PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1767006

Pedal cyclists, crash helmets and risk.

Abstract

As a rate per million kilometres travelled, the 'risk' of cycling appears to be high in relation to other forms of transport. Yet, in absolute numbers, there are far fewer cyclist deaths than pedestrian or motor vehicle occupant deaths, and most deaths and serious injuries to pedal cyclists are caused by other road users--principally motor vehicles. The large majority of pedal cyclist deaths are due to head injuries after collision with a motor vehicle. It is therefore commonly proposed that cyclists should wear crash helmets for their own 'safety'. Helmets may protect against fall injuries, but current models are not designed to withstand the impact of collisions with motor vehicles. Evidence for the benefit of pedal cyclists wearing helmets is limited: the existing studies cannot exclude the possibility of different risk-taking behaviour, either by cyclists or by motor vehicle drivers, for helmet wearers compared with non-wearers. A public health policy towards reducing pedal cyclist deaths should seek prevention of accidents, rather than protection from their consequences. Cycling in greater safety would reduce the 'risk' per kilometre travelled, but more cycling might not reduce total cyclist deaths or injuries--because of greater exposure. The 'risk' of cycling--the risk of injury or death--is a complex mix of exposure, 'danger' of the environment, and the perceived risk affecting our precautionary preventive behaviour.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M McCarthy. 1991. Pedal cyclists, crash helmets and risk.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0033-3506(05)80218-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Corporate financial decision-makers' perceptions of workplace safety.

This study, through a random national survey, explored how senior financial executives or managers (those who determined high-level budget, resource allocation, and corporate priorities) of medium-to-large companies perceive important workplace safety issues. The three top-rated safety priorities in resource allocation reported by the participants (overexertion, repetitive motion, and bodily reaction) were consistent with the top three perceived causes of workers' compensation losses. The greatest single safety concerns reported were overexertion, repetitive motion, highway accidents, falling on the same level and bodily reaction. A majority of participants believed that the indirect costs associated with workplace injury were higher than the direct costs. Our participants believed that money spent improving workplace safety would have significant returns. The perceived top benefits of an effective workplace safety program were increased productivity, reduced cost, retention, and increased satisfaction among employees. The perceived most important safety modification was safety training. The top reasons senior financial executives gave for believing their safety programs were better than those at other companies were that their companies paid more attention to and emphasized safety, they had better classes and training focused on safety, and they had teams/individuals focused specifically on safety.

Accident Prevention↗