Bicyclist Dies After Crashing into Guardrail in Malibu

Will, Alberto, and JGiven, I see where you guys are coming from. A helmeted cyclist suffering severe head injuries in a crash doesn't necessarily mean helmets are completely ineffective. That is correct.

However, where is the evidence that helmets are effective in preventing serious head injury? JGiven, you say "Helmets are remarkably effective at protecting people from serious head injury." How can you be so sure that is true? As I cyclist myself and a cycling advocate I honestly hope it is true, but I'm becoming increasingly afraid that it may not be. I'm concerned that cycle helmets, as currently constructed simply don't have the energy absorbing ability to prevent serious head injury. Bumps, scratches in a low-speed accident? Sure. Helmets are great for that. But where is the serious scientific evidence that this lightweight piece of polystyrene foam and plastic has any real energy absorbing ability? If we were serious about preventing cycling head injuries, cycle helmets would look a lot more like motocross or motorcycle helmets, with full face protection and serious energy absorbing ability.

Regarding seatbelts and airbags in automobiles, the difference there is that there is good scientific evidence from multiple sources that seatbelts and airbags do what they are supposed to do. That is, they absorb significant amounts of energy from an impact (by slowing down the human body at a reduced rate of deceleration as compared to the rapid rate of deceleration of the automobile) and therefore reduce injuries and save lives.

The real danger here is that helmets are becoming a panacea, catch-all in terms of cycling safety. They are at the top of many lists of cycling safety equipment, when they should be more towards the bottom.  I contend that high visibility reflective clothing and equipment, safe cycling tactics and education for both cyclists and drivers, traffic calming measures, and with improved cycling infrastructure in communities will do far more for protecting the craniums of cyclists than a helmet ever will. Cyclists in European cities are far safer than cyclists here in the USA, despite the fact that almost none of them wear helmets.

The helmet issue has become complex, but I think it can be summed up as "Wear one if you wish, but don't expect it to do anything."

A couple of useful links:
http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets...
http://cyclehelmets.org/

I doubt if Saturday's tragedy will spark concern for helmet effectiveness as much as it sparks my concern for the writer jumping to that cheap conclusion. To atone for such a weak unsubstantiated way to open this post, LAist must start a future article on any given fatal traffic accident with how much it might spark concern about the effectiveness of airbags.

I agree. I think the only thing that could serve to "spark concern about the effectiveness of bicycle helmets" is the writer's own suggestion that it might. I hate it when authors of articles tell us what we might think instead of just presented the facts as they occurred. 

The daily breeze just reported what happened, it seems LAist just decided it wasn't sensational enough. Nice one. 

Condolences to friends and family of the man. 

This death, while tragic, should not spark concern that bicycle helmets are ineffective. The fact is, helmets cannot protect against all bicycle deaths, just as seat belts and airbags do not prevent against all automobile deaths. Yes, if helmets can be improved, let us improve them further. But no one should abandon their helmet because it is not effective. Helmets are remarkably effective at protecting people from serious head injury, and their use should continue to be encouraged. No serious cyclist that I know would ever consider getting on a bike without one.