Cycling rates could double if we give people choice on using a helmet

Wednesday, 14 March 2018

Sit-up style bikes, such as those used in bike share schemes, demonstrate a comfortable and stress-free style of riding.

OPINION: Imagine an activity that improves your mental health, gets you moving, combats heart disease, diabetes, helps reduce obesity … and gets you places. Riding a bike is all of these.

After 1994 when helmets became compulsory in New Zealand, the unintended fallout was a corresponding 50 per cent drop in the numbers of people riding a bike. That's 50 per cent fewer people getting the life-extending benefits of riding.

Yes, cycle-paths and a less sporty, 'sit-up' riding style are encouraging more people to ride bikes regularly. Yet we could more than double cycling rates if we simply reinstated adults' rights to make a situational judgment on whether to wear a helmet.

So, let's get real value out of our new cycle-path investments by encouraging more people to hop on their bike, by this one simple change.

* Number of cycle helmet fines drops from 11,000 to 5,500 in two years

* Helmet law unfairly targets cyclists, say bike advocates**

Appetite for reform is growing, with protest rides organised in six cities across Australia, and in Wellington, this coming Saturday.

Yes, if you're in an accident you're likely to be better off wearing a helmet. But 'sit-up' style riding, as practised by bike-share users internationally, has a dramatically lower accident rate than sports-style riding. How low? In the United States, bike share sit-up riders have had just one fatality across their 50 bike-share systems. Ever.

Actually, you're far more likely to have a head injury when doing DIY or driving a car than when riding. Yet we have no compulsory law to wear a helmet in those situations.

The focus on helmets is disproportionate to risk. You're 500 times more likely to get a head injury playing rugby. Less than 1 per cent of head injury ACC claims relate to cycling, and even within cycling only 3 per cent of injury claims are for head injuries. Instead of pretending a helmet is the best path to safer riding, let's focus on what really makes a difference: creating comfortable, stress-free environments for bike riders, which attracts the numbers of people riding needed to make cycling as safe as those found overseas.

Bike share is coming, but it has failed everywhere where there is a blanket helmet law.

Adding in bike share gives people choice to easily switch travel modes, such as riding into town and catching a bus, train or Uber home – what's not to like?

Worrying about tracking down a helmet or getting nits from the previous rider discourages potential new riders.

There are different styles of riding a bike, each with different levels of risk. There are speed cyclists. There are downhill mountainbike riders. There are low-speed riders using their bike as a means of getting from A to B. Yet there's only one blanket law for riding a bike, no matter what style of riding or where that riding is happening – whether it's on the road, off the road, in a park, or on a separated cycleway.

We have a nuanced understanding of different styles driving a car – there's racing in Formula 1, rallying off-road, driving to the shops – and we treat these differently because they have different levels of risk and speed. We already acknowledge that in the way we use seat belts. When you ride in a car, you wear a seat belt, but on a city bus we recognise that the risk is far lower.

Much has changed. Our well-intentioned legislation has had unfortunate consequences, chiefly a massive decline in people riding bikes. Diabetes, obesity, heart disease and depression are all massive causes for concern in New Zealand, and riding a bike helps prevent these and keep these people out of our full to bursting hospitals. Other countries have watched from afar as New Zealand and Australian cycling numbers have dropped, and health issues rise, and have seen the consequences of a heavy-handed helmet law.

What if we were to open up our blanket laws to give adults some choice? We don't have to speculate because Australia's Northern Territories is a perfect test case of exactly that. The state made helmets optional on bike paths and as a result its cycling rates are 2.6 times the national average, and interestingly with a higher proportion of women riding.

I prioritise my health, and part of that is by using a healthy, active way of getting around. Riding is an active, healthy activity and blanket helmet laws just add an extra barrier to adoption. I've found that, consistent with UK research on risk-factoring, it's often safer for me to ride without a helmet – car drivers recognise me as a person and give me more space.

We need to improve our helmet laws to allow adults to make case by case decisions on safety. Let's get this done, and focus on the real changes that will encourage healthier, happier bike-riding for more Kiwis.

Lisa Clist is a member of Choice Biking, a new advocacy group focused on fostering a stress-free environment for people to enjoying riding bikes for transport in New Zealand. Lisa has lived and biked in many cities, including London, Paris, York and Auckland.