Bicycle helmets in Australia

Cyclists wearing helmets on a street in Melbourne, during a climate protest event

Between 1990 and 1992, Australian states introduced laws requiring people riding bicycles to wear bicycle helmets.

Australia was the first country to do this, and much of the evidence on the effects of mass helmet use comes from Australia. Debate continues, without consensus, on the results of mandatory helmet use in the country.

History

Various studies had suggested that cyclists, and especially those who are children, are more at risk of serious accident when compared to motorists who use the same roads. Reasons for this include the relative lack of stability resulting from having two wheels rather than four and because the cyclist is not protected by the shell of a car body. Improvements to their safety can be obtained in two principal ways, being causing changes to the environment in which they cycle and by causing changes to their own behaviour.

Addressing the latter of these strategies, the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) helped to encourage public awareness, acceptance and demand for mandatory wearing of helmets in Australia. The final report of a seven-year inquiry, issued in 1985, recommended that cooperation of states and territories should be sought to review the need for legislation and to introduce it if found necessary.

Mandatory helmet laws were first introduced in Victoria in July 1990, followed in January 1991 by laws for adult cyclists in New South Wales and all cyclists in Tasmania, then in July 1991 for child cyclists in New South Wales and all cyclists in South Australia as well as Queensland, where the law was not enforced until 1 January 1993. In January 1992 helmet laws were introduced in the Northern Territory and Western Australia and in July 1992 in the ACT.

Legal requirements

The current legally required standard for a bicycle helmet is AS/NZS 2063. The law is laid out in Part 15 of the Australian Road Rules, approved by the Australian Transport Council. It specifies that "The rider of a bicycle must wear an approved bicycle helmet securely fitted and fastened on the rider’s head, unless the rider is exempt from wearing a bicycle helmet under another law of this jurisdiction." The law also requires helmet use by certain bicycle passengers.

In Tasmania, the law only applies on public streets, while in the NT since March 1994 there is an exemption for adults cycling along footpaths or on cycle paths.

The Queensland government announced in April 2013 that exemptions on religious grounds from mandatory bicycle helmet laws would be granted from 2014.

Surveys of helmet use and cycling participation

Various surveys have been published concerning the use of helmets and participation in cycling both before and after the introduction of helmet laws.

Chart by Colin Clarke: 36% reduction in cycling Melbourne

A 1993 study by Finch et al. analysed the results of surveys carried out in May 1990, 1991 and 1992 at 64 sites in metropolitan Melbourne. Overall, 3121 cyclists were observed in 1990. In 1991, 1110 (36%) fewer cyclists were counted, compared to an increase of 293 cyclists wearing helmets. Although surveys conducted on weekdays had similar weather, there appears to have been some differences for counts conducted on weekends. About 32% of weekend observations in the pre-law survey were affected by rain, compared with about half in 1991 but only 14% in 1992. Counts in 1992 were also inflated by a bicycle rally passing through one of the sites in 1992. Finch et al. noted that from a statistical point of view, it would not be valid to exclude that site. (Excluding the site would have excluded cyclists who would have been cycling anyway, but through a different site, had it not been for the rally.) A study by Robinson that re-analysed the data from the Finch study, excluding the site with the rally, concluded that 27% fewer cyclists were counted in 1992 than 1990.

In NSW, surveys to assess helmet wearing rates in multiple locations, both metropolitan and regional/rural, were carried out in September 1990 and April 1991, 1992 and 1993. Compared to April 1991 (6072 child cyclists counted), the reduction in children's cycling the first year of the helmet law (April 1992) was 36%, with almost identical reductions in rural NSW (35%) and the Sydney metropolitan area (37%). In April 1993, the NSW surveys counted 3414 child cyclists, 44% fewer than the pre-law survey in April 1991. Because cycling participation is weather dependent (fewer cyclists ride when it is raining, uncomfortably cold or hot, or very windy), and may also vary with holiday periods, surveys taken at different times of year, or in different weather conditions, may be subject to statistical confounding, and care should be taken when interpreting results. In NSW, the only pre-law data for adults at road sites was in September 1990 (with overcast weather conditions for Sydney) and at a different time of year to the post-law surveys. In the first post-law Sydney survey, in April 1991 (with sunny conditions), 22% more adult cyclists were counted than in the pre-law survey. In the second Sydney post-law survey, in April 1992, 2% more adult cyclists were counted than in the pre-law survey. In 1993 5% fewer were counted than in the pre-law survey. For road sites in regional areas adults counted reduced by 9% in 1991 and by 37% in 1993. In 1993 the weather was variable, with the threat of rain, across NSW on all survey days, with rain at one of the rural sites on 2 of these 3 days. In 1996, Walker reported the results of a consistent series of counts (adults and children) at the same 25 sites and observation times in Sydney. In October, 3798 were counted in 1990, compared to 2749 cyclists in 1994. In April, the counts were 4405 (1991), 3249 (1992), 3070 (1993) and 2269 (1996). In 1996, 25% of the observational hours were associated with overcast conditions and threatened rain.

