The West Australian: Bike experts reject ‘no helmet safest’ claim – 18 September, 2006

Bike safety advocates have condemned a controversial British study suggesting cyclists would be better off not wearing helmets because there was less chance of being hit by cars. The theory is that drivers leave less room when overtaking cyclists in helmets because they perceive them to be more experienced.

Ian Walker, a traffic psychologist at Bath University, found on average motorists passed him 7cm closer when he was wearing a helmet than not wearing one. He recorded data from 2300 overtaking motorists and concluded that drivers gave more space to inexperienced and female riders.

Critics of the research argue many bike accidents do not involve cars.

Roleystone teenager Zac Christie, 14, broke his back in five places after falling off his BMX bike two months ago. Zac, who could have died had he not been wearing a helmet, will be released from hospital today.

His mother Kathy Berzins said the discomfort of wearing a helmet could not compare to losing a loved one.

Former cycling enthusiast Gerry Krygsman, 80, received multiple injuries after being clipped by another rider during a bike race almost a decade ago. Doctors said he too would have died if he had not been wearing a helmet.

Headwest chairwoman Jan Bishop said the British study sent a dangerous message to road users. “It’s ludicrous to suggest that drivers think people who don’t wear a helmet are idiots so they’ll stay away (from them) but people who do must be experienced riders, so they’ll drive closer,” she said.