Forcing adult cyclists with no evidence of brain disorders to wear helmets must save lives, mustn't it?
For years, cyclists who ride on city streets have cherished an unusual superstition: if they wear a helmet, they are more likely to get hit by a car. “I belong to an e-mail list for cyclists, and they complain about this all the time,” says Ian Walker, a psychologist at the University of Bath who rides his bike to work every day. But could this actually be true?
Walker decided to find out — putting his own neck on the line. He rigged his bicycle with an ultrasonic sensor that could detect how close each car was that passed him. Then he hit the roads, alternately riding with a helmet and without for two months, until he had been passed by 2,500 cars. Examining the data, he found that when he wore his helmet, motorists passed by 8.5 centimeters (3.35 inches) closer than when his head was bare. He had increased his risk of an accident by donning safety gear.
Why? You might suspect that cyclists wearing helmets are more prone to take risks. But studies have found otherwise. The real answer, Walker theorizes, is that helmets change the behavior of drivers. Motorists regard a helmet as a signal that the cyclist is experienced and thus can be approached with less caution. “They see the helmet and think, Oh, there’s a serious, skilful person,” Walker says. “And you get hit.”
As Cafe Hayek points out, even mandatory seat belts can lull drivers into a false sense of security that causes them to drive more dangerously. The ultimate solution, of course would be to replace air-bags with steering-wheel mounted spears that would pierce the heart of any driver involved in a collision. Now, that would encourage safe driving.
Comments