ERIC PD, the fundamentals of risk reduction and ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Practicable) which is the corner stone of safety in the UK.
who's Eric?
Eliminate
Reduce
Isolate
Control
Protect
Discipline.
In order from most effective to least. there is some argument for protect and discipline to be swapped around but for this argument they are pretty much the same in terms of effectiveness and sit at the bottom of the pile. the HSE has a similar list called the hierarchy of control in which discipline is merged with part of control. I'm also going to mention cost benefit analysis (CBA) but only in passing and when I say cost I'm really talking about sacrifice in terms of effort, time and then financial cost. I'm not really going to mention gross disproportion at the moment but the argument should be swayed in favour of safety.
- Elimination – physically remove the hazard
- Substitution – replace the hazard
- Engineering controls – isolate people from the hazard
- Administrative controls – change the way people work
- PPE – protect the worker with equipment
I would have thought that this is the argument by which the judge will have established his verdict but lets walk through it shall we
the scenario is riding a bike, the hazard is other road uses the top event is loss of control and the consequence is being injuries/fatality (note, there are other hazards but in this case we will only look at one). really we should look at inherent and residual risk based on the likelihood and severity, but I'm not going to talk to you about risk today, only about controls of which I'm going to catorgorise them in to prevention and mitigation (means it doesn't happen or that it does happen but the severity is reduced). so:
Can we eliminate the risk?
well yes and no, we aren't going to stop riding and it's exceptionally difficult to ride only on cycle paths in the UK (far easier in other countries) (both prevention) it's not worth looking CBA here, to elimate the hazard completely is simply not possible, imagine the effort of installing cycle lanes on every road in the country :O
Can we reduce or substitute the hazard?
No, not yet, perhaps when we get driverless cars that work, but for now we aren't going to remove other road users, they would be a prevention control though. again the cost is crazy.
Isolate or engineering controls?
we as cyclists can do as much as possible for prevention including making ourselves as obvious as possible (lights, high vis, etc.) in terms of cost this is pretty cheap and has real world benefits so I'd say it's worth it (opinion). the basic infrastructure is going to help too (cycle lanes, safe havens, segregation etc. ) but as above the cost would be huge, the benefit would be pretty huge too but could have other hazards associated with it. On the mitigation side of things car design is also helping (soft bonnets), if we are talking head injuries then the helmet kind of fits here, but I'd still put it in protect as for me it's PPE and it's only related to a very specific injury type.
Control (Administrative)
Yes, this is whats been spoken about above, but changing both the cyclists attitude and the car drivers attitude is a valid mitigation. Unfortunately it's exceptionally difficult to do. There has been some inroads made in recent years in the UK and other countries are already there thanks to 60+ years of cultural change. any change of culture like this takes a lot of effort but things like cycle proficiency from a young age is a great help (Still done but sporadically, all the schools near me do it now), it's also important that the old gits who learned the hard way pass on the good word (one of the benefits of wearing a helmet, it's evidence of considering safety and can help in changing the culture but it's only a small help.) Note that a lot of this could also be considered as discipline. on the plus side, the cost of this is spread over a massive amount of time and the benefit is pretty huge, so yer, we should be doing this.
ahh here we go PPE or protect
Yes we can do that, stick a box on your head, it isn't 100% perfect but it's going to reduce head injuries (Even those above who say it didn't help them, I'd like to see you do it again with a helmet to prove that, (actually, no I wouldn't, that's horrible) but tests have shown that it could help. in terms of cost, it's pennies, you can get a good helmet (granted without all the bells and whistles) for 20-30 quid, that's less than most people spend on a night out. as for sacrifice, there isn't any, other than you manly manness being hurt (ask the oil industry how that went, the culture of the industry was considered as a big causal factor to the Piper Alpha incident, and if you don't know what that is, google it). other protective means are out there too, but the cost to benefit could be a bit different. also worth noting that we are well down the list in terms of effectiveness so the cost of implementation has to be considered in terms of how effective the risk reduction would be.
Finally discipline (at last)
I'll refer you to control above but I'll also add something like this judges verdict as a disciplinary factor, yes it's unfair on the poor lass you had her payout reduced, but it's going to set a precedent, not just in terms of wearing a helmet but also in changes to the culture, were we as cyclists take some of the burden of protection on not just in terms of physical but also in saying that there is a consequence to our actions, we should ride better, we should practice good road discipline, defensive riding and all that good stuff. It's a better road to tread than enforced legislation (which has been talked about more than once).
Right I'm stopping there, but in short, your call if you want to wear a helmet, your call if you want to go digging on safety standards, helmet design and all the millions of papers on changes to culture thanks to wearing or not wearing one, my last sentence above is the good one, take some ******* responsibility for your actions, because if we don't, someone else will make so we have to and it will be the shitty end of the stick led by someone else rather than by us.
oh and if you feel like it, have a play with ERIC and your stand point on helmets, I'd love to see your take on it (then I can write a paper on it and claim it as research, mwah ha ha ha).
note: the above is somewhere between opinion and fact and should be read as such. I have not referenced any sources and don't intend to, my opinion is based on engineering judgement having worked in various industries and ridden a bike for to many years to count. I've also been knocked of a bike 4 times in 4 years at no fault of my own and the helmet has hit something hard (bonnet, floor, curb) every time, better it than my head.
And you don't wear a helmet on your face.
