobby. It didn't seem cool, helmets were uncomfortable, they made me sweat etc.

Then, when I was a young adult, a family friend fell off his bike with no helmet on, on the way home from the pub. It was a route he'd cycled hundreds of times, so he knew it well, on a well paved road that cars drove down very fast. He passed away leaving a wife and young children behind. Having gone mountain biking with him growing up, I knew he was more than competent on a bike and that changed my perspective quite a lot, and now I always wear one. 

?

I wear one for climbing, some cycling and I would wear one if I went skiing again. The only time I have been skiing I did hit my head in a backward fall and felt sick all day, helmet would have helped.

Walking is much lower risk than any of the other activities so not sure what you point is. And that's it with people who have a chip on their shoulders about cycling helmets..... they always come out with something silly.

FFTY. 50% of people still wear a helmet to commute (and it's increasing), and I have never seen someone out training without one. 

Have you tried a modern one? If you get a decent one they are not sweaty at all. 

Why have you edited my original post to Denmark.

This is what I have reported to the moderators.

"I typed and The Netherlands, and on my phone I double checked and it says The Netherlands.

Why have I been quoted as saying Denmark. Altering quotes is poor behavior."

Now I wonder there maybe an issue with my phone or UKC.

Very wierd.

You missed the "FFTY" (sic) I think!

Edit: If you're going to run to the mods to appeal about trivial matters like this, maybe UKC isn't for you.

I haven't got strong views on it. I generally don't wear one for going to the shops/pub/gym but I do wear one when commuting or 'out cycling.' I wear one riding in France but will hang it on the bars when toiling up a long hill. 

However a friend was recently hit by another cyclist, she was riding uphill and he was speeding downhill. She was very badly injured, apparently her helmet is a sight to behold, which is preferable to her head.

Interesting comments about clipless pedals. I've been using them since they appeared and the only time I've had anything which might be described as an issue is when I T-boned a car which had turned in front of me and went over the car still attached to the bike. I think we parted company in the air. I've used them for mountain biking since they appeared as well, I feel insecure without them. Each to their own, I have friends who do more cycling than me who swear by flat pedals, even on their road/gravel bikes.

Something I never cycle without are gloves. You only sandpaper your hands raw once.

FTFY (Fixed That For You) is normally used to indicate someone has edited a reply as a tongue in cheek 'correction'.

I've used clipless for many years and don't have an issue with them.

The specific incident I mentioned above was my cousin. He also doesn't have an issue with clipless pedals and still uses them too. The accident in question was the result of unexpectedly skidding on a wet drain cover, and unfortuntely he failed to unclip on that one occasion. This may have contributed to the fact that his head hit the curb as he was unable to get a foot down - however it's also entirely possible that he may have hit his head with flat pedals too. We'll never know the answer to that.

In any case, I don't have any problem with clipless and I certainly don't see them as a safety concern - like you I feel more secure using them.

Cheers, NKT*

*Never knew that.

Not me pal, I've been here for ever. But yes, I did, and a typo to boot! I meant Denmark, rather than the Netherlands, despite the latter being more associated with cycling. 

I always wear a helmet.  I went through being resistant to being an advocate in the late 80’s/early 90’s.  Other than super short local trips, on low risk bike paths, would I consider not using a helmet, but I’d typically walk instead.

It’s amazing how good entry level helmets are nowadays.

For context, I’ve been cycling for 50 years, ran a bike shop for 10 years and lead MTB rides for 14 years.  I raced MTB XC, DH, BMX and time trials, for over a decade  I do tons of road riding nowadays (Mallorca last week).

I’ve written off 6 helmets in my time.  Not sure I’d be here had I not been wearing a helmet on one of them, in particular.  I’ve seen so many incidents of head injury, from minor to major.

I just looked it up, Netherlands actually has quite a bad mortality rate for cycling.

 

Look at the number of head injuries from slips, trips & falls. 

I don't 'have a chip on my shoulder' about cycling helmets; I wear one when my risk perception says I might need one. 

I wear a helmet when climbing, especially when belaying; seen enough loose rock displaced to know there's a significant risk. And responsible for the leader 

It just seems our risk perceptions are different.

[edit: it seems odd that people are questioning different risk perceptions and approaches to safety, in a community for an activity that has to have acceptance of risk, to the point of some people choosing to climb solo]

As I said, I do wear a helmet. I find them sweaty. It's an inescapable feature of a helmet that provides cushioning against impact, as the helmet must be in contact with the head, therefore preventing sweat from evaporating.

Modern helmets are less sweaty, certainly.

I believe it was Chris Boardman who quoted figures along the lines of 'wearing a helmet isn't in the top 10 things that keeps a cyclist safe'.  It's worth keeping this in mind.

Personally:

Calm cities (commuting bumbling around) - never.

Mad cities - almost always.

Riding for sport - always 

Always wear one. Last ten years, three smashed helmets, two concussions, one CT scan.

 Some might say you might want to re-evaluate how and why you ride a bike, lol.

Should I say 'risk compensation'...?

TBH IMHO, your post would have more value if you quoted some facts and figures and posted a link, otherwise you are howling at the moon 🌙 

I used this as reverse psychology approach when I was recovering from a stitched up snapped Achilles (done during a bit of family social tennis).  I didn't wear a helmet biking during initial post-op rehab, it helped to 'prevent' me from doing anything too silly off road on the MTB.

I tried falling off my bike and banging my head on the deck once, it really hurt. Out cold for a while, concussion, 48hours in hospital and that was with a helmet. Don't care what other people do but I wear one on my bike.

Your helmet almost certainly prevented impact damage. But a helmet may not prevent concussion. It may even exacerbate it:

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/concussion-life-saving-facts...

I'm not arguing against helmets. Just pointing out it's not as black and white as people are making out.

Risk compensation's not a term I've come across, so I looked it up. Not sure it applies, as I rode like a tw*t in the 80s without a helmet. Tbh, like G, like Roglic, I'm just accident prone (without the talent, obvs). Apart from a couple of woodman's axe accidents, my worst recent one was stepping backwards off a settee onto a stool I'd forgotten was behind me, taking a back flip and landing on my head. Sounds funny, but a year and more of persistent post-concussion syndrome is less so. Re the biking, my safety measure has been removing the Garmin and stopping chasing KOMs. Seems to have worked so far, although a snapped Shimano crank at speed was a near miss during lockdown.