In 1994 Marshall and White reported on the effects of bicycle helmet legislation in South Australia and stated that “...due to the disparate nature of the results from different sources, it is not possible to be conclusive about the effect of the requirement to wear bicycle helmets on the number of cyclists". City of Adelaide cordon counts of cyclists recorded very similar results for the years 1985 through to 1992 (except for 1988 which was attributed to changed survey methods for that particular year). The counts for 1993 showed a 15 per cent drop in cyclist numbers, though the authors attributed this to poor weather and street closures due to the impending Grand Prix car race in the city. They also examined South Australian household health survey data for 1990 and 1993 (about 3000 people in each survey) and found no statistically significant evidence of a change in cycling participation in any age group after the helmet law introduction, except for a decrease in females aged less than 15 years riding to school. However, the authors noted that surveys of helmet wearing in school children by Harrison Market Research showed a 38 per cent decline in cycling from September 1988 to March 1994, although they also note that cycling to school represented only 20% of cycling participation in under 15 year olds at that time. Helmet wearing rates increased substantially after the introduction of helmet legislation, with rates of wearing over 90% in cyclists aged 15 years or older, and rates up to 86% in school children. The helmet wearing rate in commuter cyclists observed in the cordon counts was 98%.

Injury rates in Australian cyclists

A 1994 MUARC study of cycling in Victoria found that "...the number of insurance claims from bicyclists killed or admitted to hospital after sustaining a head injury decreased by 48% and 70% in the first and second years after the law, respectively. Analysis of the injury data also showed a 23% and 28% reduction in the number of bicyclists killed or admitted to hospital who did not sustain head injuries in the first and second post-law years, respectively." Robinson criticised this study on the grounds that it ignored the similar trends for pedestrians, in particular that numbers of pedestrians with concussion fell by 29% and 75% in the first and second years after the introduction of the bicycle helmet law in Victoria. In 2013, Vicroads reported "Two years after the legislation was introduced, there was a 16% reduction in head injuries in metropolitan Melbourne and 23% reduction in head injuries throughout Victoria". Road safety improved substantially with deaths reducing from 776 in 1989 to 396 in 1992.

Newstead et al. 1994 provided details of TAC claims (from motor vehicle/cyclist accidents) with the percentage reduction in severe bicyclist casualties relative to the 1989/90 financial year. For Melbourne bicyclists without head injuries fell by 4% and 12% for the years 1990/91 and 1991/92. Clarke asserted that, because the Melbourne helmet wearing surveys reported reductions in generally cycling of 36%, compared to the reported 4% and 12% reductions in non-head injury rates in cyclists, this indicates that accident involvement increased by 37% to 50%.

A final MUARC report on the helmet law in Victoria (published in 1995) reported that after taking into account changes in the funding arrangements for publicly funded hospitals, cyclist non-head injuries dropped by about 25%, and serious and severe cyclist head/brain injuries dropped by 40%. The report noted improvements to road safety and increased availability of bicycle paths. They mention "we were unable to include any reliable measures of exposure, and thus it is impossible to distingish between reductions due to helmet wearing and reductions solely due to possible reductions in exposure".

