Design, citizenship and the city
24 August 2009
You’re free to republish/copy this article under the Creative Commons Attribution licence provided you credit me (Adrian Short) and give a link back to the original article. Thanks.
This article is now available as audio in two parts on AudioBoo.
Ethical Consumer has a feature called Love this, ban that! which asks an assortment of the green and the good which saintly products they love and which evil ones they’d ban. Sadly, only Mayor Boris took the opportunity to challenge the premise that banning things is the best way to steer society down a more sustainable path and to allay the well-founded suspicion among many outside the green ghetto that environmentalists tend to be ban-happy authoritarians.
Inexplicably, Ethical Consumer didn’t contact me to take part in their survey but I’d like to nominate the bicycle as my favourite “ethical consumer product” and the cycle helmet for an immediate, total ban backed up with the full force and violence of the criminal justice system.
I hope that choosing the bicycle as my preferred product needs little explanation or justification but my proposed ban on cycle helmets might be a little more problematic. For a long time I’ve harboured the suspicion in my more paranoid moments that there’s some kind of collusion between the road/oil lobby and elements of the cycling fraternity to ensure that cycling in Britain remains a marginalised, unpleasant and largely despised activity.
For those of us looking to travel between around a mile and eight miles without an extreme amount of cargo, the bike should be the default choice. Done right, cycling is convenient, cheap, safe, accessible, fun and sustianable.
It’s not possible to uninvent the bicycle but if Shadowy Forces wanted to minimise the number of people cycling so as to benefit their Evil Agenda they’d probably want to chip away at all the things that make cycling potentially great so as to diminish the whole experience. If you can’t ban it, knacker it.
Here’s how to do it:
Cycling is cheap? Can’t have that. Now, let’s see. Let’s start at the obvious place by making bikes more expensive. Load them with features that cost more to build (complex braking systems, gears, suspension) and require expensive expert maintenance rather than DIY. Turn the bike from an everyday utilitarian thing, a utensil, and make it a product. Desirable. Fashionable. Consumerable. There’s a lot of choice, so shop around. Read reviews. Get recommendations. Worry, because it matters. Who’d want to be seen riding a cheap bike? An unfashionable bike? A tatty bike? Now accessorise. That expensive bike needs an expensive lock — or two. Got to protect your investment. Buy insurance. (Shop around, shop around.) Compare the tensile strengths and style options and get a helmet. A bone dome. A skid lid. Don’t be cheap — your skull could depend on it. Get a hi-viz jacket that’s more breathable than a string vest and only fifty times the price. Padded shorts for that tiny, bony saddle. Special shoes to couple perfectly with your special pedals. A messenger bag from this week’s premium brand.
Here’s the safety strategy: Make it less safe and make it feel less safe. The best way to make cycling less safe is for cyclists to ride faster. Encourage this wherever possible. Forget ambling, casual, pedestrian images of cycling. Emphasise sport, fitness, competition. Measure speed. Sell speedometers and odometers. Get people to monitor their performance. Track their MPH, their heartrates, their calories, their carbon footprints. Compare with others. Compete. Idolise road racers, couriers, extreme mountain bikers, BMXers. Alleycatters. Lance Armstrong. Jump the red light. Race other cyclists. Race cars. Race the clock. Race, race. It’s not fun unless you’re taking risks. Life is one big risk, right? Cycling just got a whole lot more dangerous for the sake of a marginal shortening of the average journey. Ohh, wipeout. Nice one.
Now the perception of safety. Talk about safety, safety, safety so everyone thinks danger, danger, danger. Don’t show images of cyclists without helmets, especially not children. Never children. Sending your children out on bikes without helmets is tantamount to child abuse. Don’t you care? Don’t you care about the children? Would you send them out to their deaths? Photos of cyclists without helmets are like images of people with cigarettes. Historical documents. Anachronisms. Forbidden outside the intellectual safety of the academy. Be safe, be seen. Hi viz. Yellow jacket, yellow jersey. £100 lights that can dazzle shipping 20 miles off the coast. Lumens. Got to get more lumens. You need a bell? You need a foghorn. Radar. Missiles, if you could get them. And you need training, because it’s a war out there. Drivers hate you. Pedestrians hate you. Other cyclists hate you. The law is indifferent, the police don’t care. Every other road user will kill you if they get a chance. Unless you get trained. Unless you can stay one step ahead of them. Unless you can get them first. So you go to boot camp. You get trained. You are approved. You are a Cyclist. You feel a little bit safer in that dangerous place. Until you see the ghost bike. Don’t be a statistic like the pallid, mangled wreck chained to the lamppost at the roundabout. Don’t be a victim. Go faster. Be a winner. Beat them.
Do you smell? People shouldn’t smell. If you cycle, if you cycle fast, you’ll smell. You’ll need a shower. Does your workplace have showers? No? Don’t cycle. Does the pub have showers? No? Don’t cycle. Does the shopping centre have showers? No? Please, don’t cycle.