It's especially bad among older citizens. Almost 50% of cycling deaths are among the over-75s in the Netherlands. A strong uptake of electric bikes in this age group (enabling them to go faster) combined with poorer balance, responsiveness etc is sometimes mentioned. But another important factor is that a person in their 70s or 80s is more likely to succumb to injuries that a healthy person in their 20s or 30s might recover from. So ironically, cycling into older age might be good for individual health but also increase the mortality rate for cycling.

Interesting that that article mentions MIPS. My helmets have all recently been MIPS, but I thought the jury was out over them.

Good anecdote. I'm sure all the "I once heard about someone who..." will now start wearing helmets when around the house...

You were probably young and immortal then. Young people's risk perception is notoriously poor...

Snapped chain whilst turning right across traffic was a bit unnerving...

There was an amusing snapped chain short on YouTube recently (Nils Politt was too tall for all the neutral service replacements). In the comments I mentioned that the same had happened to me in Kentish Town at rush hour a while back. It's not fun in traffic, I'm with you there.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ngMD43wClvI

I don't see many pedestrians in helmets on icy mornings in Edinburgh, but don't think I've ever heard anyone criticise that - even when I know Orthopaedics is at breaking point with injuries.

I've fallen a number of times in the course of 24000km of Scottish hillwalking, but I don't see many hillwalkers in helmets other than climbers/Skye. I don't feel inclined to wear a low protection helmet for that activity any more than what I do on a bike, even though I've had more spills walking.

I suspect, based on discussions with younger folk, that in the UK cycling is trained as a rather high hazard activity with kids being trained that PPE is absolutely vital to their safety to the extent that they feel vulnerable even doing low risk cycling without PPE. Add to that the rather vile victim-blaming hostility to cycling injury/mortality that is common and a few hundred grams of polystyrene become a protection against moral outrage, if not severe injury.

I'm yet to cough up for a MIPS helmet, either for cycling or climbing, but maybe should. I do both activities regularly and almost always wear a helmet. I forgot my helmet going to climb at Turningstone Edge a few weeks ago which is the first time climbing on a rope in forever, sans lid, and the only place I can think of riding without a helmet in recent years was in Beijing at Easter on a hire bike, which was a pretty amazing experience but probably not the safest thing I've ever done! I did see Decathlon are now doing a road MIPS helmet, and I've used Decathlon helmets for the last decade now, so might considering coughing up for one of them as they are as ever notably less expensive that Bell, Giro and the like equivalents.  

Interestingly I noted when I was last in the Cairngorms winter climbing, that all the Glenmore Lodge groups out doing winter hill walking skills course were wearing helmets. Perhaps with modern superlight ones it will become more normal to see for winter walkers and summer scramblers. I will normally take a helmet if I'm scrambling in summer or doing grade I winter stuff like Striding Edge in the snow. 

I was replying to Godwin, not you.

I'm just a Scottish Hill plodder, although I do a bit of winter walking. That said, Glenmore is Hill Health and Safety Central...so they're probably wearing helmets to the pub afterwards as well.

Hi Cap'n,

"Evidence shows drivers employ risk compensation when passing a cyclist with a helmet; i.e. they drive more dangerously."

Do you have a link for that ? I'm genuinely interested as my experience is the opposite: always a helmet (dayglo yellow) and orange hiviz vest - most cars make the effort to go around. I still get the plonkers trying to hit me with their wing mirrors, but fewer than before.

(Context: mostly cycling in Paris and its suburbs)

Here's an example:

https://www.cyclehelmets.org/1180.html#289

Though the website may be biased...

Maybe just a slight element of bias... it reads like an anti vax website! 

It's the drivers who don't realise I'm there that make me where a helmet, not the ones that do!

I always wear a helmet and have for decades. The downsides are minimal and they have saved more serious injury on one or two occasions. 

Similar thing happened to a teacher I had during my A-Levels but without the lid. Rode away from the incident refusing any help but was sadly found unconscious by his partner several hours later at home and unfortunately died.

The worst thing about it is he used to boast (to students ffs) about how he never wore a helmet.

More than enough for me to never ride without one...

This. I'd be far more interested in the reasons why anyone would ride around without lights in the dark/dusk. If cars have their headlights on you can be near invisible.

Don’t wear one, ride about 13,000-15,000 miles every year for past 30 years, and nearer 6,000 miles a year the two decades before that. I don’t race,  I consider the risks of a head injury about the same as walking, very low.  I don’t wear one when walking. Riding without a helmet perfectly fits the risk profile and the type of bike riding I do.  

Cycle helmets have not make a statistical meaningful difference to head injuries. There’s no strong case for them in everyday riding. Not surprising given how limited cycle helmets are, not being designed for collisions involving other vehicles. 
 

Finally a more recent reason, I now ride a recumbent.  It’s nigh on impossible for my head to contact the ground in a crash. Even a recent full on collision with a deer proved this.

Cycle helmets offer no protection against concussion. That is well understood.

Thanks. Not very cheery reading: helmet+not riding in the gutter+perception of being experienced (me, me and me) = close pass by lorries/buses...

Well, still gonna wear my helmet 🙂

Alcohol consumption is strongly associated with head injury, and indeed, injuries generally. (no citations but not really in dispute). A recent paper discussed (supposedly) made a case for cycle helmets by noting (from memory) a correlation between head injury rates and lack of cycle helmets, then rather glibly mentioned, but failed to properly consider, the correlation between alcohol consumption and not wearing a helmet. Given the obvious linkage between drinking and falling off bikes, or indeed falling in general, they did seem to be targeting the wrong issue. 

At the risk of being maudlin an old friend was drinking quite a lot and one day fell and knocked his head at home and sadly died of a brain bleed.

Of course, we'd all instinctively ridicule a proposal for "pub helmets", or even "drinking-at-home helmets", but if we were rational and objective it would likely be a more compelling case than for cycle helmets.

This isn't per se a reason not to wear a cycle helmet, IF it had a benefit on balance, but does somewhat take the wind out of the sails of any argument for compulsion.

