Jun

26

Gordon Price tracking the helmet debate in Canada & AK

Filed Under Bicycling 

Looking North/Northwest for more thoughts on compulsory helmet laws: A few interesting snippets recently appeared on the blog of former Vancouver, BC City Councillor (and too many other civic contributions to list) Gordon Price:

Liberal policy chair differs with his government.

From The Province:

The mandatory helmet law is even being questioned by those close to the  premier.

Ted Dixon, the BC Liberal Party Policy Chair, told The Province Monday  he is speaking out personally about the mandatory helmet law, adding he thinks  it could be a topic of debate for the next election.

“We need to bring the responsibility back to the individual who is riding the  bike,” he said. “My personal view is the individual is best able to assess the  risk.”

Dixon said he hopes the law is reviewed and ultimately changed, noting that  in Australia a mandatory bike-helmet law resulted in people shying away from  bikes.

_____________________________________________________

.

The position of the B.C. Cycling Coalition:

Helmet Education – Encouraging the use of helmets through evidence-based education that accurately reflects the risk of cycling in different circumstances. Helmet marketing campaigns that exaggerate the risk of cycling and thus discourage people from cycling should be avoided.

Helmet Choice – As many jurisdictions which have implemented comprehensive crash reduction measures have cycling fatality rates dramatically lower than BC and also very low rates of helmet usage, we recommend allowing adults choice regarding helmet use by eliminating the mandatory helmet requirement for adult cyclists. This will enable enforcement resources to be focused on collision reduction and facilitate the successful introduction of bike share systems.

_____________________________________________________

.

From Alaska Dispatch:

More than 20 years ago, G.B. Rodgers examined 8 million cases of injury or death to cyclists in the U.S over 15 years and concluded there was no evidence that helmets reduced head injury or fatalities. That injury survey remains the largest ever done.

Not only did it lead Rodgers to conclude helmets don’t work, according to the Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation, it also led him to conclude “that helmeted riders were more likely to be killed.” The foundation is not some anti-helmet crazed, personal-liberty organization. The foundation’s website sets out good arguments both for and against helmets. The foundation claims to have been “established to provide a resource of best-available factual information and to challenge evidence and policies that do not stand up to scrutiny.” …

What Anchorage ought to be doing, if it cares about its children, is encouraging them to get out and ride. What Anchorage ought to be doing, if it cares about its children, is designing safe routes to schools, playgrounds, ball fields and other activity areas. And what Anchorage ought to be doing, if it cares about its children, is dumping a do-gooder law that discourages kids from riding a bike.

___________________________________________

…More: The Helmet Debate – 2 « Price Tags.

Share

Nathan Daum

twitterlinkedin

Nate was born and raised at the intersection of Seattle’s Central District and Capitol Hill neighborhoods. He earned his BA in History from Western Washington University but it was a summer in New York City that sparked a passion for urban planning, livability, development and transportation issues. He volunteered with the Downtown Renaissance Network in Bellingham and Futurewise (back when it was still 1000 Friends of Washington) in Seattle. He has worked for Downtown Seattle’s Metropolitan Improvement District (MID), the Seattle Monorail Project and since 2004, as a consultant for housing and health care non-profits, mortgage and commercial real estate companies, hospitality and aviation brands as well as government and consumer technology businesses. He is a former member of the Uptown Alliance where he briefly served as the Co-Chair of the Transportation Committee (in reality, more of an understudy to D. John Coney). An employee of Great City Nate is also a former board member and one of the organizations earliest volunteers. He has also served on the executive committee of the Leschi Community Council. He is a cycle commuter, occasional bus rider and resident of Eastlake.


Comments

One Response to “Gordon Price tracking the helmet debate in Canada & AK”

  1. Colin Clarke on June 30th, 2012 7:13 am

    Bicycle helmet laws not the best approach

    The article ‘Cycling advocates aren’t being honest’ 29 June shows what divisions can occur with helmet legislation. It says in effect that B.C. policy makers shouldn’t take much notice of Velo-City delegates not supporting a helmet law.

    B.C. provided two surveys to assess the effect of the helmet law, one in 1995 that had some wet and windy weather and another four years later when extra cycling infrastructure had been provided and the population had increased some 200,000.
    The survey reports did not detail the weather conditions or population increase. The survey data indicates for the age group 16 –30 years an extra 97 wearing helmets compared to 489 fewer cyclists, approximately 5 fewer cycling per extra one wearing a helmet.

    In Canada 2003/04, there were approximately 2.5 million hospital admissions including 16,811 for head injuries. Motor vehicle-related head injuries accounted for 5970 admissions and cyclists 815 (494 for 0-19 years of age and 321 for 20 years and above). More than 9 pedestrians were admitted for head injury compared to cyclists. Comparing cyclist to pedestrian deaths 1992 – 1996, 386/2229 = 17.3% and with some helmet laws and reductions in cycling 1997 – 2009, 754/ 4745 = 15.9%.

    In 2001, deaths in Canada due to all circulatory disease were approximately 60,000 compared to 63 from cycling. Per million population, approximately two cyclist deaths occur annually compared with 2000 from circulatory diseases. Approximately 208,000 people have diabetes in B.C. and this is projected to increase to 300,000 by 2016. In 2005, approximately cost for B.C. $720 million. There is a very high price to pay in discouraging cycling and exercise.

    B.C or other parts of Canada has not provided a full health and safety assessment of bicycle helmet legislation so they have failed to safeguard the public. Allowing for choice in helmet use means no one is discouraged from cycling or fined for not wearing a helmet.

Leave a Reply