We're Back!

Mandatory Helmet Laws Pick Up Speed

In addition to laws, many bicycle clubs require helmets on their organized rides. The United States Cycling Federation and the Triathlon Federation require helmets for all riders in the events they sanction. Safe Kids prepares a detailed status sheet on bicycle helmet laws and updates it quarterly on a subscription basis. Contact Joan Demes, Safe Kids, 111 Michigan Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20010-4993. Phone (202)939-4993, Fax 939-4838. Bicycle helmets have been mandatory for some time in all states in Australia. Compliance is high but varies according to the area, with some urban areas over 90% and some rural areas considerably lower. Early indications are that there were fewer riders on the road, which some have blamed on helmet laws. Teen riders in Melbourne dropped 15%, but adult riding recovered after a short dip. Helmet law supporters believe that seasonal data problems, a lowering of the teen driving age and other factors are be involved, so the effect of the laws cannot be isolated. Head injuries are significantly down, by 50% in New South Wales and 70% in Victoria based on hospital admissions. This is still not as much as had been predicted. Exemptions were originally permitted for Sikhs, huge heads and others who cannot wear helmets, but in practice were rarely granted and have now been mostly withdrawn unless a doctor's certificate is provided. Penalties are necessary to make the laws work. One advocate said "Helmets are no longer an issue in Australia."

We do not know of any other countries with mandatory helmet laws for bicyclists.

ASTM Nears Final Approval of a Bicycle Helmet Standard

The ASTM standard is considerably more difficult to meet than the outdated (1984) ANSI standard, and its impact tests and other provisions are comparable to the Snell standard. The ASTM drop heights are 2.0 meters on the flat anvil and 1.2 meters on two hazard anvils, one round and one simulating a curb. Maximum permissible g force registered in the headform inside the helmet is 300 g. Strap strength is tested by yanking it with a 4kg weight dropped for .6 meters. There is no stability (rolloff) test yet, but one is under development. At present ASTM lacks a requirement for independent lab testing for certification, but an organization called the Safety Equipment Institute is gearing up to provide that. Coverage does not have to extend as far down on the head as required by the Snell standard, but otherwise an helmet which passes the ASTM tests should pass the Snell tests as well.

This is the next big development in bicycle helmet standards, and will soon be advertised by manufacturers who are eager to avoid the cost of the Snell certification process. For consumer acceptance, the independent certification is the key question, since a manufacturer's assurance of self-compliance inevitably depends on the quality of the manufacturer. Snell not only provides an independent certification process, but undertakes extensive follow-up testing of helmets purchased in the field, assuring that production line changes or materials variations do not degrade the helmet's protection.

As a member of ASTM, BHSI has been participating in the activities of the committee and attending its meetings twice a year. The next committee meeting will be in Dallas in December, and new members are welcome. ASTM can be contacted on this subject by writing to Bill Brown, Staff Member, ASTM, 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-1187, telephone (215) 299-5499. [note: address has changed since 1993. See our ASTM page for a current address and staff contact.]

1993 Helmets: A Mixed Bag

All this activity is great to see. On the other hand, some of this year's models still raise new concerns about the direction of the industry. Some highlights: Everybody Meets Snell. Nearly every helmet on the market now meets the Snell standard. Snell can send you their latest list, or we can send it to you, but you probably will not need it. The list has 838 separate entries, although many of them are the same helmet produced for different retailers. Call Snell at (516) 862-6440 or us if you need to check a helmet. There are some new helmets on the market without Snell certification, even from major manufacturers. They tend to be racers' aero models, where protection has apparently been compromised to accommodate some outlandish weight or shape restriction. The best advice for consumers is still "look for the Snell sticker."

GESET Foam. About three years ago, General Electric began producing a new EPS combined with resins that molds into a stronger foam. The technical description is "a blend of polyphenylene oxide and polystyrene impregnated with pentane (an organic blowing agent)." Beginning last year, GESET has been rapidly spreading through the high end of the bicycle helmet industry despite the fact that GE says it was not developed for helmets. It permits lighter helmets with slightly thinner foam to pass the Snell standard, opening up a new competition to convince the consumer that the difference between eight and nine ounces is significant. It also performs better in wet sample testing, which can produce erratic test results with other foams. Most importantly, it holds together better in multiple impacts, which is a problem with any all-foam helmet.