For me, I'd need to be persuaded that

1) Cycle helmets on balance are beneficial
(this hasn't really be demonstrated by research that doesn't unravel when looked at closely)

2) Any risk reduction is significantly greater than for comparable scenarios where you really wouldn't bother with a helmet. (OK a vague notion but let's say pedestrian helmets, stairs helmets, pub helmets)

A comparison for point 2 might be the wisdom of safety goggles for using a grinder, or riding a motorcycle, but not bothering for cooking in the kitchen or using a power drill (at home)

Not that well understood by cyclist, a study showed that only 1 in 5 competive cyclists knew that https://road.cc/content/news/only-1-5-aware-helmets-not-protect-concussion-...

Reviewing my younger years I’d have been better served by wearing a helmet when going out drinking than cycling.

Are there any circumstances under which a cyclist who comes off their bike could end up being better off by not having worn a helmet than one who has worn one? (I'm thinking of a situation similar to wearing a helmet when using auto-belays at the wall where the chin strap could get caught on a hold and the climber is somehow unconscious.)

You can believe what ever you want, I'm still going to wear my helmet. Whether or not you do is of no interest to me. 

Do you have a source for that? It certainly sounds interestingly counterintuitive.

From a personal perspective wearing a helmet has saved me from likely two very serious head injuries in the last few years (not involing other vehicles), one slipping on black ice and bouncing my head off the curb (so hard I got whiplash) smashing the helmet, and the second a freak mechanical (snapped chain wedged under the back wheel) with similar consequences. 

That's not mentioning being hit by cars which fortunately hasn't happened since I moved out of London!

Good job that logic only applies to a foreign country and cycling. If it was the UK and driving there might have been some defensive responses.

If you go even older it might not even be injuries. Pretty sure the high mortality rate on golf courses, relative to other sporting venues, isn't due to its dangerous nature.

Another reason for the high mortality rate in the Netherlands is the Dutch cycle a lot. On average more than 12 times, compared to the UK  (621 miles a year compared to 47 in the UK)

A friend did a regular MTB ride but forgot his helmet the one time he crashed. Sadly, he died! 

It was a pretty small study done by an academic at Bath Uni if I remember correctly, maybe about 20 years ago. He measured passing distances when dressed in different clothing including wearing a wig to appear like a woman! The hypothesis was helmet and lycra make you look more 'pro' so drivers felt they could pass closer.

If I'm in town, and my priority is getting plenty of space, then I employ my maximum safety attire. 

I wear flip-flops, a skirt, shoulder bag slung around me and long blonde hair blowing in the wind. 🙂 People treat you like a complete incompetent, and give OODLES of space. 

On actual sporty riding (whether mtb or road) then I do always wear it as I go fast enough for a fall to be a problem. But, I still reckon on road that my childish, wild leggings are also particularly good for safety, people still think I might be unhinged 

Actually if your head hit snow a helmet could have made things worse wrt transferred energy to your neck.

I never used to wear a seatbelt, a concussion from a head meets windscreen incident made me sometimes wear one. Getting a £100 fine makes me almost always wear one. I did spend a lot of years surfing on the roof and bonnet though and I tide a motorbike without a belt.

Cycling though I always wear a lid, as others have mentioned I had one break in a crash, much rather the lid than my head.

There is a video on line somewhere, Dutch I think, sped up, showing children arriving at school.

Three things stand out:

Vast numbers on bikes, like probably most of the school. Literally hundreds of kids. (Senior school by the look of it)

Nobody locks their bikes

Nobody wears a helmet

I don't have time to search for it, sorry.

Here's what "science" has to say on the matter:

179 effect estimates from 55 studies from 1989–2017 are included in the meta-analysis. The use of bicycle helmets was found to reduce head injury by 48%, serious head injury by 60%, traumatic brain injury by 53%, face injury by 23%, and the total number of killed or seriously injured cyclists by 34%

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.026

See also

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-35728-x

https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw153

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-4575(00)00048-8

That's also confirmed in studies.

I noted an earlier anecdote involved someone cycling back from the pub...

It's become increasingly common in/around Stirling, too. One theory is that because a load of new cycle lanes have been put in over the past couple of years, some of them lit, this had led to quite a lot of cyclists (eg students, but not only them) not bothering with lights. We live at the end of a half-mile unlit rural stretch reasonably well used by cyclists (it's part of a national route), and the number of near misses in terms of cyclists almost hitting pedestrians last winter was noticeable. There's almost an argument for pedestrians needing to wear helmets hereabouts as cycling without lights along unlit pavements seems to have become A Thing.

PS - I'm with Kinley re the viz vs helmet question. I've more or less stopped cycling, but in the years when I did lots, often in heavy traffic in Glasgow, I would almost always wear a dayglo yellow top but only occasionally a helmet (partly because helmets back then were so unwieldy and the one I had made me look like a giraffe crossed with an alien).

PPS - I once went up the In Pinn wearing a borrowed cycling helmet!

For me, I find wearing one changes the experience of riding a bike a little.  (Wearing a seat belt on the other hand has absolutely no effect whatsoever on the experience of driving a car.)  So when I don't wear one, sometimes it's because I've decided I don't want to wear one for the kind of riding I'll be doing.  Just like I don't always wear a helmet for the kind of climbing or kayaking I'll be doing, but often will do as well. 

I'm quite prone to 'risk compensation' I think (I've noticed this in other activities as well as cycling), so it's possible that wearing protective gear might protect me somewhat less than some other people because I do sometimes catch myself engaging in riskier behaviour without having consciously chosen to do so. 

But also I sometimes don't wear a helmet because a bike helmet is a slightly bulky and awkward thing to carry about while you're not on the bike if you can't leave it with the bike if you see what I mean.

There's an episode of 'Sliced Bread' (radio programme) from a couple of years ago that might interest you here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001n21k

I never wore a cycling helmet as a kid, or when i first started climbing.  Seeing my climbing partner, a few years later, with a 1 inch crater in his skull caused by a fall at Millstone, was a wake-up call.  Several people at his funeral asked why he didn't wear a helmet.  There was no defendable answer.

I've worn a helmet for climbing and cycling ever since. Except once and that cost me a cracked eye socket and permanent damage to an optical nerve.  It only takes a few excuses and a few seconds to do the damage.

