To wear, or not to wear [a helmet] that is the question:<\/p>\n
Well, it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s not a question that’s ever exercised me much, but it generates blog posts, column inches, and social media comment like few other issues in cycling.<\/p>\n
Take last month. road.cc<\/a> reported that war had broken out<\/a> after London Ambulance Service Joint Response Unit tweeted that a cyclist had been taken to major trauma centre after colliding with a van (the tweet didn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t say if the cyclist had run into the van or the van into the cyclist). So far, so informative. Then they included #NoHelmet in the tweet. As is common on Twitter, the argument that followed was more pub brawl than war, with people joining in just because there was a fight going on, some of them not even knowing what started it.<\/p>\n One argument went that the cyclist\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s injuries would have been less bad, if they had been wearing a helmet. That is quite possibly true, but it ignores that the cyclist\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s head wouldn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t have hit the road in the first place if the van wasn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t involved.<\/p>\n The other quickly inferred that the emergency services were in some way blaming the cyclist for the injury they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122d sustained. That’s hard to believe, but as others joined in it became impossible to row it back to clarify the reasons for using #NoHelmet in the first place. It’s no surprise that the tweet has disappeared from the originator’s timeline. It’s still available in the road.cc link above.<\/p>\n On the face of it, the case for wearing a helmet seems simple and conclusive: if you come off and hit your head it\u00e2\u20ac\u2122ll hurt less, if you\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re wearing a helmet. But look into it a little deeper and the case rapidly becomes less certain. Facts about the advantages and disadvantages of wearing a helmet are harder to come by than you might imagine. There are those who want to see a legal requirement for cyclists to wear helmets and those who vehemently oppose that idea, so like any political argument, the pool of developing information is muddied by each side claiming anything that supports their case and rubbishing anything that doesn\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t.<\/p>\n