[JohnGB]

The Netherlands did a study on bike helmets and found that cars tend to be more dangerous with cyclists if the cyclists are wearing a helmet, which is why there are no mandatory bicycle helmet laws in the Netherlands. However, it's worth noting that the cycling infrastructure in the Netherlands also for the most part separates bikes and cars with more than just a line of paint, so their experience may not translate well to other countries with poor cycling infrastructure.

[float4]

> The Netherlands did a study on bike helmets

This was a British study

> and found that cars tend to be more dangerous with cyclists if the cyclists are wearing a helmet

Re-analysis showed that there actually was no significant effect. Source: https://swov.nl/en/fact-sheet/bicycle-helmets (under: "Do bicycle helmets also have adverse effects?")

> which is why there are no mandatory bicycle helmet laws in the Netherlands

We (the Netherlands) don't have helmet laws because we hate helmets, not because we did research and concluded they'd have significant adverse effects.

[tremon]

because we hate helmets, not because we did research

Actually, we did. From [0] (the link to the study itself is on that page too):

> A recent Dutch study (2021) concludes that many people expect to make fewer bike rides when mandatory helmet laws are introduced. These findings suggest that such a law would have a negative effect both on bike usage and on public health in general.

In addition to the standard arguments already posted here about safety in numbers, efficacy of a helmet, and infrastructure design, they also mention a few practical problems with helmets:

- What to do with the helmet when you're not wearing it? A good helmet is too big to just store in a coat pocket or a handbag.

- What to do if you lose your helmet or it gets stolen? How will you make it home then?

[0] https://www.fietsersbond.nl/de-fiets/accessoires/fietshelmen...

[lmm]

The "re-analysis" just does a bunch of ad-hoc adjustments to make the study underpowered. You could make literally any scientific paper show no effect by doing the same thing.

[ndsipa_pomu]

I believe that re-analysis was refuted by Dr Ian Walker: https://psyarxiv.com/nxw2k

[moffkalast]

> because we hate helmets

I mean yeah helmets for commuting at a snail's pace in areas without cars are an annoyance at best.

[dylan604]

> and found that cars tend to be more dangerous with cyclists if the cyclists are wearing a helmet

I know that when I'm driving a car, I specifically behave differently when I see a bicyclist with a helmet vs without. /s

This just sounds so preposterous. First off, I doubt the average driver notices bicyclists at all. Of those that do, I'd seriously doubt if they even consider that they are wearing a helmet or not and just express frustration at the bicycle being there in the first place. The suggestion that a driver notices a helmet and acts more aggressively towards the rider or that they give a wider berth to the rider when not wearing a helmet is just "trying too hard" for lack of better words to describe my incredulity.

[Fiahil]

that study comes out a lot, but, AFAIK was poorly challenged. It would be nice to get a second opinion on this topic before jumping to conclusions.

[lukas099]

It may not be perfect, but if it's the best study we have on the matter I think we should tentatively and judiciously accept it.

[peoplefromibiza]

> The Netherlands did a study on bike helmets

They did not.

But it's true that "Dutch neurologists and surgeons call on people to wear helmets while cycling"

https://road.cc/content/news/dutch-neurologists-call-cyclist...

Because, you know, politicians would do anything to keep people voting for them, including putting people lives at risk to please them (COVID just proved it, if there was some doubt left), but doctors opinions are a bit more of a reliable source to understand what could potentially kill you and what could save your life.

[kqr]

I don't agree. A surgeon is not going to see the vast majority of people who don't suffer head trauma, so they are not any more reliable than anyone else. If anything, they are likely to be more biased than the average person.

Now, get me a statistician and we can talk.