bicycle Australia bicycle helmet bicycle helmet Australia bicycle infrastructure bicycle paths Bicycling Bike paths bikes Biking cycle infrastructure Cycling cycling in Australia cycling in Holland cycling in the netherlands Cycling Netherlands cycling NSW cycling paradise cycling to school dutch cycling helmet in the netherlands helmet on a bike helmet when cycling helmets Netherlands
32 Comments
1:43 bicyclepaths are per definition seperated from other traffic, if not it's a bicyclelane.
High standards? Yes, and I need to have those to confront the authorities that we also need those high standards of the whole land at the border!
Do you have to bike when you're wearing a helmet in the Netherlands?
Great job handling an inevitably controversial topic. I wish you'd put more emphasis on the word HAVE though. I wear a helmet whenever I'm going to ride on a road, or at high speed. But the fact that it's mandatory and routinely enforced with fines for me to wear a helmet to go to the corner shop on a bike is a pain. We should be treated as adults, and allowed to choose the circumstances we feel that any extra protection may be helpful. Or we could just mandate helmets for all forms of mobility.
Menyenangkan sekali kawan melihat anak kecil bermain seped
even on that australian infrastructure, it is safer not to wear a helmet. Cars give you more space and you are less likely to be hit by a car.
It’s a shame that more and more people are using helmets.
It is ugly and does not reduce the risc of accidents. Considering the small risc of accidents, in combination with the small risc of falling on your head makes it rather silly. I cycle a lot but, but meeting people with helmets and sunglasses is not very nice. A free and nature-friendly way of transport is reduced to something that appears dangerous.
I'd take issue with the "you'd have to be mad not to wear one" comment tbh, people really don't realise just how futile helmets are. No doubt someone reading this is about to leap in to reply that a helmet saved their life, but it really didn't.
You have to understand the testing criteria that are used to certify a cycling helmet fit to sell as a product. They're dropped, from stationary, at a height of 1.5m, on to a hard surface. That's it. So, assuming you're a child or a short adult riding with a low seat position, and you fall over when not moving at all, and the manner in which you fall means your head moves downward in an almost vertical trajectory, then in those very limited circumstances congratulations, your helmet will protect your head from bruising and abrasions. Even under those ludicrously ideal conditions however, it will not protect you from brain injuries of any kind – if you hit your head hard enough to cause a concussion or anything more serious, then you will get a concussion or something more serious whether you're wearing a helmet or not. If you're skeptical of that, here's an exercise to try: go and have a look around at helmet manufacturer websites, bike retailers, at packaging and at marketing for helmets, and find one, single explicit claim from a company making or selling bicycle helmets – the people who would be legally liable for such a claim – that they will protect against serious head trauma, concussion etc.
Occasionally you'll see dramatic pictures of cracked and shattered helmets and claims that had the person not been wearing them, the car wheel that ran over their head or the vehicle that struck them would have killed them, but that is also unfortunately untrue. If the helmet is shattered, or even merely cracked and the foam dented, that means the helmet has, in the sense of its structural integrity, failed*. When an object fails in that way, essentially all of the force of the crush/impact that was in excess of the amount required to cause the failure is transferred onwards into what's underneath – the reason they aren't dead had nothing to do with their helmets, and everything to do with their skull, which is *significantly more resilient than any cycling helmet. Even when considering sports cyclists on racing bikes, there is no protection a helmet can provide that couldn't be equalled by a strapped skull cap made of a resilient fabric.
If you really believe that cycling is dangerous enough to need head armour, then buy a fully enclosed motorcycle helmet, because that's the only kind that is actually tested and rated to provide meaningful protection – bicycle "helmets" are basically just silly hats.
I always wear a helmet. I only have one head. It doesn't matter if it is on the road or a cycleway.
Furthermore a biking helmet gives you only some protection when falling. If you fall with your bike on that road you showed in Australia where you're cycling in that 1 cm free space between the fencing and the cars, and you're hit or get runover by a car than a helmet does not protect you in any way.
That is why in the Netherlands biking helmets are seen as fake security.
Hi! I remeber reading a survey that showed that cars passing cyclists unconsiously kept less distance from them if the cyslist was wearing a helmet. So wearing a helmet actually put you in more danger with cars. Flipside is that if something happens you're not wearing a helmet…
Are pedestrians allowed on all the 'off road' trails shown in this video? In the UK those paths would be full of dog walkers and peds with headphones on….
Honestly Helmet mandates just seem like yet another concession to motorists.
