Article by Don Hollingshead

Alberta Bicycle Association, June 1999

    In a nutshell, I would like folks to wear a helmet but to make that
    decision on their own (or for their children). The EVCC in concert with
    other agencies should continue to promote the benefits of helmet
    wearing. A comprehensive cyclist education program should be widely
    available to cyclists to arm them with the knowledge they need to avoid
    injury-causing accidents.

    In my naive past, I even lobbied with the MLA for Calgary Centre for
    mandatory helmet legislation in Alberta (early '80's). Who couldn't
    support a law for something so good for humanity? Then I started to
    hear about other aspects of the issue from advocates in BC. Not
    everyone was completely sold on mandatory helmet legislation's benefits
    to society, especially to the healthcare system. Then I heard about a
    number of Quebec physicians who opposed mandatory helmet legislation.
    What was going on?

    Apparently compelling people to wear bicycle helmets makes what is a
    relatively safe activity appear very dangerous. This may have the
    effect of turning potential cyclists away from a relatively healthy
    activity. If cycling were just another sedentary way get from A to B by
    pushing on a gas pedal or twisting a throttle on a motorbike, then
    there should be no problem in compelling users to don safety equipment
    like seat belts or helmets. However, motorized personal conveyances
    provide no positive benefit for the general health of our society. On
    the contrary these conveyances engender sedentary lifestyle, pollute
    the air and maim and kill people with alarming frequency.

    In 1996, 5744 Albertans died of cardiovascular disease. There were
    22,268 injuries (549 cyclists and 1002 pedestrians) and 349 deaths in
    traffic mishaps (4 were cyclists and 36 were pedestrians). In 1996, for
    every cyclist that died, 1436 Albertans died of cardiovascular disease,
    77 motorists died and 9 pedestrians died. Alberta's population was
    2,636,489 in 1996.

    By far, the largest killer of Albertans appears to be cardiovascular
    disease, a preventable disease resulting from a sedentary lifestyle. A
    disease engendered by television and automobiles.

    If we make cycling, an activity that combats cardiovascular disease,
    look too dangerous to folks who might like to give it a whirl, we are
    likely taxing our health care system much more than paying for the odd
    head injury from cycling mishaps. This is the conclusion drawn by the
    British Medical Association in condemning mandatory helmet legislation
    in Britain.

    We keep hearing anecdotes about "experienced" cyclists involved in
    mishaps and requiring a new helmet. "That helmet saved my life" they
    say. So they conclude that we make all cyclists wear one. When I
    analyze the anecdotes I hear, I consistently conclude that the cyclist
    was not in control of their bike, rode too close to the opening truck
    door, or made a poor judgment of some sort-most bicycling mishaps could
    have been avoided with better riding skills and judgment. And wearing
    protective headgear may make cyclists take chances that they otherwise
    wouldn't. (I am presently researching changes in risk taking behaviors
    in sports where protective headgear has been introduced.)

    There is a real fear that once the government enacts mandatory helmet
    legislation, they largely walk away from the issue of bicyclist
    education, feeling that they have done their job. This has been borne
    out in both Ontario and BC. I know that the following isn't going to
    endear me to my cycling comrades but I think its true. In my humble
    opinion, very few cyclists I've observed demonstrate optimal skills or
    judgment. Many have barely adequate skills to get them around. A
    comprehensive bicycle education program would help resolve this and
    help cyclists avoid the sorts of situations that require a
    helmet-destroying Hail Mary dive.

    The Alberta Bicycle Association recently received detailed counts of
    bicyclist activity/injury rates in Australia comparing these before and
    after the introduction of mandatory helmet legislation. From Chris
    Gillham  in Australia, here is a synopsis:


       "Detailed analysis of government figures shows that compulsory bicycle
        helmet legislation has decimated cycling as a recreation pursuit since
        1992, yet cyclist injuries are now at their highest level in Western
        Australian history.

        The latest statistics show a total of 738 cyclists were hospitalized in
        1997, when 20% of seriously injured road users were cyclists. The
        previous admissions record was 735 in 1991. However, Main Roads Western
        Australia figures show there are still between 10% and 20% fewer people
        (approx. 100,000 cyclists) riding bicycles in Perth than in 1991 - the
        year before the helmet law was enforced.

        Surveys conducted on the Narrows and the Causeway show that during the
        8 months prior to enforcement of the legislation on June 1 1992, the
        monthly averages of daytime trips across these two bridges added up to
        17,180 cyclists.

        During the eight months to prior June 1 1998, they added up to
        approximately 14,600 cyclists. This equates to a 15% reduction in
        cyclist numbers, despite an increase in Perth's population of more than
        140,000 people since 1991.

        If this 10% population increase is factored into the decline, it can be
        estimated that between 20-30% fewer people are riding bicycles now
        compared to 1991 - that is, almost one out of every four potential
        cyclists has stopped riding because of the legislation."


     Bottom line: Our society is better served if people ride their bikes
     without helmets rather than not riding them at all because they are
     compelled to wear a helmet. Injury statistics do not show cycling to be
     a particularly hazardous activity compared to the health benefits it
     bestows. 



de@daclarke.org 

De Clarke