Article Text
Abstract
Many jurisdictions require cyclists to wear bicycle helmets. The UK is currently not one of these. However, an increasing number of interest groups, including the British Medical Association, want to change the status quo. They argue that mandatory cycle helmet laws will reduce the incidence of head injuries and that this will be both good for cyclists (because they will suffer fewer head injuries) and good for society (because the burden of having to treat cyclists suffering from head injuries will be reduced). In this paper we argue against this position. We suggest that cycle helmets may not be especially effective in reducing head injuries and we suggest that the imposition of such a restrictive law would violate people's freedom and reduce their autonomy. We also argue that those who accept such a restrictive law would be committed to supporting further legislation which would force many other groups – including pedestrians – to take fewer risks with their health. We conclude that cycle helmet legislation should not be enacted in the UK unless, perhaps, it is restricted to children.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- The effects of provincial bicycle helmet legislation on helmet use and bicycle ridership in Canada
- Prevalence of helmet use by users of bicycles, push scooters, inline skates and skateboards in Toronto and the surrounding area in the absence of comprehensive legislation: an observational study
- Effect of helmet wear on the incidence of head/face and cervical spine injuries in young skiers and snowboarders
- Population preventable fraction of bicycle related head injuries
- Economic disparity in bicycle helmet use by children six years after the introduction of legislation
- Factors associated with incorrect bicycle helmet use
- In defence of mandatory bicycle helmet legislation: response to Hooper and Spicer
- Cycle helmet ownership and use; a cluster randomised controlled trial in primary school children in deprived areas
- Effectiveness of bicycle helmet legislation to increase helmet use: a systematic review
- Risk compensation theory should be subject to systematic reviews of the scientific evidence