If you don’t mind smelling, you can’t cycle to work because they don’t have lockers. You need a locker for your helmet. Your jacket. Your padded shorts. Your special shoes that couple so, so perfectly with your special pedals. Your quick-release (eezy-steal) saddle. Your lights and all their lumens. Your handlebar computer with its data, its intimate knowledge of your body, your performance, your lifestyle. Your hydration system. Your lock. You worry about your lock. It cost more than your first bike. And the bike itself? That needs a CCTV-monitored, thumbprint-secured, climate-controlled vault. A lamppost won’t do because your bike takes a month’s work to buy but only a minute or two to steal.
Are you fat? Don’t cycle. You don’t, do you? Fit people cycle. Fat people do not cycle. (Fat people do not swim. Fat people do not run. Soon, fat people will not walk.) Cycling is about fitness. Fat people, un-fit people, do not cycle. Fat people look ridiculous on bikes. Fat people look crap in lycra. Fat people look even more fat in lycra, if such a tragically hilarious thing could be possible. Fat people can only go slowly but cyclists must go fast. They must race. They must perform. They must compete. Fat people are not fast off the lights. Fat people do not look like Lance Fuckingarmfuckingstrong. Fat people must enshroud themselves in cars as a prophylactic against polite society’s sight of their ungainly self-propelled movement. Fat people must squeeze themselves onto buses and trains and tubes with all the other huffers and puffers, the children and the old people, the timid and the nearly dead. They say obese but you read fat. People like you are an epidemic. You are contagious and the things you must do to make the rest of us safe you are not allowed to do. Fat is getting thinner all the time. If you are fat, don’t cycle. You don’t, do you?
Cycle helmets are the most visible and potent symbol of all that’s wrong with Britain’s (anti-)cycling culture. Cycle helmets say we cannot cycle without the right precautions, the right equipment, the right infrastructure, the right training. Cycle helmets say there must be more to cycling than a person, two wheels and the surface of the Earth. Cycle helmets say that cycling is more dangerous than not cycling. Let’s ban them now before it’s too late. Let’s lock up all the people who buy them, who sell them, who use them. Let’s drag them off to jail in handcuffs, in tears.
25 August 2009
[...] via save the planet – ban cycle helmets [...]
25 August 2009
BRAVO!
25 August 2009
This is the best collection of words I’ve seen written about cycling in quite some time.
Keep rolling and writing,
Kent Peterson
Issaquah WA USA
25 August 2009
A truly hilarious yet confronting read.
25 August 2009
Hits the nail squarely on the head – well done dude!
25 August 2009
Brillant!
25 August 2009
[...] Save the planet – ban cycle helmets [...]
25 August 2009
I whole heartily agree, ban cycle helmets today, cycling for all!!
25 August 2009
[...] This post was Twitted by jdpanoptic [...]
25 August 2009
Compelling genius.
Love it.
I never wore a helmet, but started recently… all because of the number of cars on the road here in Cardiff. Bikes are on the up, but it’s still not commonplace.
Kudos.
25 August 2009
Stunning collection of words, and all in good order as well!
Advertising/marketing/capitalism is pervasive and not easily ignored. I remember when hiking (walking, rambling…) meant putting on a pair of shoes and hitting the trail. Now most hikers I see have hydration packs (no time to stop and drink from a bottle), 2 hiking poles (Hey, you lost your skis!!), gore-tex everything. Can hiking helmets be far behind? Knee pads? Elbow guards? Don’t laugh, I predict we will see them very soon.
You heard it first here.
Bob
Michigan, USA
25 August 2009
Agreed on the general sentiment, although I wouldn’t send cyclists who feel safer with helmets to jail, or for that matter the sales assistants who are ordered to sell the things. I used to be both of these.
By the way, the reason accesories are pushed is that they have higher profit margins than bikes. We were always told selling a bike was good, to sell lights and anything else we could was 100% better.
25 August 2009
Forgot to mention that the merchandise bandwagon continues: Bikehacks are featuring a bike helmet lock. The comments of the designer about why he made them (at the end of the post)are revealing. Essentially he admits helmets are a pain and put him off cycling sometimes:
http://bikehacks.com/the-honor-system-mystery-product-revealed/
25 August 2009
Rapturous applause!
25 August 2009
Twaddle. Why look for a conspiracy when simpler human defects will do? There will always be business that want to sell you a better bike with more accessories. That’s just capitalism. There will always be those who I suppose with the intent for doing good to will advocate for nanny government including helmet laws. Are busybodies are unique to cycling? Fat people are discouraged from riding? You just made that up. And on and on.
