Cycle Helmets - New government promotion could sound the death knell for the future of cycling

June 2003

    A new Department for Transport campaign promoting the use of cycle helmets amongst teenagers could lead to a significant drop in cycle use according to CTC, the national cyclists' organisation.

    The campaign employs a series of X-Ray images depicting skulls wearing helmets in an attempt to encourage helmet wearing among 11-14 year old children.

    Far from promoting a positive image of cycling, CTC believes that this macabre imagery, with its associations of hospitals and death, is likely to reduce cycle use, thereby undermining efforts to realise the health and other benefits of increased cycling.

    The skeletal X-Ray images are due to appear as a series of advertisements in several teen orientated magazines as part of the government's "THINK!" road safety initiative.

    Although the Department for Transport tested these adverts on their 'target group' they can provide CTC with no assurance of having considered the effect of them on younger children, concerned parents, carers, teachers and others who may be exposed to this campaign.

Kevin Mayne, Director of CTC, said:

"These images have alarming cultural associations with severe injury and even death. At a time of rising childhood obesity the last thing that the government should be doing is scaring children and their parents into not cycling."

    CTC believes the images in this campaign are likely to have the following effects on people outside the intended "target group" (11-14 year olds, mainly boys): 

•    Children (especially younger children and girls) may be frightened off      cycling.  
•     Their parents, teachers and others may be unwilling to allow them to cycle.
•     Younger children may be frightened by the images themselves.
•     Some cyclists (particularly teenage and young adult males) are known to take greater risks when helmeted. This is just one of many reasons for believing that these posters could actually INCREASE the rate or severity of casualties for those who are not deterred from cycling.

    CTC also believes the campaign is at odds with the Department of Transport's own target of increasing by a third the number of regular cyclists in the UK by 2010 (based on 2000 levels)  in order to realise the public health, social and environmental benefits of cycling. In this context CTC's view is that efforts to drive up helmet wearing rates can prove counter-productive in the following ways:

•       Helmet promotion campaigns deter people from cycling, by raising unfounded anxiety about the risks involved in cycling. The health benefits of cycling vastly outweigh the supposed dangers that helmets are meant to address, as this paper demonstrates. Every individual who is put off cycling in this way therefore represents a significant loss of the public health and other benefits of encouraging greater cycle use.
•       Efforts to increase cycle helmet wearing rates have consistently failed to achieve the promised benefits for cyclists' safety. For those who do continue cycling, the risks have never been shown to have reduced as a result of increased helmet wearing, and in several cases there is evidence that these have actually become worse.

    The images associated with this campaign can be viewed at www.cyclesense.net whilst briefing sheets will be available setting out CTC's position on helmet promotion campaigns and other relevant background information from CTC HQ and on the CTC website www.ctc.org.uk

Notes 

· In 2001 there were 136 fatalities to cyclists in the UK all of which occurred on public highways. During the same year 45,000 people died of Coronary Heart Disease directly related to inactivity. The financial implications to the tax-payer of losing a whole generation of cyclists through this campaign are enormous.

· The Promotion of helmets is in itself a contentious issue. Research by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL 286) concluded that in UK areas where active promotion of cycle helmets took place there was a strong and demonstrable link to a decrease in the use of bicycles.

· The British Medical Association has concluded that "the benefits of cycling are likely to outweigh the loss of life as a result of crashes". One researcher has estimated that, in terms of life-years gained and lost by cycling even in current UK conditions, the health benefits of cycling outweigh any risks by a factor of around 20:1.

· CTC campaigns for all cyclists, including children, families, commuters and travellers and offers free third party insurance, legal claims advice, travel and technical guidance, on and offroad route information and a bi-monthly magazine.

· For details of all CTC services visit www.ctc.org.uk

    We are grateful to Steve Bowater, Manchester Cycling Campaign for the following email on the subject of head injuries suffered by the different classification of road user.

Steve writes -

The link below may give some insight on head injuries to other road injuries. http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/helmets/effectiveness.pdf

    It takes you to a very in depth study by John Franklin on the effectiveness of cycle helmets, which on page 7 shows the following figures for head injuries:

40.5% Car occupants 

39.1% Pedestrians 

11.9% Motorcyclists 

8.5% Cyclists

This report also states that:

    In Australia the promotion of helmets for car occupants is being considered. Research by the University of Adelaide and Monash University  has shown that bicycle-style helmets would afford motorists more protection than interior padding, air bags or seat belts. Helmets could lessen the severity of 50% to 60% of motorist brain injuries and avoid 1 in 5 fatal crashes. A subsequent report from New Zealand  notes that helmets for car occupants have been proved to be more effective in preventing serious injury than helmets for cyclists.

Steve, Greater Manchester Cycling Campaign

Top