Aero designs. Very few riders ever take advantage of the "tail" on an aerodynamic helmet, which helps only at high speed. For most riders Aero styles are styles, not a functional classification. But there are more of them than ever this year, and the riders we see using them are not Olympic athletes. Common sense tells you that the ideal shape for the exterior of the helmet to perform well in a crash is a round ball, which is less likely to snag on anything and jerk the rider's neck, or to constrain the head in the crash. We think that the U.S. is still in the phase where anything that persuades more riders to buy helmets has merit even if it degrades protection slightly, and there is no scientific evidence yet that aero helmets are less protective than round ones. But the time will come to re-examine that philosophy. Similar issues are raised by the "sculpted" look in some other helmet models. Designers are looking for alternatives to plain looking helmets, even if it means sacrificing some crash performance.

Hard Foam Liner Inserts. Two more manufacturers have introduced models this year with very hard foam around the vents. The hard foam lets them open up the vents more while still passing a standard. In the U.S. our standards do not have a test for point loading on the skull, so the metal or hard plastic headform bridges the vent hole, permitting the helmet to pass. Real skulls are less rigid, and may deflect from harder foam, causing a "wave" in the fluid in which the brain is suspended or even bashing the brain directly. In addition, many researchers believe that we already need to soften the foam in bicycle helmets to reduce g levels well below the current 300 g standard, since some riders may be injured at lower g's. Australia has added a point loading test to its standard to eliminate any spots where the load is disproportionate, and we need to do that here as well. Meantime, we are advising consumers to avoid any helmet with hard foam inside unless it has a sticker stating that it passes the Standards Association of Australia standard.

Off Brands. Taiwan is now sending us any number of new helmets, most of them indistinguishable from each other. There are many new U.S. brands as well. But some are not Snell certified, so there is no check on their quality control procedures. EPS foam is notoriously subject to molding problems, which can leave internal voids and other nasty defects. Under these conditions Snell certification becomes even more important.

Spaghetti Straps. The search for product differentiation has led some manufacturers to put very narrow straps on their helmets. The effect is akin to wearing high heeled shoes: function and comfort are sacrificed for style. Colors and trim. There was a net loss in conspicuity this year, since the neon craze is over and deep purple is in. Helmet trim is often not reflective, sometimes even when the box says it is. Again a change in standards could be required to achieve improvement. At present the New Zealand standard is still the only one in the world which addresses conspicuity.

Visors. Visors are making a comeback. There are new ones this year from several manufacturers. The ASTM standard requires helmets to pass with any included attachment in place, so at least visors will now be tested. (Snell and ANSI do not test the visor at all.) But there is no provision for how easily a visor should rip off rather than snagging the head in a crash, nor for whether or not it can shatter and cut the rider's face. So we recommend avoiding a visor. The issue had died while visors were unfashionable, but now they are back and must be addressed. Air bags. Bell has introduced a fitting system pumped up by air to fit, which they licensed from Reebok. The system offers advantages: it can be adjusted easily for winter use with a cap, may fit strangely shaped heads better and might make fitting quicker. But will it hold up? If it leaks after long use, riders are likely to wear the helmet anyway, just tolerating a loose fit. That becomes a safety question. We also heard a Bell salesman at one bicycle show tell a show owner "If you're out riding on a hot day and you get too hot you can just let out some air to increase your ventilation." Just don't crash on hot days.

Multi-Density Foam. LT continues to produce impressive looking designs with harder foam outside and softer layers inside. Their new 870 has mesh in between to keep the foam together in a crash and a thin shell. (On the other hand, their new 970 has a "sculpted" shape which provides irregular and unnecessary ridges on the outside shell.) It would be interesting to see independent lab test results on these and other helmets. Snell Funds Research Projects The Snell Memorial Foundation has funded a number of primary research projects on head and neck injury at various universities and research centers around the country. The results will be published eventually, but research takes time. In addition Snell has funded two literature reviews and monographs by a team headed by Dr. Susan Baker at Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Baker has produced two very fine analyses of the current information on head injury. The first was titled "Head Injuries in Non-Motorized Informal Recreation" and excluded bicycle injuries. The second is titled "Injuries to Bicyclists: A National Perspective," and we are attaching one useful summary page from it. It includes charts, tables and graphs from various sources covering bicycle trips, fatalities, hospital admissions, emergency room cases and more. The conclusions are not surprising, but it brings together a complete statistical review of data from many sources to make sure your bases are covered. Snell distributes both papers free: Snell Memorial Foundation, P. O. Box 493, St. James, NY 11780. Telephone (516) 862-6440 or Fax (516) 862-6545. They are also distributed by the Center for Disease Control, 1600 Clifton Road F-41, Atlanta, GA 30333. Snell Reduces Severity of Strap Test The Snell Memorial Foundation announced in January that it was reducing the severity of the strap test for its bicycle helmet standard. The previous requirement was that the buckle and strap withstand the jerk from a 38 kg weight dropped for 70 mm. (about 2.75 inches). This was a very severe test. The drop has now been reduced to 30 mm (about 1.3 inches), and is now comparable to most other standards. In practice, helmets meeting almost any minimal standard do not suffer strap breakage, so the softening of the requirement will probably have little effect. We think that consumers should primarily be concerned about strap fit and buckle durability in use, both of which affect helmet performance, and neither of which is covered in the current Snell, ASTM or ANSI standards.