I wear a helmet because I’ve bounced my head off the ground with and without a helmet and I vastly prefer with. I also encourage others to wear helmets for the same reason unless they are mid-20′s, healthy, non-drinkers then I don’t. I might need their liver some day. If a simple, cheap piece of safety equipment is enough to stand between a person and biking then they weren’t really serious about biking in the first place.
25 August 2009
Very funny, very good.
“Cycle helmets are the most visible and potent symbol of all that’s wrong with Britain’s (anti-)cycling culture.” – Absolutely.
25 August 2009
Who you calling fat? I’m proportionally challenged, and I ride, and ride, and ride – and my proportions are changing for the better.
25 August 2009
Very well said. It’s bicycle illiteracy.
Did you know: half the population of the USA lives within 5 miles of work. Two thirds of car journeys in the UK are shorter than 5 miles.
http://1world2wheels.org/get-involved
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4626
25 August 2009
Very well said. It’s bicycle illiteracy.
Did you know: half the population of the USA lives within 5 miles of work. Two thirds of car journeys in the UK are shorter than 5 miles. Sources: CTC website and 1world2wheels.org.
25 August 2009
And I just subscribed to your blog – nice job.
25 August 2009
I actually think this is part of the wider risk-averse culture we have in Britain at the moment. [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7062545.stm]Particularly with regards to children[/url]
25 August 2009
I’ve yet to see any non-anecdotal evidence that cycle helmets work at speeds in excess of 12 mph. Strangely, most of the research that I have seen that is in favour of helmet-wearing turns out to have been funded by manufacturers of moulded polystyrene hats.
Cycle helmets would actually be more useful to pedestrians, yet no-one seems to be promoting them for that purpose.
25 August 2009
The next step is surely to get local & national papers on board with these views? Education is vital – people will not lose their ‘culture of fear’ agendas without proper education about ALL the issues around cycling.
Little by little – we’ll get there in the end!
Well done on a great piece.
Mike
25 August 2009
Love it – well said. And a good morning laugh.
25 August 2009
[...] Save the planet — ban cycle helmets :: Adrian Short adrianshort.co.uk/2009/08/24/456 – view page – cached Ethical Consumer has a feature called “Love this, ban that!” which asks an assortment of the green and the good which saintly products they love and which evil ones they’d ban. Sadly, no-one took the opportunity to challenge the premise that banning things is the best way to steer society down a more sustainable path and to allay the well-founded suspicion among many outside the green ghetto that environmentalists tend to be ban-happy authoritarians. — From the page [...]
25 August 2009
Excellent piece Adrian – you should try and get it more widely published. I was concerned to read in The Scotsman on my recent foray north of the border that the police are stopping parents who fail to ensure their child wears a helment when cycling to school. I wasn’t aware that it was compulsory! If we instill on children that cycling is dangerous from an early age it could put them off, not to mention the style factor. Very few cyclists on the continent wear helmets, where cycling is more common.
25 August 2009
Fucking brilliant.
25 August 2009
Excellent article – it could only be improved if you had, perhaps, some strong feelings about the subject. For myself, I ride a bike because it is the best way to get from one place to the other, and no one tells me what hat to wear. I can dress myself perfectly well, too, and I don’t see why riding a bike should require a special costume. Keep up the good words.
25 August 2009
While humorous, this post is nearly completely free of any kind of revelation.
Humans can turn any material good into a fetish. Your description of the ridiculous parade of bike ‘improvements’ for the common consumer has been duplicated in a million different ways. Cars, sunglasses, shoes, bras, food – people demand relentless improvement in the things they purchase. Progress must be paid its due.
Helmets, on the other hand, are a practical, inexpensive and unobtrusive tool that provide a valuable margin of safety. You may see them as a symbol of oppression, much like your philosophical ancestors (or perhaps you!) saw the car seatbelt. As someone who was lucky enough to be wearing one when my head was bounced off of a speeding car, then road, then sidewalk, a helmet is not a toy, nor is it irrelevant. Anecdotal evidence, to be sure, but an anecdote I would not have been able to convey at this time, as I would be dead.
But this misses the forest for the trees, right? And I get that – this is a funny essay, and the satire has enough bite to be uncomfortable. For that, bravo! Now put on your damned helmet, you freak.
25 August 2009
I live in Portland, where people cycle in dresses, slacks, shorts, capris, and any other every day clothes besides lycra. There’s lycra, too, of course, but they’re not commuters.
Every time I’ve fallen off my bike and hit my head, no one else was involved in my accident – I hit a pot hole, I hit an old rail tie in the road, I hit a big ole rearview mirror of a parked car. You can argue that the infrastructure should be soooo good I’d never fall off my bike, but that’s a bit absurd. A helmet is the difference between “Ow, that hurt!” and “Trip to the hospital” – did it save my life? By no means. It just saved me a world of hurt.
I don’t understand animosity towards helmets.
