I would be dead and not writing this if it had not been for my Bell helmet – twice:
Many bicycling advocates fiercely oppose bike helmet laws, pointing to racial disparities in citations and reduced ridership.
Study: The effect of safety attire on perceptions of cyclist dehumanisation – ScienceDirect
This was a psychology study. They claimed of those surveyed, 30% viewed cyclists wearing a helmet as “less human” and thus, might be more subjected to aggressive and risky driving near cyclists.
Survey participants self selected to do the study. This was not a random sample of the population. It appears that survey participants could have participated more than once.
The overwhelming majority of survey participants were highly educated, high income, white males, about 2/3ds of which said they road a bike at least once or twice per week. This was not a survey of drivers – but mostly of avid bicyclists – who may have a bias that drivers are out to get them.
90+% of bike crashes do not involve vehicles. The crash where I fractured my skull involved a small pot hole – no vehicles. Helmets do not cause an increase in roadway hazards!
The news report, above, suggests this study supports not wearing bike helmets. The reporter spins the story with substantial added comments at the end that helmets are not that useful.
This is a poorly done psychology study that extrapolates a fuzzy conclusion to encompass bike crashes not involving vehicles (about 90+% of them) – and then the study is spun by a story teller to suggest that helmets are not that useful. Wow.
The writer is a politics reporter with an AB in history.
Again, I would be deceased if it were not for having worn a Bell bike helmet.