Out of idle interest...

https://www.google.com/search?q=woman+dies+tripping+hit+head

I always where one but never did as a kid. About 4 years ago hit a pot hole and landed head first. Broke my coller bone. Recond I'd be dead without my helmet. Was doing a rapid 13mph but the impact split it in two.

I used to pop to the shops without it along a cycle path never would now.

LR

A few things. My position - helmet when training and racing or MTB, no helmet commuting, have been run over and had traumatic brain injury a year ago from which I'm still recovering.

There are a few small n studies that, as previously discussed, show more dangerous motorist behaviour with cycling clothing/helmets. I've raced Enduro, XC and road at a high level - I don't fall off my road bike. The only way I'm coming off is if I am I assaulted by a driver. I find driver behaviour to be massively more cautious when I'm not wearing a helmet or cycling clothing.

The positions that helmets worsen tbi are faulty and based on relatively old studies of old helmets. Most modern data suggests that they reduce the risk overall. But - you have to hit the ground first. Ask - how can I not hit the ground.

If you want to be persuaded about rotational impact compensation systems, go and check the rankings on https://www.helmet.beam.vt.edu/ (cliffs - no helmet without MIPS makes it into the top 50 or something). I won't buy a new helmet without it and replaced all of my older ones. I wear a climbing helmet for things falling on me, not high speed rotational impacts, so I am not persuaded of the benefits, but if I bought a dual purpose climbing and skiing helmet it would need to have mips.

Tldr the most important things you can do to reduce your risk of head injury are about preventing attempted manslaughter by a driver. Lights, passpixi, ride more gravel and MTB, campaign for presumed liability in all cases, campaign for proper language in media (car hits cyclist Vs driver kills cyclist as compared to cyclist kills pedestrian always). BBC particularly bad and the rags are even worse.

Passpixi. I had no idea what that sign meant, until I just googled it.

However when I have cycled in certain parts of Scotland, motorists unnervingly reluctant to pass me. I commented to a bloke from Aberdeen how courteous Scottish people are.

He rolled his eyes and laughed and said the Police in some areas have stealth bikes and take photos, and there is a public information campaign, and they get 3 points and IIRC an £80 fine.

I agree with most things you say, however I have come off on the road a few times, due to black ice, a pothole that snuck up on me and avoiding a pedestrian that walked into the road (headphones on, looking at their phone).

I also once had a rear blowout, at only 10mph or so, ended up hitting the kerb and flying headfirst into someone’s garden.

I’ve also been out when a mate was hit by a deer and I’ve had very near misses with sheep.

My point being that there are uncontrollable risks, other than the more obvious road users.

A friend of mine is a keen cyclist and an anti helmet zealot. This is what he tells me and doesn't reflect my views. He rants along the lines of..

Helmets don't guarantee any safety, most don't meet standards and they offer very poor protection to the sides of your head where you need protection the most. Several studies have shown (I've never asked him which studies as he's normally ranting and I'm just quietly nodding 🤣) that road users are more likely to hit you if you wear a helmet and they offer a false sense of security making cyclists less cautious so in effect they increase the risk

Like I said: not my view.. but it is a view many people hold.

Not directed at you at all, and I'm firmly a deliver on people doing what they want but since there have been several mentions of 'studies' in the interest of facts vs bullshit I'm pretty sure that all the actual reported data  says that helmets significantly reduce injury in an accident.

If people don't want to wear helmets that's fine by me but claiming it's on the grounds of safety is mental! (And just plain wrong)

Possibly, probably not.

Like climbing and hillwalking there's risk assessment at the ground floor of informed participation.

Looking upstream on this thread there are cyclists who have wrecked 1, 2 and 6(!) cycling helmets. So I get people like that will tend to want to add padding to their heads. Plainly they need it.

Cycling is a broad church and there are those whose method/technique/habits/skill will increase the chances of being pitched headfirst onto solid surfaces.

There are others whose cycling has a different risk profile. Personally, in 48yrs of cycling I've only had a significantly uncontrolled dismount 3 times - 2 low speed motorised assaults and one low speed tree on an unwise friday night return from The Doctors. I just use a bike for getting around a relatively safe environment (previously commuting in a relatively safe environment).

As someone who does risk profiling professionally and for my hobbies the hugely excessive amount of hot air generated by a relatively minor piece of safety kit seems very odd. People on this thread talk about "anti-helmet zealots"  - but from the perspective of low risk cycling the zealotry seems to be pro-helmet.....and very odd in the context of a hillwalking/climbing forum where people should understand risk assessment.

I live c1km from work and usually cycle but sometimes walk.

i don’t wear a helmet for either mode of transportation. 
 

in about 5000 trips, the vast majority by bike, my closest brush with a bad accident was a van wing mirror just missing my head as I walked along the pavement.

Those are examples of risk compensation on the part of drivers and cyclists respectively.

Risk compensation is a genuine effect, discussed up thread.

I think the distinction is that, in certain circumstances, you are less likely to be in an accident if you don't have a helmet on (my cycling in flip-flops, skirt and long hair blowing in the wind type scenario) as drivers actually pay more attention and see you as a person. 

If you are in an accident, your head is only one (albeit important) part of your anatomy. I also don't want broken femur/ pelvis/ spine/ punctured lungs etc. 

It's all a question of risk assessment. Sometimes I just don't want the hassle of dealing with a helmet at the far end and it is a risk I am willing to take. 

If it's icy/ I'm on a fast ride/ mtb etc then I decide that risk does require a helmet. 

We are adults with capacity to make such decisions on a case by case basis.

I don't always wear a helmet but then I grew up when we didn't need them. I wear one when off road if off road means single track. Gravel, only on group rides when it gets frantic! I wear one commuting in the winter as the dark woods hide all sorts of things like boar and deer that jump out at me on the gravel tracks. The road I use is slippery. I use a helmet on club road rides, again, mostly because I am around other people. The main risk is dimwit drivers taking me out. Or over enthusiastic riding. If those are in low supply why wear a helmet?

I wear a seat belt most of the time but not on the quiet roads where the chances of being stopped or virtually nil. I grew up without the nanny state telling me I needed one. I ride my motorcycle on private land without a helmet.

Why? It is my life and no one has the right to say other wise. I don't accept the effects, often shouted about, on the emergency services. They joined knowing what they are in for, or so my mates in all three services say. My family is mine, not for anyone else to worry about. The effect on our NHS is minimal compared to so many other optional dangers. Let's say teenagers in cars as one example. Or fatties who won't stop eating. 