I think Portland has proved that safety equipment isn’t the problem – it’s the feeling that you’re not safe riding a bike. If you do feel safe – and a helmet helps some people feel safe – you’ll get out on your bike. We’ve had a 146% increase in bicycle road share in Portland since 2006. And that was a 600% increase from 1990. It matches the increase in good bicycle infrastructure. Lots of people ride in Portland – and most of them ride helmets.
That wouldn’t make as interesting a blog post, though…
25 August 2009
Good rant, except it totally misses a considerable number of points, not least of which is that nobody has banned people from going out and buying a cheap bike. In fact, you’ll probably find the bikes most normal cyclist ride are pretty cheap, however below a certain price a bike becomes a bike-shaped-object, so unpleasant to use they inevitably get shoved into the garage and ignored. Same thing with gear. As for helmets, since when has anyone had the right to tell me what I should wear for my own sense of self-preservation. I do not agree with forcing cyclists to wear a helmet, however, I ride mountain bikes, frequently at some speed off-road, and I couldn’t begin to tell you how many times I’ve had the top of my head impacted by low branches, which would have left me bleeding heavily or stunned on the ground if I hadn’t worn a helmet. A recent crash in town at walking pace on wet Tarmac left me with a badly damaged knee, a grazed face, and ringing ears, with damage to my helmet that indicates that I would have had a serious head wound that would have required hospital treatment. Rant at capitalism if you like, but don’t try to enforce a Stalinist imposition on what people have a right to buy. Maybe you’d be happier moving to North Korea, a society that seems to fit your criteria for a happy society.
25 August 2009
But but but Allison, if it didn’t save your life, it’s useless, right?
I don’t understand the animosity either.
25 August 2009
The animosity against helmets comes from authorities and traffic safety people promoting helmets as an effective safety device.
There are many case-control studies where the helmet-wearing group of cyclists got lower head injury rates than the ones without. However, experience from places with high helmet-wearing rates show that head injury rates do not fall with increasing helmet-wearing rates, especially in collisions with cars.
Read more at cyclehelmets.org and Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmets_in_New_Zealand
25 August 2009
This is ridiculous dribble. While you correctly identify a whole array of things that make cycling seem like an exclusive club that requires all the bells & whistles (and spandex, etc.), helmets are most certainly not one of those.
Helmets are smart. Brain damage, a fractured skull, a concussion – are not. I ride an awesome conversion I built myself for very little $$ and no, my bike’s not pretty. It doesn’t have anything fancy or extra on it. Bare bones when it comes down to it, but I sure as hell went and spent the few dollars to put a helmet on my skull.
This rant is crap. You could’ve talked all about how easy it is to enter into the world of cycling without picking a fight with helmets.
25 August 2009
Allison– Don’t be so quick to categorize all lycra-wearers as non-commuters (granted, I commute my lycra-clad butt to work in Beaverton, technically not Portland).
I believe a lot of the promotion of safety equipment is driven by the nefarious exaggeration of fear of cycling; “Cycling is dangerous!” I also think, though, that when people have a choice, they will find what works for them and stick with it. For some, helmets “work”; for some others, lycra makes the longer commute more comfortable.
25 August 2009
[...] This post was Twitted by pdxgene [...]
25 August 2009
Kryxtanicole, I don’t know about the UK, but in Sweden, concussions are very unusual among cyclists: one concussion per two million kilometres cycled. That’s equivalent to cycling an hour a day for 274 years. Plus, a concussion isn’t the end of the world; cyclists with concussions are discharged from the hospital after just one day on average. Brain damage and skull fractures are even more rare, even though only 20% of cyclists wear helmets in Sweden.
Even if you get a skull fracture, Swedish cyclists spend an average 4 days in the hospital for skull fractures, just half the care time needed for motorists with skull fractures. So the skull fractures suffered by car drivers are much more serious. Click my name for the whole story (sorry, only in Swedish).
A helmet isn’t likely to help you in a collision with a car, see wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmets_in_New_Zealand
25 August 2009
its a funny word smith’s story, reads well as hell, giggle … etc. but what is your point? I think you have chosen the least effective attacking angle against anti cycling lobbies.
I cycled 36 years without a helmet, finally got a helmet and did not wear it much. than came the sudden late night low speed self accident in a badly lit street of bangalore , falling into a pothole, not unconscious, but badly damaged . lost memory for couple of hours, found myself in hospital for 4 days,3 weeks recuperation from sever concussion. two years later another medium speed self accident nearby due to front wheel arrest due to ….. .I flew over the handle bar and hit head and shoulders hard on tarmac, solid pain and bruises and a broken helmet but nothing else. this was enough evidence for me to now wear the helmet always and every day and to overcome all feelings of infringed freedom , wind in the hair etc and understand the real issue notwithstanding my own ranting against consumerist behaviour of our society etc. appreciating your talent to entertain us…!