World Health Organization Conference

This international helmet campaign got a boost last month when WHO sponsored a major conference on injuries and injury control in Atlanta. Earlier the same week ASTM had a head and neck injury conference at the same location. Many interesting papers were presented at the two conferences. Among the researchers' findings:

• Restraining movement of the head during impact increases neck injuries. If the head is free to twist, slide or roll the strain on the neck is reduced. The researcher concluded that helmets should have hard, non-deformable, slippery outer surfaces, introducing the term "The Slippery Head Protection Philosophy." This confirms Dr. Voigt Hodgson's work on sliding resistance, and indicates that hard shell helmets can probably be superior to soft or thin shells. There are many other variables in helmet design besides the shell, and current hard shell designs may not necessarily be superior to thin shells. We still have no field data comparing the various designs and no indication that it is necessary to recommend hard shells for everyone. Other research on spinal injuries from direct straight-neck impacts on the crown of the head seemed to support this thesis.

• California's motorcyclists are now using helmets at the rate of 99.5% since the mandatory helmet rule was reinstated for motorcycle riders. But 7% are wearing bogus helmets, some about the size of a yarmulke. Motorcycle ridership is down by 16%, and fatalities are down by 37%. Fatalities per 1,000 riders (which adjusts for less ridership) dropped by 32%.

• Cost effectiveness measurements show bicycle helmet promotions to be reasonably cost effective, ranking behind motorcycle helmet promotion and ahead of rear seat belt promotion. Either the legislative approach or a community-based promotion campaign approach can produce good results. Depending on the approach, maximum impact comes from lowering helmet costs or increasing the wearing rate.

• Toronto's experience shows that the usage rate increases if the rider is riding with helmeted peers, or with an entire helmeted family. Their subsidy program did not work well for low-income areas, but did work well in medium or higher income neighborhoods.

• A Danish study emphasized approaching helmet promotion by analyzing children's bicycle culture. Danish children used their bikes for transportation, were impulsive on where to go next, valued their independence to ride wherever they chose, regularly exceeded the limits of good judgment to race or hot-dog, sped, considered bicycles important in achieving status. There were gender differences in the bicycle/communication relationship, with girls chatting more as they rode. Helmets must be "cool" even though children recognize the protection advantages, and peer pressure is a key element. Children function in groups. Their bicycle culture is unique to children, and is not an extension of adult bicycle culture. The approach can provide interesting insights on how to reach children with a helmet message by relating it to their bicycle culture. Case studies of individuals have little effect, so try to reach the kids with a group message, make sure that helmets are presented as "cool" and remember that helmets are not an isolated appliance, but a part of a culture. Most programs already follow those guidelines, but the talk bought back childhood memories that we all need to keep in mind when we try to reach child audiences.

• The Puerto Rico chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics has developed Spanish language materials for helmet promotion. AAP can be reached at (708) 981-7933.

• Georgia state officials on TV during the conference proudly announced (erroneously) that their new helmet law taking effect on June 1 would be first of its kind in the nation. A national organization spokesperson said (equally erroneously) during a keynote address that the first was in Montgomery County. Imagine researching a history of helmet laws years from now... For child cyclists up to age 9, the most frequent crash with a car is the "mid-block ride-out," which accounts for a full 42%.

• Maryland has had legislation advocated by a community-based effort (Howard County), a coalition of groups (Montgomery County) and a single legislative champion (Allegheny County). Their statewide effort failed, partly because an earlier brouhaha over motorcycle helmet laws created helmet law fatigue. Major components to be determined include age group covered, handling of contributory negligence provisions, provisions government bicycle rentals and fines to be assessed. Howard County has written only five citations, the fines for all of which were waived.

• No workshop participants reported any of the "hanging" incidents which have occurred in several Scandinavian playgrounds. Either the spacing on our gym equipment bars is different, or children are just not wearing their helmets in playgrounds outside of Sweden and Norway.

We hope that these scraps from our notes will be fleshed out with published papers in due time for the ASTM conference. For the WHO conference there was a book of conference abstracts, but no published proceedings.

More Bibliography, More Needed

Psssst!! You Can Still Find Hard Shells

Hal Fenner's Melon Drop

BHSI News

This page was last revised on: November 13, 2003.

Contact us.