I am told that skiers now wear helmets. FFS. 

That study is utterly flawed and superficial. You only need to read the first sentence to realise that...

Which aspect of the first sentence leads you to that conclusion?

I think that this is such a contentious topic as it is concerned with risk perception and  marginal gains. Helmets will reduce certain injury types i.e. reduce the risk of skull # when hitting a hard surface but is will probably not reduce concussion as this is caused by sheering within the skull cavity. In terms of the accident survival data there is an analogy with seatbelts/airbags etc. The difficulty with many studies is that each case is unique. A higher velocity impact may result in death with no helmet vs survival with a severe brain injury with a helmet.

Falling off a bike is often highly unpredictable, even for those with a cautious riding style.  If you fall off you may get hurt. A helmet will help prevent certain types of head injury if you bang your head wearing one. Gloves may reduce the risk of you grazing your hands as you hit the tarmac. 

Personally I wear both. I do not believe wearing them affects my riding style but I hope that my fluoro helmet helps other road users see, and avoid, me. This seems to be a work in progress. I am unconvinced by the study of helmet/clothing perceptions of others as there are too many variables- helmet+lycra+road bike, vs helmet and normal clothing, vs no helmet etc.

I am also undoubtedly influenced by seeing trauma survivors on a daily basis; many with severe head injuries.

Melbourne tram tracks are incredibly slippery when damp so for me would be a helmet every time, even if it were not compulsory. I do sometimes find myself slipping onto the heuristic trap of being astonished at seeing cyclists not wearing helmets.....

it is interesting how much controversy there exists between the advocates for wearing/not wearing helmets.

Have you ever read and digested Joe Simpson's book "The Beckoning  Silence" ?  He starts to realise that, no matter what hazards he has survived for many years (using his skill), he will eventually succumb to 'bad luck'.   To random chance that he can't control.  He watches his friends picked off, one by one.

You sound a bit like one of Joe Simpson's friends.

I'm genuinely interested and happy to be proved wrong, but why? Where is the evidence that says anything to the contrary and what about the many other meta analysis and studies that all seem to say the same thing? I mean my second reference is from Nature, who generally I would regard as pretty reliable.

I find the arguments here all a bit weird, in climbing loads of people don't wear helmets, its seen as a personal choice, and that's fine, but no one ever attempts to claim (without any evidence) that helmets make no difference in climbing safty, as I think we can all agree that would me mad, what makes cycling special here? 

That's a good one.  Ride Sheffield have put little signs up in various places reminding mountain bikers (and horse riders and walkers) to "Be nice, say hi."  It goes a surprisingly long way towards keeping everything sweet.

Your interpretation of that study *is* 'utterly' incorrect. It's considering two outcomes separately: (1) head injury - the main aim of the analysis; (2) other injuries - a secondary aim, less important than the first.

I'm not sure how many "advocates for not wearing helmets" there are. Most of the people who have answered the OP's question are "people who don't wear helmets" rather than advocating that to others.

There's the usual bewilderment in the thread as to how someone could choose not to wear a helmet, the usual excessive focus on a relatively minor piece of PPE and the usual failure to acknowledge that some cycling is very safe so a risk assessment might not come to the conclusion that this piece of PPE is worth the hassle.

I drive 25000 miles per year, walk 1100km per year on often pathless Scottish uplands and cycle about 15km per week around Edinburgh. I'm fairly sure that cycling is not statistically most likely activity that may end in a head injury for me.....and yet I've never heard anyone getting a bee in their bonnet about walking or driving helmets.

It's weird that such a healthy, efficient and useful activity has got so much scrutiny on minor safety measures.

Objective risks exist; not all of them are drivers - I agree. But I feel those are better mitigated in other ways. I don't ride a road bike when there is a chance of ice. I run high quality tubeless tyres in all of my bikes alongside rear inserts (that you can run flat) and don't let the sealant dry out. 

This would be the case if every time you went for a ride you were guaranteed to hit your head. Unfortunately there are two aspects to risk - the chance of it happening and the impact. Helmets reduce the impact, but as many have pointed out can increase the chance of it happening. Until better studies come out this calculus will have to be something personal. I have ridden on roads for 32 years and been hit once by a car and once by a pedestrian and I know what my experiences tell me (the biggest thing I did for my safety in this time is to run a daytime rear flashing light).

I wear a helmet to mountain bike because I push my limits and crash whilst racing. I wear a road helmet for similar reasons, and in addition - it reduces my total system aerodynamic drag so it makes me faster than you.

I wear a ski helmet because I am not a good skier. As a result my chance of a bonk is somewhere in the range of p=1. No part of wearing a ski helmet increases my risk of injury.

I wear a climbing helmet because it doesn't increase the risk of me getting hurt in any meaningful way and stops me bonking my head accidentally on roofs or hitting myself taking an ice tool out.

Also, importantly, unlike the random and odd morally bankrupt bloke a few posts above, none of these choices impact other people negatively. 

Because it takes the accident as the starting point, rather than covering the likelihood and outcome collectively.

Mandating helmet use increases the rate of injuries

I'll try and find it later.

But any study wishing to examine health outcomes with and without a helmet (ie does a helmet protect you if you have an accident) *has* to be conditional on an accident occurring.

If you are interested in comparing accident risk in helmet-wearers vs non-wearers, that's a much harder study to do well, due to the multiple confounders I would expect there to be. However, a few brave souls have attempted this. A quick google scholar search

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847812000587?casa_to...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369847818305941 --

neither found evidence to support a risk compensation hypothesis.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221414051500002X?casa_to...

this one found some evidence that helmet wearers were more likely to have an accident.

I can't access the detail in your link but even those results may well come not from helmet-wearing increasing accident risk, but from increased accident potential causing helmet-wearing. i.e. many people, including plenty on his thread, will wear a helmet only when doing MTB, road race or other more 'serious' cycling, where the perceived and likely actual risk is going to be higher.

That itself will probably skew any results in favour of helmet wearing being associated with higher accident rates.