25 August 2009
http://images.livescience.com/strangenews/070515_ap_head_squish.html
This is why I wear a helmet. Brains belong inside the skull. When you’re out on the street totally exposed, with cars and trucks and busses breathing fire down your neck, and the city has made road-maintainance a low priority so you are dodging pot holes large enough to swallow a Holstein (Friesian to you Brits) cow, every bit of protection is appreciated. Does the helmet make me invulnerable? Of course not! But it can’t hurt.
And what’s bad about gears and brakes? Singlespeed bikes with coasting brakes make sense if you live somewhere FLAT, but I live in West Virginia, which is not called ‘the Mountain State’ for no reason; I need all the gears I can get.
25 August 2009
Hurrah for this chap!
People should wear hats if they want, but they shouldn’t be pushed on people with pseudoscience rubbish.
More people on bikes! i avoid potholes by going at a reasonable (laid back) speed, and watching where I’m going. It seems to work OK for me.
25 August 2009
Fucking Brilliant, well done
25 August 2009
Completely terrific. Bravo!
26 August 2009
Well written and a fun read. However, while I agree that cycling clothes and most accessories are a ridiculous waste of money I disagree that helmets should be villified. Honestly, I don’t care if you or anyone else goes lidless, but I choose protect my own head everyday. My husband wears a helmet when he plays ice hockey. I wear a helmet when I ride my bike.
26 August 2009
Love it. Reminds me of the urban design philosophy of removing lights from intersections which can actually make them safer as drivers have to pay more attention.
26 August 2009
Awesome, thank you!
(found courtesy of Copenhagenize)
26 August 2009
Thanks for an enjoyable read. Remember folks, not everything is to be taken literally! There may be an easier way to end the debate over abortion than the one regarding bike helmets. Me? I live on a hill and wear a helmet while I speed down. I’ve often said that my greatest dangers on the way up are heart attacks and trucks, neither of which is going to worry in the least about my helmet, which hangs from the handlebars.
26 August 2009
Common sense says that if you fall and hit your head a hard hat would help. (Though I have read that the helmet increases the twisting effect – you can’t win all the time.) But helmets appeared in the UK some twenty years ago and they were worn by American tourists. Despite increases in cycling in the US they are still way down on utility cycling unlike Northern continental Europe. There hardly anyone wears a helmet and few cycles are imitation mountain bikes. So if cycling is to be fostered in Britain we should take lessons from Europe and not America. Fifty odd years ago plenty of people cycled to work, to school, to the shops in Britain; we lost that because we copied America and not Europe. The helmet is a symbol of US cycling not European cycling.
26 August 2009
Very good! Cyclists have mostly bought into the cycling is dangerous argument, but the people who’ve really bought it are the ones who will not give it a try or let their children cycle because it’s just so dangerous.
Cycling is fun and good for us so let’s portray it that way. Sitting on the couch in front of the television with a bowl of chips is the killer.
26 August 2009
Cycling *is* dangerous. Hell, what isn’t. Every morning and every evening as I prepare for my commute to and from work, my stomach churns. But I don my racing latex and helmet, slip into my special cycling shoes, slide my skinny ass onto the skinny saddle of my expensive titanium-framed fixed gear, and head out to do battle in the pavement wars. I am my own hero.
26 August 2009
[...] This post was Twitted by BeefingJection [...]
26 August 2009
You call cycling dangerous? Try being a couch potato. It seems so safe, snug at home in front of the TV maybe with a beer in hand. But THAT’s dangerous. Slowly the effects build up until you’re trapped in your shell and the heart attack or stroke are arguing over who gets to take you.
27 August 2009
Should Mr. Short be so unfortunate as to suffer a fatal head injury whilst cycling without a helmet, I will nominate him for a Darwin Award.
27 August 2009
While we are at it, why don’t we ban seat belts in motor vehicles as well? I mean after all, aren’t they just an oil company conspiracy to keep more people alive so they will buy more oil? Mr. Short’s arguments are puerile in their simplicity.
27 August 2009
You won’t understand. It’s all about performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn29DvMITu4
27 August 2009
Congratulation for your wit. I think you got a point, but I also think you should reconsider the focus of attack. While all the gadgets you are satirizing are in fact ridiculous and really not needed to use bikes as transportation there are some facts that seem paradoxical, but are unfortunately true, at least in Germany:
Bikes are cheaper than ever. For my grandfather in the 50ies his bike was worth a months wage, that would be about 3000 € today while the average bike now sells for 3-800 €. So I cant see the expensive point. Bikle dealers are rather threatened by a flood of cheapos. And live of people prepared to spend a good amount of cash for a bike. When I was young all youngsters wantd a motorbike. Now they spend the same amount on a MTB. Progress.
Bike sales grow after cycling is highlighted in the media. In Germany cycling was dead until Thurau in 1978 and Ulrich in 1996 got some guys on their bikes. Many of them now also use it for transportation (if not enough). Also if they just do it in Lycra at least doint cycling as a sport gives SOME impression of what a cyclist experiences vs a car.
