The bicycle helmet debate

[moorepants]

Description

There is the long standing debate of whether bicycle helmets should be mandated by governments, similar how automobile seat belts are. If we want to make the act of bicycling safe, I see the dichotomy being:

1. in the event a bicyclist collides with something, ensure their injuries are minimized

vs

2. minimizing the chances that the bicyclist will be in a collision

Many societies have seemingly accepted that some # of collisions will occur in transportation. Lot's of money is spent in research, development, policy, etc. to make colliding safer for the collider. There seems to be considerably less attention in transportation to reducing the chance of collisions. The words "safe", "safety", "make safer", etc. are all used to describe 1) and 2) but there is a difference and using the word safe for both is a misnomer of sorts. 1) and 2) have to be dealt with, but I think the vast majority of resources should be put into 2) instead of 1).

So, can we contribute to this conversation from the bicycle lab? The hypothesis is that it would be best for societies to focus on 2) instead of 1) to improve safety the most. For the case of bicycles, this means more specifically to reduce focus on bicycle helmets. Can we offer anything to help prove this hypothesis?

Prior Art

Proposed Methods

Required Resources