Robinson 1996 reported reductions in numbers of child cyclists 15 and 2.2 times greater than the increase in numbers of children wearing helmets and analysed children's accident data from New South Wales and Victoria to investigate injury changes. For NSW and Victoria the number of children’s injuries was compared to the level of cycling activity to provide estimates of the ‘equivalent number of injuries for pre law numbers of cyclists’, Table 2 and 5 in the report. For NSW the equivalent number of injuries for pre-law number of cyclists increased from 1310 (384 head + 926 other injuries) in 1991 to 2083 (488 head + 1595 other injuries) in 1993. For Victoria from 1990 to 1992 the equivalent numbers increased from 897 to 1035. Robinson concludes that the injury data suggest that the overall accident rate may even have increased.

An analysis by Curnow found that between 1988 to 1994, cyclist deaths from head injury fell 30%. This figure was less than estimates noted above of the reduction in cycling. ATSB road fatality data shows that between 1992 and 1994, compared to 1987-1989, the number of cyclist fatalities fell by 45%.

King and Fraine studied data from the southern part of Brisbane, concluding that helmet wearing legislation and enforcement was associated with a reduction in head injuries, 26% more than expected if they had followed the trend for other injury types. The addition of the penalty for non-compliance had a larger effect, reducing severe head injuries by a further 55% and less severe injuries by a further 8% compared with the expected values.

Neither King's study, nor the 1994 study of cycling in Victoria, made allowance for declining trends in the proportion of head injuries to all road users. In 1996, an analysis by Robinson of data for cyclists of all ages in Victoria and child cyclists in New South Wales was published, noting almost identical declining trends in the percentage of injuries that involved head injuries for both cyclists and pedestrians, and that the decline in cycle use after the helmet law in NSW and Victoria was greater than the decline in injuries. Bruce Robinson used information on head injuries, recorded for hospital admissions in Western Australia (WA) since 1971, to show the remarkably similar trends for all road users, and noted that a divergence between the injury rates from 1991 was unexplained, suggesting that it might just be random variation. The WA data were later analysed by Hendrie et al., using a statistical model to estimate the effect of the helmet law on cyclist head injuries, after taking the downward trends in both pedestrian and cyclist head injuries into account. The model showed that the divergence was not due to random variation (p<0.001); that before the helmet law the proportion of cyclists with a head injury was on average 6% higher than the proportion of pedestrians with a head injury; and that after the law the proportion of cyclists with a head injury was on average 16% lower than the proportion of pedestrians with a head injury. (This divergence can be seen on the graph, where the green/pedestrian line crosses the black/cyclist line the year before the helmet law is introduced.) With respect to the cost-benefit of the helmet law, Hendrie et al concluded that "In monetary terms, it is unlikely that the helmet wearing legislation would have achieved net savings of any sizeable magnitude." ATSB data shows that in NSW, during the 3 years following legislation 1992-1994, compared to the 3 years prior to legislation of 1988-1990, pedestrian fatalities dropped by 34% (from an average of 185 to 122 per year), cyclist fatalities dropped by 49% (from an average of 24 to 12 per year) and motorcyclists dropped by 49% (an average of 107 to 54). A 1995 NSW RTA analysis reported the total reduction in cyclist casualties since helmet legislation (including the effects of safer roads and reduced cycling) as 33 fewer cyclist deaths and 1040 fewer injuries, a saving of $47,863,820 in casualty costs.

A 2006 review by Robinson of available data head injuries and cycle use in four Australian states (Victoria, New South Wales, South Australia, Western Australia) and New Zealand concluded that there was no evidence at the population level that the laws had reduced head injuries. Several authors have criticised the 2006 Robinson review. Robinson's review included a Victorian study by Carr et al. which noted: "the change is largely due to the introduction of the mandatory helmet wearing legislation although it is possible that a part of the change relates to reduced exposure to crash risk of bicyclists since the legislation's introduction." Robinson noted that pedestrian deaths and serious injuries declined to 74% of pre-law casualties. The same 74% reduction in deaths and serious head injuries, together with 30% fewer cyclists, should have led to a 48% reduction in cyclists' deaths and serious head injuries. The actual fall of only 43% therefore implied increased risk of death and serious injury per cyclist (compared to pedestrians) after the introduction of helmet laws in Australia.