Cars are dangerous for other road users? Oh best force cyclists to wear a helmet!
The only helmets that are useful in bike-car accidents, are motorcycle helmets.
Bicycle helmets only protect your head from impact trauma in case of a one-sided accident at a maximum speed of 15km/h, e.g. someone falling of their bike while riding slowly, or slipping in a corner.
If you want to protect your head (why not other body parts??) at higher speeds (25km/h and up), you should really wear a full-face motorcycle helmet.
A good way to prevent having to wear helmets at all, is having a decent (separated or speed-adjusted) infrastructure, where the chances of getting hurt by using a bicycle are dramatically lower than in “mixed traffic” situations, prevalent in so many countries. Having to cycle between, or next to cars is a perfect recipe for discouraging people from cycling at all.
I don't know why your videos don't have more views and likes. They are well done, informative and fun to watch. My only criticism is that they aren't long enough. I would like to see more of your bicycling life in the Netherlands as I'm sure many others who live in car dependent cities and countries do as well (I live in Detroit). Videos such as yours give hope and joy to those of us who can't experience what you do everyday.
One small correction: you ARE required to wear a bike helmet if you are riding a speed pedelec (a bike that goes 50 km/hour). And when you go mountain biking through the woods using designated mountain bike trails, of which there are many, everyone also wear a helmet. But that’s just common sense…
a whatnow?
On the nethetlands nobody wears a helmet
The Dutch have it .
Biking actually is still safer than walking even in places like Australia or the USA despite the lack of good infrastructure.
A fine of over 300 dollars aus for not wearing a helmet sounds like a method of stopping the popularity of cycling, as is making a helmet mandatory. Anti-cyclists at work, it's not about safety.
No helmet needed here in the Netherlands.
But as you can see here at 01:55 is learning how to swim of even more importance. Wearing a helmet doesn't give you much protection against drowning when a strong gust blows you away from the cycling path, into a river, creek or one of the many, many canals in Holland.
That's why most elementary schools make learning how to swim a priority lesson. Learning how to swim is often the first diploma our children earn.
Wearing/not wearing a helmet is a personal choise that will depend on how people feel safe about riding in their country. For me (I live in Switzerland), even though bike infrastructures are ok, many times I have to ride on the side of the road with cars overpassing me at 60-80 km/h. For this I always wear a helmet even if I know that being hit by a car could seriouslly injured me or even kill me. But overall wearing a helmet will always decrease the risk of injuries (especially in the case of a low-speed accident, which are the most frequent).
My wife is working as a medical doctor in an emergency service of a big hospital and tells me almost everyday about how many people arrive with head injuries after a bike accident (even if the "fall by themselves" without being hit by a car). People wearing a helmet generaly have broken wrists, knees, shoulders, etc. but the head is rarely injured (sometimes a light concussion) and overall helmets protects well the head. In opposite, people not wearing helmet frequently have much more serious head injuries even when riding at low speed and in the case of higher speed, serious brain damages can occure leaving the person with long terme effects or even worse (death or vegetable state).
Having not a helmet obligation results in more people using the bicycle instead of a car. The added health benefit from this outways the added risk from having no helmet.
I wish I had saved the source now, but I read a Dutch study on bike safety and a comparison of bike related injuries. Which showed that it is safer without. Most people without a helmet are more mindful of how they cycle. And helmets can be a false security, making you more careless.
there are more people wearing helmets: TOURISTS…..
Why do you have to wear a bike helmet in Australia? Because the state governments there became nanny states with it when they began coercing people to wear them from the early 1990s! That's why! When I visited last time in 1995, they had begun the laws on that and I was appalled and under the circumstances I had to play along! Not to mention big government overregulation of many things at the same time. One thing that the poster and many others seem do not get on the basis of the state propaganda, is that the bike helmets are simply useless fluff which do nothing for safety and actually up the dangers of the whole business of cycling. Yes, you have greater risks on some Australian roads like you documented for riding bikes, but no, the helmets do not make you safe or safer. I'll take unhindered peripheral vision and better naturalized responses wearing a cap, over a retarded plastic hat any ruddy day, and stave off having the accident in the first place!
The Dutch are immune from head injuries.
Only tourists wear helmets on bikes and elderly people wear sometimes helmets on their e-bikes. Because that's what the governement advises, that's what the dutch people call: "betutteling".
In answer to the question…. If you want to be identified as a tourist, then yes!
And another… we are almost born on a bike.
Only foreigners are requirred to wear helmets
Instead of making roads safer for cars we should require a roll cage for every car even though it's inconvenient