Cycle helmet debate

"Can you see anything here to suggest that helmets are preventing a meaningful number of injuries? It looks to me as if the trend for cyclist injuries is not noticeably different from the trend for the whole population - and surely we can't credit helmets for saving those who aren't wearing them? (Actually we can try, but we won't get very far)."

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Cycle_helmet_debate

"Cyclists' death and injury rates decrease with increasing prevalence of cycling. The UK death rate of 53 per hundred million passenger hours is on a base of an average 62km cycled per person per year. In Holland the death rate is 23 per hundred million on a base of 850km per person per year, and in Denmark the rate is even lower - 18 deaths per hundred million hours on a base of 1,050km per person per year.

These ratios have been reasonably consistent over time, and indicate that the very best way to improve road safety for cyclists is to encourage more people to cycle. The reasons are obvious: more drivers will also be cyclists, and therefore be aware of the existence and needs of bikes on the roads; and the more bikes there are, the more drivers will expect to see them.

There is also good evidence that cycle lanes at least 2m wide, advanced stop lines, cycle-only phases at traffic lights, and good junction and roundabout design, are effective in increasing safety. After all, the most survivable crash is the one that doesn't happen in the first place. Helmets, by contrast, are a "sticking plaster" solution which fails to address in any way the underlying causes of accidents."