April 4, 2014 by Bruce Wynkoop
While I enjoyed and agreed with most of Walker Angell’s March 25th article (“Mitigating risk to bicyclists”) I have to vehemently disagree with his bicycle helmet comments. Bicycling is an enjoyable way to get exercise, see the countryside, get around, and just wind down a bit.
However, toward the end of the article Angell states that bicycle helmets “…don’t make the cut.” saying riding a bicycle is just not that dangerous, crashes with any form of head impact are not that prevalent, and bicycle helmets are not that effective (no mention of where he heard that). Angell also claims that gymnastics, soccer, and cheerleading are more dangerous.
Maybe if gymnastics, soccer, and cheerleading were done on paved surfaces occupied by high-speed, several-thousand pound vehicles driven by sometimes distracted drivers they would be just as dangerous.
I have been riding as an older adult for 30 years and in that time have had several cycling mishaps. Most were minor but in at least two of them I would have suffered a serious head injury if not for my bicycle helmet. In each case the helmet was very effective. In one of the mishaps I tipped over when my bike chain came off and, being “clipped in” to the pedals, I could not free my feet in time to catch myself. As I went over, anticipating getting some “road rash,” my head came down hard onto the roadside guard rail. The plastic shield around the helmet split, but the helmet itself stayed in one piece and did what it was designed to do–protect my head.
Helmets are a low cost, unobtrusive way to protect a very important part of the body. Why would you not use one? And, good heavens, why encourage others not to not use one?
The Minnesota driver’s manual encourages bicyclists to wear helmets, as does the Minnesota Bicycle Alliance, and every one of the fifty or more organized bike rides in which I have participated (in fact, they won’t let you ride without one). Cycling without a helmet is just plain foolish.
Bruce Wynkoop