I tell people that the reason that I wear a helmet is because I once came off my bike (after skidding on a patch of sand left over from the winter’s gritting) and ended up against a stone wall. A helmet didn’t save my life, probably didn’t even save me a concussion, but it could have.
The truth is that the older I get, the less I think that my helmet is worthwhile. I keep hoping that, eventually, I’ll be able to cycle without the helmet. It’s really wonderful feeling the breeze through my hair. I forget just how sweaty the helmet makes my forehead. I keep thinking to myself I think I could enjoy cycling without a helmet. And I don’t think it’s likely that a helmet would help much in the types of accidents I’m likely to have. [cyclehelmets.org]
The cyclist, who was not wearing a helmet at the time…
The sheriff said Mrs Fyffe “wasn’t to blame in any way for the accident”, but added: “She was not wearing a safety helmet and that in my view contributed to her death.”
I find it frustrating that journalists feel the need to mention whether or not the cyclist was wearing a helmet, as if that’s the thing that determines whether whether it’s a tragic accident or an asked-for eventuality. And I wonder if this attitude by the media is a reflection of the attitudes of the public on the whole (like the sheriff who partly blamed Mrs Fyffe for her own death) or if the attitudes of the public are affected by this constant reminder that this cyclist or that cyclist was or was not wearing a helmet.
So every time I read a news article that mentions whether or not the cyclist was wearing a helmet, I am forced to think to myself if I were to get into a collision, completely the fault of another road user, would my family be denied compensation because I wasn’t wearing a helmet?