On 24 Apr, 17:46, Mike Clark wrote:

Fair enough I understand your view. In my case I started out as an early
advocate for the wearing of cycle helmets. In the late 70s and early 80s
I usually found myself in a helmet wearing minority trying to convince
others of the benefits of wearing a cycle helmet. I also brought to
peoples attention the case controlled studies which seemed to show the
advantages of wearing a helmet.

However over time I started to look at the totality of all the evidence
both from case controlled studies and also from population studies. I
also became more aware of data associated with risk compensation. Indeed
my personal participation in sports such as rock climbing,
mountaineering and skiing demonstrated to me graphically that people
really do modify their behaviour in response to their own perceptions of
the risks, myself included. I also realised that peoples perceptions of
risk rarely reflected an accurate understanding of the probability of
any given risk.

Thus when I appreciated that there were indeed genuine anomalies in the
data providing evidence for the benefits of wearing a helmet I became
more sceptical.

My current position is that I remain unconvinced that cycle helmets
provide any substantial benefit for many forms of cycling, although I
wouldn't dismiss the possibility of there being an underlying small
benefit, particularly in some forms of cycling. Certainly on a cost
benefit analysis it seems strange to me to over emphasise the importance
of one risk, such as head injuries when cycling, and yet not to
appreciate the evidence that the risks of head injuries in many other
every day circumstances are likely to be much higher (such as when
walking along streets and roads, descending stairs, using ladders, or
taking a bath or shower, or returning home from the pub after a few
beers). Do I consider it an acceptable risk to undertake these other
activities without wearing helmet? Yes. Which is why I also now consider
it acceptable for people to choose to cycle without wearing a helmet.

Mike

Thanks for that info, and I understand and appreciate your perception
and views. It does indeed ultimately boil down to individual choice. I
would, however, qualify that by saying that new or inexperienced
riders, particularly young ones, would perhaps be best advised to use
a helmet until they feel (or are old enough) that they can make that
judgement. As with learning to drive, there is much that you learn in
the first couple of years about road risks and how to spot and deal
with them, and there is an element of luck in completing that
experience without actual injury.

I'm aware of the effects of risk compensation - there are activities I
undertake for my own enjoyment where I choose and accept the risks. I
regard road use as a necessity where it is not worth taking undue
risk, and where much of what can happen depends on the actions of
others, and, from experience, both personally and professional, I'm
quite prepared to use any reasonable precautions to get safely from A
to B. Whilst it may be my attitudes to road use minimise my own risk
compensation, it helps to be aware of those who may be more regardless
of their own and my safety and to make extra allowance for this. So
far, so good, but then I can't prove why, and there is always the
occasional black swan on or off the road, as I recently reflected when
falling from a stepladder (without a helmet).

Toom