Personally, I'm doubtful as to whether wearing helmets will increase risk per se, but I'm also quite confident in my ability to cycle without a helmet in reasonable safety on quiet roads, putting one on only when I perceive the accident risk merits the (very minor) inconvenience, such as when doing single-track. Exactly as I do with climbing, such as with winter climbing.

It isn't Nature, it's Scientific Reports. This is a journal published by Nature, but not high-impact. It's an open access journal that will essentially publish anything, provided it survives peer review. Lots of very flawed papers have been published in Scientific Reports. So journal here is not by itself a mark of excellent science (equally the paper may be great, but you can't tell from the journal).

Going off this thread I'd say there a less 'anti-helmet zealots' than there used to be. There's only one link to cyclehelmets.org and that comes with an admission that it's not exactly objective.

I have to wear one for racing so train in one too. I would wear one in any case tbh. Not in favour of them being compulsory though. 

Steady on! I've published with them loads! (For exactly the reasons you say, ahem).  

Either way there seem to be lots of studies about the effectiveness of helmets and, as yet 0, on how they reduce safety. (Aside from mandatory helmet rules whitch no one here is advocating for).

It’s what the science says and the helmet manufacturers agree. I like to believe in facts not make believe.

Ah fair enough, apologies (and I actually have something under review with them at the moment as a co-author). My beef is mainly with people getting a paper in SciReps and then saying "we published in Nature". I don't have any strong opinions on the helmet debate, but plenty about academic publishing  

No, you're quite right, it was very lazy of me. I get very embarrassed when people's say to me "wow you have a nature paper" and I have to explain very much i have not! It is still a 'proper' peer reviewed journal though.

Belive it or not i don't really have a position on bicycle helmets either, but I am interested in research that shows something very counterintuitive to popular opinion and logic,  so would be really interested to read any work showing how helmets don't make cycle safer, especially as it would stop my wife nagging me when I don't wear one! However these don't seem to actually exist.

Never a reason not to wear a helmet in my opinion. Simple as that. 

Are you wearing one now?

No. But I was wearing one when gently riding into town and someone opened a car door infront of me, glancing my handlebars sending me across the road and head first into the wheel of a car parked on the other side of the road. Got away with wearing a spongy neck brace for a couple of weeks. No helmet, different outcome. Wear a helmet. You may never 'use' it but will be thankful when you do. 

Thank God the helmet police have arrived! Won't someone think of the children?

Send these hideous images to The BMC / cycling UK (delete as appropriate) immediately and get Steve locked up for his heinous crimes of deciding for himself what PPE is appropriate when and daring to comment on it.

Ps, can you make a record of you asking what Steve is wearing right now? That sh*t is HOT! (And not at all weird and creepy) 

A good post in my opinion.

I used to do some risk analysis stuff for work. Low chance, high impact - what are you going to do about it?  This point is spot on, but I would also add 'the cost to mitigate the risk'.  For me the cost (not financial, but intangible) of wearing a helmet is trivial, it doesn't bother me, it doesn't impact my (crap) cycling or climbing, so I do. 

Plus someone close to me could have been seriously injured (or not here anymore) if she hadn't been wearing a helmet when another cyclist in the group dropped a water bottle ...

We all make our own choices.

aka ALARP.

I think deepsoup was suggesting we should be allowed to decide for ourselves when to wear a helmet, whilst questioning the logic of the rather absolutist "Never a reason not to wear a helmet" against the evidence of not wearing a helmet in activities that probably pose a similar (or greater) risk than cycling. Sure, people are entitled to choose their risk appetite, but you might hope it would be consistent.

Apologies to deepsoup if that wasn't their point...

Of the two of us you think I'm the 'helmet police'?  That's hilarious.

I'm merely pointing out the inconsistency of insisting that in everyone should always wear a helmet whilst cycling regardless of their own assessment of the risks, yet also making a personal choice to not wear one during an activity that clearly carries a more significant risk of head injury than some cycling for some people.

Guessing that he wasn't wearing a helmet just now, I was planning to ask why not - since there is never a reason to not be wearing it.  What can I tell you?  It seemed like a good idea at 20:22 but by 21:01 I'd realised how lame it was and couldn't be arsed with the punchline.

In truth I've added nothing useful to this thread this evening and probably shouldn't have bothered, sorry about that. 

I think kinley2 nailed it up thread with this post: https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/biking/wearing_a_helmet-782744?v=1#x10058...  Something quite curious is going on with this topic - particularly on this forum since it's pretty much a defining feature of rock climbing that people voluntarily choose to accept a risk of injury of death, and in climbing at least it's really quite uncommon for anyone to be nearly so judgemental towards others who eschew protection that they would choose for themselves.

No, you're quite right, that was precisely the point I was trying to make ta.  I'm adding nothing useful to the thread though, so I'll be somewhat uncharacteristically winding my neck in now.  Cheers and goodnight.

I agree with your last paragraph, this thread is a bit weird but they way I read it no one has been judgmental about wearing a helmet more just sharing experience and personal preference. 

Apologies for my rubbish attempt at humour i should probably know better, the what are you wearing comment just amused me.

I'm not sure if there are any in my gallery here, but there are definitely plenty of photos of me bouldering and doing those little-grit-routes-which-are-uncomfortably-somewhere-between-bouldering-and-soloing with a helmet on, so I could be that annoying Captain Helmet who can smugly say "there's never a reason to not wear one [for adventure sports]!"   But that's when I'm on my own and, of course, I'm not consistent about this at all; when I'm bouldering with someone else, and often trying things harder than I might on my own, where I know falling off is going to happen, I don't wear one because bouldering in helmet looks weird, even if we all know it's sensible! (I was looking for one photo in this old review https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/footwear/climbing_shoes/comfy_all-day_rock_... but actually notice the photos of me make this point exactly, I'm wearing a helmet on soloing on short routes on Kinder and Baslow, but not on Stanage. Go figure.)

Do people who are old enough to remember learning to ride bikes when no one wore helmets, remember when they got their first? I know mine must have been late Sept. 1992. I moved to Glasgow to start uni and had to stay in my sister's flat on the South Side for Freshers Week, and I rode once across Glasgow to get to the university sans lid, and stopped at Halfords on the way back to get one of these new fangled helmet thingies! 