Advancements in equipment (derailleurs etc.) help people in not so perfect shape. Given the German landscape (hilly!) transporting a child on a would be a real problem. But now I see a lot of mothers on bikes with Childrens seats. First came the mountain bike, then better gearing for everyday bikes.
Concerning safety: I all support the slow biking movement. This is the way to go. But things are now not as they should be.
You say that “if done right” biking is safe. Very true.
But I observe 70% of cyclists NOT doing it right. (To leave out the motorists just for this time) Too fast, too cutting corners, too going in the wrong direction, too dressed black without a light, too MP3 Player deaf. Given cyclists crammed on narrow bikelanes (unfortunate, but given fact for the time being, in Germany there are many, they are all bullshit and you HAVE to use them, else all damage is your responsibility) this IS dangerous.
A bike with a 75 kg rider at 20 km/h DOES have a lot of energy/impact (check your physics book) Not to be compared with pedestrians.Notr at all.
Fortunately I observe the number of cyclists growing here in Regensburg/Germany. The downside is: narrow bike lanes are ever more crowded with speeding, unexperienced bike heroes not aware of what they are doing. I was one of them, which led to suffering and injury. In the group of about 100 cyclists I know personally there were 6 accidents involving head injury (rsp. broken helmets) in the last 3 years.
Conclusion: Copenhagenise, Amsterdamize, Portlandize, strengthen the slow bike movement! Cycling is in fact not INHERENTLY dangerous. But as things are now with all things against us, and 70% of cyclists being safe cycling´s worst enemies I choose to wear a helmet. No big deal. Dont have much hair to spoil anyway.
27 August 2009
[quote]While we are at it, why don’t we ban seat belts in motor vehicles as well? I mean after all, aren’t they just an oil company conspiracy to keep more people alive so they will buy more oil? Mr. Short’s arguments are puerile in their simplicity.[/quote]
Sarcasm for you – a serious suggestion for others.
http://john-adams.co.uk/?s=seat+belt
It’s all to do with risk compensation. Objective safety and subjective safety sometimes operate against one another – ie, where people feel safe they behave in a more risky manner.
27 August 2009
So, the author’s trying to persuade us all to ride in jeans on a crappy bike with a lock that’s easily broken, lighting our way with the weakest and most pathetic lights we can find? Is this a fashion statement? It doesn’t sound like an adult approach to cycling.
I hate miniature Lance Armstrongs as much as the next man, but to vilify people for buying comfortable and safe equipment to bike with is pretty retarded. Save your ire for the transportation planners, not other cyclists.
And obviously obviously obviously there’s no good argument for not wearing a helmet. Can we just stop this…?
27 August 2009
Owen, please just do what you said: just stop this and save the arguing for the transportation planners.
So, stop arguing that cycling is inherently dangerous in need of a plastic hat and irately yell for better cycling infrastructure.
27 August 2009
Here’s the problem: Mr. Short, in his attempt to write a piece of satire, has cyclists arguing amongst themselves. In reading this article, I can’t tell where the satire is meant to end and the serious argument is meant to begin. If his argument is that the wearing of helmets should be optional, then we can have a rational discussion. If he is serious that helmets should be made illegal on the grounds that they are a symbol of something that he finds distasteful – that other peoples right of choice to wear a helmet should be criminalized – then he is a fascist and I can only find consolation in the fact that he hasn’t a hope in hell of getting his proposal passed.
28 August 2009
Every cyclists should be free to decide whether they wear a helmet or not when they ride.
If they do like to ride, like I like to live, they’ll probably decide to wear one of their own volition.
They should neither be banned nor be compulsory.
29 August 2009
I was trundling along with my 11 year old step-son when an elderly woman doing 80kph nailed 90kg me and the clipped the young fella. Both of us were wearing helmets. The result was a written off Mitsubishi Lancer, my broken shoulder and some scrapes on my step-son. Both of us got up and walked away to ride another day. No shit. Smash on!
30 August 2009
“…if helmets do work, why is this proving so difficult to see? In countries where helmets have been made mandatory, and where usage went from low to high levels almost overnight, there is just no real evidence of a concomitant drop in injuries. Indeed, what we see instead is a big drop in the number of people cycling, which is a disaster – far worse for public health than the few head injuries the helmet laws tried to prevent.”
http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/10/01/to-wear-or-not-to-wear-and-is-that-even-the-right-question-ian-walker-on-cycle-helmets/
Increased helmet use correlated with INCREASED rates of head injury:
http://lobv.org/15reasons.html
1 September 2009
At last – a voice of reason in our over-risk assessed nanny state! Long live the freewheelers who pedal with the wind in their hair, wno enjoy the health-giving spontaneity of cycling!!
