Wasn’t it only yesterday that I was reading about the non-necessity of bike helmets? Oh, well. I guess if there is a buck to be made off of something you can always Etch-A-Sketch your narrative to allow filthy lucre to flow into ones coffers. This is going to set back the “cycling is perfectly safe, we don’t need no stinking helmets” narrative by a few days, at least.
Pay special attention to Robert Verweij of the Ministry for Infrastructure who is citing the statistics for daily fatalities. He indicates that “every day two people do not come home and an additional 50 are severely injured“. Would these numbers be acceptable in Chicago? I dare say they would not. But increases in ridership bring about the inevitable increases in fatalities and this is something that the Europeans are having to deal with.
While you are at it you might as well hear the flip side of the argument just once more:
Somebody needs to offer these Europeans some free consultative advice on how not to sound like you have your heads up your butts. I noted that on Copenhagen this new development in what are essentially external air bags for cars meant to capture and cradle a pedestrian or bicyclist when struck.
“A cyclist has limited chances of survival in accidents over 40 km/h – the average accident speed. Commercially-available cycle helmets offer some protection but in limited scenarios and at a maximum speed of 20 km/h…“
You can read his previous article on mandatory airbags for cars rather then helmets here. But again, if cycling is so safe why would even these airbags be needed? Do not they also give the impression that this mode of transportation is dangerous? And why indeed would the motorist population so hated by cyclists choose to pay for this expensive option in the first place?