A 2011 study by researchers at the University of New South Wales concluded that helmet laws led to an immediate 29% reduction in cycling related head injuries over and above any reductions in cycling participation immediately after the introduction of the legislation in NSW. A rejoinder by Rissel to this paper criticised aspects of its methods and challenged its conclusions. A response to this critique by the authors of the original paper addressed each of the criticisms and provided some additional analyses of the data used in the original paper, which confirmed the original results and conclusions.

A 2012 study by the same University of New South Wales researchers found that the population-based hospitalisation rate for cyclist arm injuries had increased by 145 percent in NSW from 1991 to 2010. In the same time period head injuries rates only increased by 20 percent. When trends are assessed relative to available estimates of cycling participation from 2001-2010, arm injuries increased by 46% while head injuries remained flat. In terms of absolute numbers of hospitalisations, between 1991 and 2000, the number of arm injuries doubled, while the number of head injuries increased by 40%.

See also: Bicycle_helmet § Rotational_injury

Bambach et al. 2013 provided details for NSW, 2001 to 2009, by comparing wearers and non-wearers, head and other injuries from accidents involving motor vehicles. A noticeable feature in the details was for the ages, 55% of non-wearers were in the 0-19 age group compared with 19% for wearers. Bambach Table 2 shows 267 head injuries for non-wearers and 372 head injuries for wearers. There were 120 non-wearers over the 0.05 BAC limit and 85 wearers. Non-helmeted cyclists were more likely to display imprudent cycling behaviour, including disobeying a traffic control (9.4% compared with 3.3%) and cycling with a BAC greater than 0.05 (7.2% compared with 1.7%) (Table 2). However, non-helmeted cyclists were more likely cycling on the footpath (34.4% compared with 12.9%) and in speed zones of 50 km/h or less (56.9% compared with 50.0%), and less likely cycling on highways or freeways (8.3% compared with 12.6%). Overall, non-helmeted cyclists were more likely to be seriously injured in body regions other than the head (9.5% compared with 7.3%).

In a meta-analysis of published helmet effectiveness studies, Attewell et al. found in 2000 that "...three studies provided neck injury results that were unfavourable to helmets with a summary [odds ratio] estimate of 1.36 (95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.86), but this result may not be applicable to the lighter helmets currently in use", and that compared to helmeted cyclists, unhelmeted cyclists were 2.4 times more likely to sustain a brain injury; 2.5 times more likely to sustain a head injury; and 3.7 times more likely to sustain a fatal injury.

See also: Bicycle_helmet § Meta-analyses

Use of case-control studies

Main article: Bicycle_helmet § Case-control_studies

Case-control studies concerning the effectiveness of helmets, including some from Australia, have been cited in a literature review regarding the health outcomes of cycling and bicycle helmets by the Centre for Accident Research & Road Safety — Queensland (CARRS-Q). The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) analyzed sixteen such studies, four from Australia.

All these studies are disputed by Curnow and Robinson pointed out that case-control studies in other areas, such as hormone replacement therapy and heart disease, have produced misleading results.

Bicycle usage

Bicycle usage: studies with control groups

The Australian census asks about about method of travel to work on census day. Some states made bicycle helmets compulsory before the 1991 census (Vic: 1 July 1990; Tas: 1 Jan 1991; NSW (adults): 1 Jan 1991. The trend from 1986-91 in all these states was below that from 1981-86. In SA the law was introduced on 1 Jul 1991, a few days before the 1991 census on 6 August. As in some other states, the law may not have been enforced immediately. In SA, there was a greater reduction in cycling to work from the 1991 to the 1996 census than from 1986-91. In WA, the law was introduced on 1 Jan 1992 and enforced from 1 July 1992. In Qld, no provision was made for penalties and the law was widely ignored (about 50% of adults wore helmets) until 1 Jan 1993, when penalties were introduced. The greatest declines in cycling to work in these states were seen from the 1991 to 1996 census. In the seat of government, the Australian Capital Territory, cycling continued to increase despite the helmet law.

