So my toot about helmet laws increasing heart disease has got a few replies by people wondering wtf. The way it works is that mandatory helmet laws reduce cycling, fewer people cycling results in an increase in obesity related illnesses like heart disease and diabetes.
One of, if not rhe best, things that a government can do to improve health at a population level is increasing active travel (walking and cycling).
1/n
https://theconversation.com/ditching-bike-helmets-laws-better-for-health-42
In the Netherlands with probably the largest bicycle density (flat country helps) in Europa nobody wears bike helmets, never have…
With e-bikes the accidents increase though…
@xs4me2 0.4% of cyclists in the Netherlands wear a helmet. Helmet wearers account for 13% of cyclists ending up in hospital...
Ergo helmets cause hospitals?!?
Not to get too morbid here, but is that because people who die at the scene in accidents don't count towards hospital visits?
@DaveMWilburn @xs4me2 no. It's because helmets give a false sense of safety, and are largely worn by racing cyclists and mountain bikers who engage in a more risky form of cycling than a utility cyclist cycling for transport.
I've cycled over 40000km in the Netherlands. I've visited every municipality by bike. I have a pretty good understanding of Dutch cycle infrastructure.
Yeah, the reason I asked is because in the US there has been criticism from the right about motorcycle helmet laws, with some arguing that helmet use leads to higher rates of severe, life-altering injuries that otherwise wouldn't have been survivable (and further that these are the kinds of injuries you wouldn't want to survive).
That argument was perhaps plausible. But I don't think it's actually born out in the data. Studies seem to suggest that motorcycle helmets are an unqualified good thing.
And, at the risk of stating the obvious, motorcycles are different from bicycles, especially everyday cycling in places with good bike infrastructure, and the rates, kinds, and severities of the injuries you might encounter are likewise very different.
@kiennah @DaveMWilburn @quixoticgeek
Indeed, that is how it is...
@xs4me2 @quixoticgeek I *always* wear a helmet when going road cycling ("wielrennen"), but not for casual rides to the shops 🤷🏼♂️
With road cycling in particular, other (casual) cyclists and car drivers are not used to your speed, and the chances of getting hit are much higher than for a casual cyclist (ask me how I know).
And yeah, grandpa and grandma on their e-bikes have no idea about the risks they take. The number of times I’ve seen them bombing down the hills around here (Veluwezoom) without helmets is mindblowing (and sometimes, it literally is 🙄).
@wiredfool @xs4me2 @quixoticgeek Motorists regularly killing and injuring cyclists and pedestrians is necessary for the upholding of motorism. Without a credible threat, pedestrians would just use the streets and all motorists would have to adjust their speed to walking speed, and this is not acceptable to motorists.
@ahltorp @wiredfool @quixoticgeek
Besides having specific bike lanes, actually in more and more city centers (Utrecht, Amsterdam) the idea in the Netherlands to have them all in one road, and in that chaos the motorists simply have to slow down.
@ahltorp @xs4me2 @wiredfool "fiets straat, auto te gast"
Bike street, cars are guests.
Common in the Netherlands, but not common enough.
@ahltorp @wiredfool @quixoticgeek
Nice sign btw, says it all indeed!
Quixoticgeek
xs4me2
Dave Wilburn 
kiennah
「ʀᴏʙᴇʀᴛ」
wiredfool
Magnus Ahltorp