I cycled for years without a helmet, as a child & teenager, then as a student, both commuting to/from campus (Stirling & Aberdeen) & cycle touring. I finally bought a cycling helmet in my mid 40s when I started cycling in/around Paris in the early 2000s partly as it seemed more of a risk than the back roads of Strathspey but also as it just seemed the accepted thing to do in a way it hadn't been earlier (when did cycle helmets start being easily available ? I can't remember seeing them much before maybe 1990). I know wear one most of the time cycling, both on & off road. Always wore a helmet winter climbing but rarely for rock climbing & its only in the last couple of years I've started wearing one for downhill skiing as since retirement I live in a village which is a small downhill resort so piste ski much more than in the past.

1992 - I would have been 11. I know it was 1992 because they came from this Weetabix promotion: https://cerealoffers.com/Weetabix_Ltd/Weetabix/1990s/Bits_for_Bikes/bits_fo...

My Mum saved tokens to get these helmets for my sister and me. They were horrendous, really big and unwieldy, no vents, fabric helmet cover in the tasteful Weetabix yellow, and a double D-ring strap fastening that was impossible to do up by yourself. I used to wear it to leave the house, ditch it as soon as I sensibly could and then pick it up on my way home.

Started riding a bike at 5 years, in 1968. Spent much of my childhood riding bikes around local woods; what would be seen as (very rough) trail riding these days. Bought a helmet soon after buying my first mountain bike, in 1999, after my road bike was written off when a woman reversed out of her drive in front of me, down a steep hill. No head injury then ..

Must have been 90-92, had it in when I cycled into the back of a parked ford orion at pace and snapped off two of my incisors, leaving a blue stain on one (from the paint) that took years to fade.

Specialized xtra air I think.

I would never accuse anyone of being that annoying Captain Helmet on account of choices they make for themselves, it's when they preach their own choices as moral absolutes for others that it winds me up a bit.

We all have a bunch of cognitive biases that are seemingly just features/bugs of how the human mind works, and we're generally not very good at assessing risks associated with unlikely events.  Another delusion that's seemingly baked in is that we're much more rational than we actually are - constructing detailed post-hoc rationalisations for whatever decision has already been made by a far more emotional, intuitive process.

So my suspicion is that one thing going on here is a tendency to deny the extent to which peer pressure and 'culture' shapes our decision to wear/not wear a helmet, and having constructed a rational argument tend then to see it in very black/white terms as the only valid, logical choice.

Boulderers mostly don't wear helmets because other boulderers don't, cyclists mostly do wear helmets because other cyclists do.  I've been sea kayaking for about 10 years or so now, and noticed quite an abrupt cultural change there a few years ago.  Only 10 years ago hardly anyone ever wore one and the only sea kayakers who even owned one were those who also do some white water paddling.  Now almost everyone paddling on the sea does wear one for rock-hopping, surfing or messing about in tide races.  It isn't quite mandatory, but would probably be frowned on a bit for the leader/coach of a club or commercial group didn't set a good example by wearing one in a 'dynamic' environment.

Perhaps another thing going on is that modern cycle helmets are designed to absorb energy destructively, by breaking.  That enables them to be made much lighter and more compact than if they absorbed the energy of an impact by a more elastic deformation.  If you hit your head wearing a helmet and smash it to bits there's obviously a tendency to assume that the impact would surely have been fatal were it not for the helmet.  There are lots of people very confidently asserting in this thread and the other one that they definitely owe their lives to having been wearing one when they fell off their bike.

"I was completely unhurt but would have been killed without my helmet." - sorry folks, I'm absolutely not accusing you of lying, but I don't believe you!  Bike helmets are very effective protection against head injuries from an impact of course, but they're not that effective.  If it didn't hurt with the helmet, I don't think it's very likely that a really serious/fatal injury would have resulted without it.  (Though clearly the chances are the outcome would have been significantly worse.) 

Conversely, if the impact was severe enough that the helmet saved your life, you're very unlikely to come out of that without at least a bit of concussion.  If it would have been fatal without the helmet, there's no way it didn't hurt at all with the helmet.

I got my first in 2014!  Never having been much into mountain biking and never having used one before for commuting, pootling around Ladybower etc., I bought one when I entered an 'adventure' race with mandatory helmets for the cycle sections and thought I'd better train in the helmet I'd be wearing on race day.  Actually I bought two - the first one wasn't very good, then I took the time and spent a little bit more money to get a comfortable one that was a good fit and continued to use it (sometimes) after the race.

Apart from modern helmets being so much better and more comfortable than they were then, that's peer pressure innit?  Kids don't want to be the odd one out of their peer group - when I was that age I'd mostly have not wanted to wear a helmet because none of my mates was wearing one.

These days if you sent a kid out without one (assuming social services don't get involved because of the appalling parental neglect), the kid would probably be mithering you that they want a helmet because all their mates have one.

I remember a thread on here a while ago about auto belays, and how kids shouldn't wear helmets when they're climbing on an autobelay indoors because of the risk of the shell of their helmet snagging on a hold, meaning that they end up dangling from the helmet getting strangled by the chin strap.  A couple of climbing wall instructors commented that the kids really want to wear their helmets, and are reluctant to take them off.  Not on safety grounds (they're kids!) but because wearing one is part of the 'adventure', and climbing seems less exciting if an adult tells them they don't need one.

I first learnt to ride a bike - a Raleigh Chopper! - in the early/mid 1970s. I had to be very furtive about this however as my mother had absolutely forbidden me from ever riding a bike, and I only did so along at a friend's house - they were better off then us (his dad was a dentist, mine a railwayman) and they had a big gravel driveway where we could skid around on any of the several bikes there. I eventually bought an old bike (with a lady's frame) when I went to uni in Aberdeen, but I was into my 20s before I mentioned this to my mother.

In terms of helmets, I'm not sure when I first wore one, but most of my decade-plus of cycling across Glasgow in heavy traffic (Gorbals to jobs in the West End and Easterhouse) was helmetless, although I would always try and wear a yellow high-viz top if it was rainy/dark, or a white T-shirt if it was warm and sunny. Incidentally, my late father once rode 100 miles in a day on a bike with no gears. I think this was in Hampshire, when he was doing his National Service in the 1950s.

One reason not to wear a helmet is the inconvenience of something extra to carry when you get to the supermarket.

