Bicycle helmet laws need review: Health expert

Associate Professor Chris Rissel, from Sydney University's School of Public Health pointed out that head injuries were high in the 80's before the laws for compulsory helmets was in place but then it dropped mainly due to road safety campaigns and speed controls. The numbers of such injuries is steady since then he said.

"What it does is it puts people off cycling and makes people think that cycling's a dangerous activity, even though it's a really healthy thing to do and it increases people's physical activity...And you're seeing things like in the Melbourne bike hire scheme - it's not working as well as it has in the rest of the world because people don't walk around with a helmet just in case...You've got helmets creating a barrier to cycling, particularly spontaneous, short-trip cycling...People who ride short trips down to the shops, or ride in parks or just going along quiet streets. Their risks are very, very low," he explained.

Try repealing it for a while

Dr. Rissel added, "I'd recommend a trial repeal in one city for two years to allow researchers to make observations and see if there's an increase in head injuries, and on the basis of that you could come to some informed policy decision."

For the findings Dr. Rissel analysed the ratio of head injuries to arm injuries among cyclists admitted to hospital between 1988 and 2008. He assumed the ratio would not change unless helmet use reduced head injury rates compared with arm injury rates. Their findings showed that most of the fall in head injury rates occurred before the laws came into force. After the new laws, they found "a continued but declining reduction in the ratio of head injuries to arm injuries [and] ... it is likely that factors other than the mandatory helmet legislation reduced head injuries".

Not convinced

Chief executive of Bike NSW, Omar Khalifa feels differently. He said, "The data in the study is neither complete nor compelling ... We don't think it would stand up to scrutiny." He believed the study failed to include cyclists who did not go to hospital because helmets saved them from a head injury. "We believe riders who have ridden and fallen would almost all support the fact the helmet may have saved them from more serious injuries but ... the study does not pick up any of that." "Some say they'd prefer not to have it, but very few complain about having to wear them because they realise there's a potential benefit," he concluded.

Bicycle New South Wales vice-president Richard Birdsey also said that it was road safety and not helmet laws that put off potential cyclists. "At the moment it's important that we retain the law, but certainly once we see improved riding conditions for people, where the roads become safer, the governments should look at perhaps seeing whether they can be wound back a bit," he said.