An occasional update on items from the Velo-city.
___________________________________________________________________
.
MANDATORY HELMET LAWS
Keeping this pot boiling:
Bike helmet laws saving lives; researchers
Researchers say they have evidence which shows mandatory helmet laws in New South Wales have worked, slashing head injuries by almost one third. Australia was the first country to introduce mandatory helmet legislation in 1991, and ever since it has been the subject of fierce debate. …
Dr Jake Olivier led researchers from the University of New South Wales and the Sax Institute. They found that from just before to just after the mandatory helmet law came into effect in NSW, head injuries among cyclists fell by up to 29 per cent. …
But Professor Chris Rissel disputes the findings and argues helmet laws should be repealed because they “do more harm than good”. Whether forcing people to wear helmets deters them from cycling is disputed, but Rissel maintains the number of people riding bikes has dropped since the introduction of helmet laws.
“The health benefits to physical activity through more people cycling really outweigh the injury risk that there is,” he says.
___________________________________________________________________
.
HELMETS ON KIDS
A super sweet video by Vancouver-based band La Candela who teams up with The B:C:Clettes for some bicycle-inspired music. “Ride a bike and wear a helmet, kids!”
___________________________________________________________________
.
BIKE-SHARING WITH HELMETS
This should be interesting: Boston has inaugurated bike-sharing -Hubway – and it has a compulsory helmet law.
Hundreds of cyclists attended Thursday’s launch of the program at Government Center, where Boston Mayor Thomas Menino applauded the program as a way to reduce traffic congestion, improve health and help the environment.
“The car is no longer king in Boston,” Menino said.
According to the mayor’s office, more than 700 people have signed up for annual memberships to the bike-share program so far.
___________________________________________________________________
.
HAPPY B’DAY, BARCLAYS
Bike sharing in London – known as Barclays Bikes – is one year old. Andrew Jackson says his friends have told him “this is the ‘next big thing’ in terms of transportation planning there.”
And even from an advertising perspective, I wonder if Barclays, the bank, has ever had as good a promotional return on its investment.
___________________________________________________________________
.
Well Barclays does sponsor the English Premier League but that probably cost a bit more. I hope Vancouver’s Public Bike System gets a decent sponsor when it gets going.
As for helmets, I really have trouble understanding the anti-helmet arguments about deterring participation. New cyclists especially should not be forgoing cranial protection as they get adjusted to riding.
Please cite a source for Boston’s mandatory helmet law, Gordon. As far as I can tell, helmets are mandatory for under-16s only. http://www.massbike.org/resourcesnew/bike-law/bike-law-update/ This puts helmets in the same category as smoking, drinking and having sex. The state sets legal minimum ages for the protection of minors.
The Church of Sit-Up Cycling has no issue with protecting children: http://flavors.me/situpvancouver
Jurisdictions, like British Columbia, that seek to protect adults from themselves belittle the citizenry. There are over 1000 pensioners hospitalised each year in British Columbia with head injuries resulting from falls at home: mandatory helmets at home for over-65s then? Helmets for crossing the road next?
Or perhaps our public servants could spend our taxes building safe, narrowed streets.
I’ve also been very encouraged to see the number of hat-free cyclists along 10th avenue in all this sunny summer weather. Hopefully this civil disobedience will only grow, and provide a real mandate for changing the law, or at least making an exception on Vancouver’s calmed streets and separated lanes.
Fining dutch tourists $200 for enjoying the seawall is not befitting of a world-class greenest city.
researchers are right:
bike helmet law reduces causalities among cyclist, by simple fact they deter cycling…
If you dispute this fact: you have better to come with a good explanation, on why practice of cycling has more than doubled in Quebec when it has stay at best flat in BC in the last 10 years.
the problem of that is that there is no no safety in number making cycling in BC much more dangerous for the brave able to ride with some encumbrance on their skull. That is also the reason why it is much safer to cycle in Quebec than in BC…
That is also the reason why like TwoWheeler, I feel encouraged by the amount of civil disobedience among Vancouver cyclist, a fact probably noone dispute, and make no mistake: the inching increase in cycling modal share, is thank to all this hair free cyclist which you will notify much more numerous in high cycling ridership neighborhood like Kits…
(in fact I have counted the other day close to 50% of cyclist without helmet, and 40% without helmet on Burrard bridge)…Those brave soul make cycling safer for everyone…
Thank to them.