I once got shouted at by a motorist for not wearing a helmet, which was pretty funny as his health risk was higher - an hour of motoring made him an hour older and an hour closer to death (particularly as he was shouting at other road users) but an hour of brisk exercise makes you an hour older and several hours further away from death.

Stating the obvious, exercise makes you live longer.

Less obviously, you can gain more hours of life than hours of life you expend exercising. Estimates are varied, see a journalistic example below.

For the shouty motorist, the convenience of driving was more dangerous than cycling with or without a helmet.

Leisure cycling, mostly off road gravel & single track I always wear a helmet.

Utility cycling I don't often wear a helmet to keep my hands free when I'm at the destination.

https://www.inc.com/jeff-haden/science-says-1-hour-can-make-you-live-5-or-m...

Brisk walking for an hour gives you 3.2 hours of extra life

Biking for an hour at less than 10 mph (not particularly brisk) gives you 4.5 hours of extra life

Running for an hour gives you 9 extra hours of life

Jumping rope for an hour gives you 11 hours of extra life

I'm not sure that was the case for me. At that age, I was very much into going against the flow. I would often shoot myself in the foot because I wouldn't wear something or listen to music that I liked, purely because it was popular. It would absolutely have worn a helmet just to be different. The big factor for me was how heavy and uncomfortable it was.

Of course, your statement does hold true for most kids - I just liked to be an oddball!

I just leave mine clipped to my frame when I go to the supermarket. No-one in their right mind is going to want to steal my sweaty old helmet!

In the case I cited above, I never said my cousin was completely unhurt! If I implied that, it was unintentional - he had some significant injuries. However, those did not include a life-changing head injury.

Back in yee olden times (mid eighties) my brother bought a polystyrene helmet to replace his leather helmet used for racing (nobody else wore helmets).

We were amused that the instructions said, "not for use scuba diving". I liked the idea of people struggling to submerge with buoyancy strapped to their head. 

Apparently we no longer need to be told not to use our cycling helmets for scuba diving, we're obviously more intelligent these days

Here's a picture of Patsy Hendren the great Middlesex batsman wearing the first cricket helmet - years ahead of its time - in 1933:

https://www.cricketcountry.com/articles/patsy-hendren-wears-the-first-helme...

I didn't have a specific post in mind when I wrote that and wouldn't want to single one out really, but I agree completely that yours would not be an example of the kind of thing I mean.  Pedestrians have also died as a result of slipping up and whacking their heads on a kerb.

As a kid of 7 I really wanted some Jacques Cousteau goggles (the guy was a big star in 1973). We had neither a nearby sea nor our own Calypso, so I told my mum that I needed a set for the school running races because otherwise my eyes would be damaged by the speed of the air.

At the secondary school where I teach most of the kids who ride in don't wear helmets. It would definitely spoil the road man image of going everywhere with your Hoodrich hoody up, even in mid summer, and probably mess up their perms - yep, they're back. 

I wouldn't dream of snowboarding without a helmet on - I lost a heel edge turning on what turned out to be sheet ice with a light dusting of snow on top and was VERY glad I was wearing one, as the back of my head bounced off the ice!

Skiing - I wear one out of habit, but mainly to protect me from other people, these days.

Never been an issue.

I used to put it in my rucksack and then swap it for the groceries at the checkout.

These days, I just lock it to my bike

Think it was about the mid-nineties. It was a gift, did try it once - since then it has probably witnessed the rise and fall of dust mite empires in 30 years under the wardrobe.

I know this about cycling but I once got a concussion *from* a helmet while climbing. Been thinking about this a while and trying to work out how I could have avoided it but am stumped.

Niche admittedly - first time drytooling, on an overhanging traverse wall, fell backwards a long way, quite violently (my axe pinged) and rolled back, but then immediately whipped back forward and my head hit the inside of my helmet. Not pleasant - I felt the impact strongly and it set my health back months. Would have been fine if I was on a rope, or on a bouldering wall without a helmet (or probably without axes in my hands - I think they must have been why I so suddenly stopped travelling backwards and then whipped back forward, rather than absorbing the force of the fall in the roll as would usually happen). Obviously I wouldn't have wanted to generally not have the helmet on that evening - I was already rather struggling without eye protectors or gloves, which we hadn't been warned to bring - but I rather wish I hadn't had the helmet on at that very moment! 

Maybe the helmet could have been a tiny tiny bit closer fitted but it was fine for normal use and wasn't slopping around - I hadn't thought to test it for travelling forward at speed (and maybe I could have had the injury anyway from the brain travelling inside the skull, I don't know). 

Wow, this topic seems to surpass: peg bolts, abseil tatt/fixed loweroff and E0 in terms of triggering UKC readers. Good work! 🤣

Thanks!

That reminds me of an incident last year during a trip to a supermarket in Seattle. I wasn't really paying attention and was looking downwards as I rounded the end of an aisle at a fairly brisk pace. I bumped right into an elderly chap who was paying the same scant attention. He however was wearing one of those really solid,  full cover, bike helmets as our heads collided and definitely came off the better. I was quite dazed for several seconds immediately afterwards!

Did anyone else listen (or I think in my case, re-listen) to this?  It was interesting covering much the same ground as has been discussed here, but one thing I did take away from it is that if you are going to wear a helmet, these days it should be a MIPS (or similar) one. Unhelpfully they also point out that there is very little evidence of helmets degrading with age, so my current main summer helmet is 4 years old and probably doesn't "need" replacing BUT as I fortunately seem to have a Decathlon-shaped head, and Decathlon now make a MIPS equipped road helmet, the temptation to treat myself is growing...

People seem to have plenty of "my helmet saved my life" stories, but has anyone crashed yet with a MIPS helmet and had reason to think it did a better job than a "normal" bike helmet would have?

Not sure why you've got 18 down votes just for voicing your opinion but hey. However, I do take issue with writing off modern bike helmets as 'polystyrene caps'. They are so much more than that. I have had 2 occasions when my cycle helmet has taken an incredible impact, partially breaking in the process but leaving me talk pick myself up an continue my journey. I'm not saying they saved my life (though in one instance that is quite likely) but they certainly saved me from a significant injury and lots of pain! 

Notwithstanding that, I believe wearing a cycle helmet is a matter of personal choice and if you are happy riding without one I don't have a problem with that. I'm just happy to see people out on bikes.