Helmets make cyclists less safe, study says

[Richard (Apples)]

Read this in the Times yesterday !!


Cyclists who wear safety helmets are more likely to be hit by overtaking vehicles, according to a study from the University of Bath which suggests that drivers give bare-headed riders a wider berth because they assume that they are less experienced on the road.

The research found that motorists get more than 8cm (3.1in) closer to cyclists wearing helmets than to other riders. Surprisingly, female cyclists are given more room on the road than their male counterparts.

In a hands-on survey, Dr Ian Walker, a psychologist who specialises in road safety, used a bicycle fitted with an ultrasonic distance sensor to record data from more than 2,500 motorists who overtook him in Salisbury and Bristol.

He covered a total of 320 km (200 miles) during the study and was hit twice, once by a lorry and once by a bus. Both times he was wearing a helmet, but says: "As a scientist, I don't think you can read too much into two incidents."

Dr Walker said that drivers were twice as likely to get close to his bicycle when he was wearing the helmet. "This was something I had suspected, as many cyclists had told me of similar experiences. The perception is that those wearing helmets are experienced and more predictable," he said.

"Drivers think, ‘He knows what he’s doing, he won’t do anything surprising’. But that’s really quite a dangerous thought, particularly as so many cycling novices are told to wear helmets."

Dr Walker, whose research is to be published in the journal Accident Analysis & Prevention, said that buses and trucks were the worst offenders. While the average car gave cyclists 1.33m of room, the average truck got 19cm closer and the average bus 23cm closer.

There was no evidence of sports utility vehicles or 4x4s getting any closer to bikes than ordinary cars did, although an earlier finding from the study was that drivers of white vans give cyclists 10cm (4in) less space to cyclists than car-drivers.

To test another theory, Dr Walker wore a long wig to see if there was any difference in passing distance when vehicles thought they were overtaking a female cyclist.

Vehicles gave him an average of 14cm more space when he was wearing the wig. Dr Walker said that this may be because women are seen as less predictable than men on the roads, or because female cyclists are more rare and so are treated with more caution.

Dr Walker said that he hoped his research would raise awareness of the dangers facing cyclists on busy roads. More than 11,000 cyclists were injured and 109 killed on UK roads in 2004, the latest year for which figures are available.

"The fundamental message is that drivers need to be more understanding of the people that they share the roads with and cannot make judgments based on their appearance," he said.

But the message to cyclists is less clear. Dr Walker, himself a keen cyclist who rode from John O'Groats to Land's End earlier this year, without mishap, is unconvinced as to how much protection helmets give cyclists and says previous studies on it are mixed.

He is more confident of the benefits of cycling, the risks of which are far outweighed by the health benefits, and says that those countries that have made helmets compulsory have seen the number of people who use bicycles fall.

"The message to cyclists is a really difficult one," he told Times Online. "The evidence on (the usefulness of) helmets in a collision is very mixed. Evidence that it might make a collision more likely will be added to mix and people will have to make their mind up."

Dr Walker says that he "goes through phases" of wearing or not wearing helmets but if he had children would insist that they wear them.

"My personal belief is that a bit of polystyrene is not going to help much when I'm hit by a car, but when children come off it's usually because they all over, low-speed impacts, and they definitely help then."

[adrian]

About as silly as the idea that cyclists feel that wearing a helmet makes them invincible and so ride more recklessly. Still, it's encouraging to learn the the fact that drivers never give me enough room is down to my immaculate riding style and competent demeanour!

[Richard (Apples)]

Yes I agree. Not going to stop wearing my helmet for my commute.

Does make you think though - human nature to give a wide berth to perceived hazzards ??

[John Czernobay]

I'll go for the "wig" option especially with winter coming up. Have GB's a selection of designs in ACC colours

[Dan B]

We've been discussing this on another forum. This is the same guy from out West who had a similar tosh study on white vans not too long ago.

I figure if a guy has got a bike with a shedload of buttons and sensors to monitor or activate, he's a threat to everyone. He got hit twice in 200 miles; I've been hit twice in 8000.

Numpty.

[Mike I]

I used to get given a nice wide berth when I had a child seat (occupied) on my bike. Has our techy friend tested that theory?

Oh, and I've been knocked off twice in 35 years. On neither occasion was I wearing a helmet, and both drivers said they didn't see me. Presumably, they were in no position to know whether I was wearing a helmet or not. I don't think this report stands up to any sort of scrutiny at all.

[Richard (Apples)]

I agree Mike I dont think he rode nearly enough miles .

However I think the general message about giving cyclists more room is the right one and the more drivers that gets through to the better

I've only been knocked off once, but it's not a competition

[Wal]

I'm inclined to think that there is something is his findings. I've read reports on other studies that show that driver behaviour around cyclists is affected by a whole raft of factors, and it seems reasonable to me that perception (conscious or otherwise) of cyclist competence and vulnerability would figure quite strongly.

I think you could take the above study a step further by monitoring how motorists behave around child cyclists. I'd be willing to bet that not only do motorists give those cyclists who are noticeably smaller and less confident a much wider berth than they do adults, they probably overtake at a significantly slower speed too.

At the other end of the scale, I think that lycra-kitted dudes doing 25mph on racing bikes are more likely perceived as being able to look after themselves and would barely warrant a second thought in the minds of most motorists (apart from, that is, the irrational contempt that most of us have been on the receiving end of).

[simonfrench]

It sounds like a child seat fitted with a suitable dummy child would provide some serious protection.

It would of course take a serious weirdo to do it - so I won't.

[Marek]

Why not dress up as a horse, drivers tend to slow right down and give horses a really wide berth. Who was that comedian that was dressed as if he was riding an Ostrich, surely someone could design something similar except it would be a cyclist on a horse.

Cheers

Marek...

[Andrew G]

[quote]Who was that comedian that was dressed as if he was riding an Ostrich

[John Cochrane]

After yesterday I'm convinced of the benefits of wearing a helmet.On my early morning commute, at 04:00 (I know it's sad) I donned my spare helemt. It has a very thick reinforced section round its base which turned out to be just as well. On a poorly lit section of road my front wheel came to an ubrupt halt in a rut in the road. At this point physics came into play as I flew, somewhat ungracefully, over the handlebars. My next recollection was sliding face first along the road watching the road sliding beneath my eye and within an inch of it and musing how fortunate I was to be wearing a helmet otherwise it would have been my face sliding on the tarmac. As it was, the corner of my eye was bruised but I wonder what state it would have been in without the helmet!

[John Cochrane]

Thanks, Sean. I collected a number of cuts and bruises, but nothing broken.