1 September 2009
Fantastic! A joy to read. Thank you
3 September 2009
[...] Save the planet — ban cycle helmets :: Adrian Short I have to admit, the bit about fat cyclists seems to be a prevalent attitude among many cyclists. I have a granny bike and a fat butt, and I often feel I should be apologizing for not racing racing racing to get through the streets when I'm out on my bike. (tags: bicycles cycling) [...]
3 September 2009
Absolutely brilliant article and I commend your dry wit enormously!
As for fat people, I saw a 20 ton girl riding her bike today, I hesitate to say it was just as Freddy Mercury envisaged. Thing is she was doing something she loved and I admire that, and the fact she bothered to get off her arse.
3 September 2009
Love it. You have captured my sentiments entirely.
4 September 2009
I can only assume that Mr Short was either bored, had been taking a number of illegal substances when he wrote this or this was intended as comedy, but i can’t be sure. To be honest I’ve not read so much rubbish for a long time !!
Think about it, you are being given the choice to use a piece of equipment which could minimise injury in the event of an accident. That’s it, nothing more.
What he seems to have missed is that we all have the power of choice. If you don’t want to wear a helmet, don’t, it’s up to you. But don’t whine if you fall off and smack your head on a kerb. A helmet won’t stop the idiot in the car from hitting you, but it might minimise any damage should you hit your head on the road. From experience, and a number of broken helmets, I can say that they’re worth it. But guess what….. if you don’t want to wear one, don’t !
The same goes for everything else written on here, if you don’t want to, don’t. No one’s forcing you. I seriously don’t understand the point of this article. If you want to get on a bike and pedal, do so. If you want to dress head to toe in Lycra, do so. Simple.
This article seems to be a rant for the sake of it. I might write one about whether I should mow my lawn or not. I don’t have to, but it’s a good idea…… hmmmm I think I’ll have a moan about the fact that the choice is mine but it could be beneficial to myslef.
4 September 2009
Mr Short you are a knob!, if you dont want to wear a helmet don’t that’s your choice……erm….that’s it, no need to write a frankly unfunny ‘rant’ about it.
4 September 2009
Fabulous read – thanks
4 September 2009
listen mate – get a life. leave people alone, if you don’t want to wear a helmet – don’t. just don’t try to tell other people what to do. have you not heard of the concept of PERSONAL CHOICE?
4 September 2009
I love how 98% of the commenters think this is a rant about helmets. Way to miss the point.
6 September 2009
[...] This post was Twitted by TreadlyAndMe [...]
6 September 2009
spot on
7 September 2009
funny stuff but…
two couples, friends of mine, were out leisurely riding along and stopped to take in a great view. one of the gals was rolling to a slow stop, put her foot down, stepped on a small rock and fell over backwards. hit her head on a bigger rock and has permanent brain damage. a helmet would have absorbed that hit.
i’ll keep my helmet on. they can fix my knee if it gets busted up but not my brain. i have no intention of relearning the alphabet if i can in any way help it. i bike 7 to 8 thousand miles a year.
9 September 2009
[...] Adrian Short argues that the helmet is a symbole of everything that stops cycling being “convenient, cheap, safe, accessible, fun and sustianable”: [...]
10 September 2009
Rick, isn’t that story arguing for wearing helmets all the time, or at least while camping or spending time in places where you can step on rocks?
11 September 2009
Getting sweaty is not directly related to smelling bad. You don’t necessarily need a shower after a bike ride. Unfortunately, some don’t commute by bike for fear of this.
I shower before going to work, and put on normal clothing. 13 miles later, I put on a fresh shirt and I am ready to work. Even in 100 degree weather.
I asked my coworkers about this and they say I am fresh as a daisy. No, they are not just being nice to me; we give each other grief all the time.
It’s not the sweat that stinks; it’s the action of the bacteria working on it, and mostly on the secretions of the apocrine glands (concentrated in the armpits and groin). It takes time for the bacteria to make the sweat stink. The apocrine sweat glands are not very active during physical activity. They release oils that can smell after exposure to the bacteria on the skin . The merocrine sweat glands are the most active during physical activity, and are the glands that cool us off. They release mostly water and salt.
So ride your bike to work and don’t worry about having a shower waiting there for you. If you are reasonably hygienic, you will be fine.
Great article! Thanks for the insightful read! not all of the readers will understand your topic is about much more than plastic hats.
11 September 2009
I love this story and all the comments are entertaining as well… and I want to say to David Wiley, who suggested “That’s just capitalism” about selling more higher priced garbage… well, maybe capatalism is the problem, hm?
11 September 2009
Excellent. Simply excellent.
16 September 2009
If I think this is about helmets and am missing the point, could you please explain the point?
Who’s running this conspiracy?? When I go to work, everyone just says how much they hated trying to overtake the cyclist on the way in. I think that’s the biggest impediment to cycling: other road users hate us.