Personally I grit my teeth at the non-safety conscious, which if we’re going to throw around anecdotal stats, seem far more likely to ride on sidewalks. I commute everyday workday from Kits to downtown and back and the commuter crew seems far more observant of laws than the casual ridership. Don’t get me wrong I would love to see higher ridership numbers but I’d also like to see them ride in a correct fashion.
By the way,
I believe the helmet law in Boston doesn’t apply to adult-only to kid 16years old or younger-
not a deterrent for a bike sharing system, relying on credit card anyway.
Just to make sure: so far the one and only undisputed bike sharing failure has been in Melbourne, Australia. The one and only bike sharing system with helmet law has been in…
PS: to Andrew ferris, the statistic I have given are certainly anecdotal for the compliance to helmet law, (it is not for cycling practice in BC vs Quebec, it is backed by solid number I have no time to retrieve the reference on the spot)…for the general behavior, I guess it is a perception viewpoint, since from mine, I saw more spandex-helmet biker running fast and furious as “casual cyclist” in everyday clothes making problem to other street users 😉
One thing for certain:
I’ve been cycling regularily for past 19 yrs. –includes commuting, fitness and self-loaded bike touring trips. We live a car-free life. Since then, a few close long-time friends and family members have taken up cycling regularily on their own.
One only walks (or cycles) their talk.
None of these folks asked me personally for my advice on helmets, cycling gear. Questions were more about bike fit (so they don’t waste their money) and good safe bike routes (in Toronto).
I would be a fool (to myself) to tell them now not to wear a helmet. Sorry, with 7 nieces and nephews, I have zero interest in convincing them not to wear a helmet.
Has ever occurred to anyone that telling some people not to wear a helmet might actually put off some loved ones to allow their family members, etc. to cycle?
We just returned from cycling 300 kms. over several years in the Canadian Rockies. There were some separated bike paths as well as sections of the Trans Canada Highway that we did on the shoulder. Speed limit for cars there was 110 kms. Hey, it’s Alberta. I haven’t seen such high speed limit in Ontario for the Trans Canada Highway yet…)
Really I enjoyed my false sense of security of wearing a bike helmet under such cycling circumstances. 🙂 And cycling chic during that trip? Well, please….we’re forgetting it’s a huge, big country out in the wild with headwinds, bighorn sheep, bears and all.
Let’s get practical at times.
Oops I meant cycling over several days (not years).
I don’t think we should ever encourage people not to wear a helmet. I wear a helmet whenever I cycle, and that’s not going to change. Even cautious cyclists get into crashes eventually, especially given that we don’t have the critical mass seen in other cities, and also because cyclists crash with each other (especially when they forget to signal!) The problem is where it’s mandatory, as that does discourage cycling. It means people are worried about making even a short trip if they haven’t already put in the investment to buy a helmet and likely buy their own bike, and they don’t buy their own bike because they haven’t had that “i love cycling” experience. This will become even more of an issue when we launch our bike share program, which Melbourne has done, and has had a lot of difficulty getting the same level of usage that other cities have had.
It’s also true that when I show up somewhere, I have helmet hair. I don’t really mind so much, but others will, especially if they’re hoping to look as hip as those in the Flying Pigeon video previewed later in the blog.
So absolutely, let’s encourage cyclists to use their helmet, but I don’t see the need to force people under fear of paying a fine. Especially when simply getting on a bike has so many health benefits regardless of the helmet.