I wear a helmet and cycle every day. I would always wear one under any circumstances, as I value my head and wish to protect it. I’ve crashed and struck my head on a bus, and the road, and walked away twice. My helmet is the most valuable item I have, and cost about 1/20th that of my bike. It is hardly noticeable while riding, so why wouldn’t you?
22 September 2009
[...] has not be given serious consideration in many parts of the world. Here is a comical perspective why not. There is real potential to improve the appearance and functionality of our cities, public health, [...]
30 September 2009
Old people shouldn’t cycle either. As a society we should discourage them from cycling whenever possible. Place them together in assisted living facilities and drive them around in buses. Much safer. Much better for them. If they were to cycle, then they would want nicely built bicycle paths and a transportation infrastructure that supported cycling. It would be like Amsterdam everywhere. Who wants that?
16 October 2009
Viva La Revolution! Once you stop drinking the cycle-fear cool-aid, things look different. Want people safely riding bikes? Safety in Numbers. Get more people out there. Thus, avoid things that make biking look like a dangerous, pain in the ass. Now, that the cool-aids is wearing off, my head feels better. Oh, that’s cause I don’t have that dammed helmet on anymore…(Unless the conditions warrant(Snow…)).
16 October 2009
Of course the proposal to ban helmets is tongue in cheek, but many of the responses prove Adrian’s basic point – people wildly overestimate both the dangers of cycling and helmets’ ability to reduce them.
Sadly it is all too easy to think of the worst case, however unlikely it is in reality, and base your planning on that.
If you are wondering whether or not to wear a cycle helmet, consider:
- increases in helmet-wearing rates have never led to reductions in cyclist injury rates
- a human skull can stand a harder impact than a cycle helmet can
- life-threatening impacts are way beyond the design strength of cycle helmets
- serious head injuries from cycling are rare – about as rare per mile as ones from walking
- any impact slow enough to be within cycle helmets’ design speed is slow enough for normal human reactions to prevent head impact altogether
- overall, cyclists live longer – the extra health is worth a couple of extra years of life on average.
18 October 2009
YES! So well said! I live in America, and we have that same culture of fear. Sadly, I will continue wearing a helmet because it is so deeply ingrained in me – unless I’m on a bike path, I feel paranoid without one. I still live the happy bicycling lifestyle by keeping everything else simple.
23 October 2009
Great rant. I posted it as a reprint on my blog.
Love your sense of humour. I like slow biking, it’s pleasant and fun. My wife and i cycled all around paris and Amsterdam.
In Canada it’s very hard to find slow bikes. I had to have two shipped to me from a used shop in Amsterdam. Cost me about $600.00 Euro all in, but the same Batavus bikes in Canada New are about 700.00 Euro each and there arn’t any used because anyone who buy one keeps it becasue they are so f-ing great to ride.
cheers
sw canada
14 February 2010
“cycling is more dangerous than not cycling?” Of course it is. I’ve been cycling for thirty years, most of that time without a helmet. Today I wouldn’t get on my bike without one. Why? because I choose to wear one. I’ve looked at the arguments, assesed the data and decided it’s better to wear one. I might get hit from behind by some idiot or get crushed by an lorry, neither of which I can do anything about. But if I get knocked off and hit my head my helmet might save me.
I started wearing helmets years ago when a friend who worked as a nurse in the local hospital, told me of a case where a cyclist had been cycling down a gravel path, hit something, went over the handlebars and got scalped, his scalp had to be sewn back together, she said it was one of the worse things she had seen.
Personally I couldn’t care less what anyone else does. I choose to wear a helmet.
15 March 2010
Paul,
Do you wear a helmet in the shower?
“showering is more dangerous than not showering?” Of course it is. I’ve been showering for fourty three years, most of that time without a helmet. Today I wouldn’t get in the shower without one. Why? because I choose to wear one. I’ve looked at the arguments, assesed the data and decided it’s better to wear one. I might have a heart attack or stroke while showering, neither of which I can do anything about, but if I slip and hit my head my helmet might save me.
I started wearing helmets years ago when a friend who worked as a nurse in the local hospital, told me of a case where a showerist had been showering in her shower, slipped on something, went back and banged her head on the tub and got a cracked skull, she said it was one of the worse things she had seen.
Personally I couldn’t care less what anyone else does. I choose to wear a helmet.
I know, reductio ad absurdum, couldn’t help myself sorry.
17 May 2010
I taught myself to cycle during the mid 1960′s without all that health and safety crap, and to this day and for the rest of my life I will always cycle my cycle without a helmet, reflective lycra and all the other commercial crap that has become associated without simple cycling, that includes even if it’s made law, helmets are not needed, unless people are brainwashed into wearing them, Heath and Safety Nanny, who needs it,? I Don’t, We Don’t, Lets remain free from all that crap.
Tom, Crystal Palace, London