Bicycle usage: states with and without enforced laws at the 1991 census

Aggregating all data for states with (Vic, Tas and NSW) or that may have had (SA) enforced helmet laws, and those that did not (Qld, WA and ACT) provides a clearer picture for the country as a whole. Both in capital cities and regional areas, cycling continued to increase on average in states without enforced helmet laws at the 1991 census. In contrast, the percentage cycling to work in states with enforced helmet laws decreased. Before helmet legislation in 1986, capital cities had similar numbers (43,218 vs 40,798 in regional/rural areas) cycling to work but much lower percentages (1.14% compared to 3.14%). Capital cities generally have higher traffic levels and the lower percentages cycling to work suggest they were less conducive to cycling than regional areas such as small country towns, with less traffic and shorter distances between home and work. In Vic, NSW, Tas and SA, the fall in non-capital cities was from 2.9% in 1986 to 2.0% in 1991. Excluding the capital cities of Perth and Brisbane, in 1991, in Qld and WA, 3.57% of journeys to work were by bicycle. This fell to 2.45% by the 1996 census when these areas had enforced helmet laws, with continued declines to 1.7% by the 2006 census. Bicycle usage in all capital cites was 1.14% in 1986 when no helmet laws existed. In 1991, it was 0.99% in Victoria, NSW, Tasmania and SA — states that had (or for SA may have had) enforced laws — and 1.57% in Qld, ACT and WA. From 1986-1996, cycling to work in capital cities dropped from 1.14% to 0.89%, (a difference of 0.25 percentage points, but a decrease of 22%). Census data for Adelaide for 1986, 1991 and 1996 have commuter cycling counts on Census day of 8061, 7186 and 4494 respectively and represent a reduction from 1986 to 1996 of 44%. (note, pre law surveys were conducted on 30 June of each census year and post law surveys in early August (slightly warmer conditions and approximately 42 minutes extra daylight).

Opinions on cycling in relation to the helmet laws

A street survey in the Northern Territory found 20% of cyclists had given up because of the law and 42% said they had reduced their cycling. A 1994 evaluation report on the helmet laws by the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority stated:

On examination of bicycling magazines at the time of legislation, the feeling of many individuals in the Australian bicycle fraternity was anti-helmet and particularly, against compulsory legislation. There was, however, the occasional pro-helmet advocate. The magazine editorial approach tended to be antagonistic toward compulsory helmet legislation, but some, e.g., Bicycle Victoria, encouraged helmet wearing. Articles within the body of the magazines, although primarily against the idea of bicycle helmet legislation, did proyide a more balanced perspective on the topic. Bicycle user groups throughout Australia supported helmet usage, although there were some concerns with helmet design, e.g., in the Northern Territory, the lack of air flow through helmets was of particular concern. The RTA's Bicycle Advisory Council also supported the legislation.

In 2007, John C. Harland, a Melbourne cycling activist, put forward the following views, citing two 1996 cycling conference papers, in a history conference paper titled "Cycling cultures and the mismeasurement of cycling":

"Helmets and social equity — It is believed widely that bicycle helmets reduce the risk of brain damage in bicycle crashes. The data, however, is very thin even now, and was skeletal at the time of mandation of helmet use. Bruce Robinson and Dorre Robinson have both presented good analyses of these issues and will be familiar to most readers from the Velo Australis conference of 1996. A key problem is the use of limited data on head injury to infer data on brain damage - the real issue of concern. The two parameters are far less-well correlated than is believed widely, and Dorre Robinson’s 1996 paper is a good analysis of that. On the scant evidence available, helmet use should never have been mandated. Another issue that raised far too little concern at the time, though, was that of social equity."

Bicycle usage: changes without concurrent control groups around the time of helmet compulsion

Census data from 2011 showed lower percentages cycling to work than before helmet laws were introduced.

Robinson noted that for children, the decrease in numbers of cyclists counted in New South Wales and Victoria)was greater than the increase in numbers wearing helmets, suggesting that the main effect of the law was to discourage cycling rather than persuade cyclists to wear helmets.

In Melbourne, where 4 surveys of helmet wearing were conducted, Cameron et al. reported "a 36% reduction in bicycle use by children during the first year of the law and an estimated increase in adult use of 44%." On a Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation web page, Robinson criticised the claim relating to adult use on the basis that MUARC ignored the 29% fewer adults counted post-law at the same sites and observation periods as the pre-law survey, and instead "estimated the effect of the law by comparing adult cycle use in 1991 with a much earlier survey (1987/88) at a different time of year. This is... invalid because... cycle use has a marked seasonal variation."

Automatic counters installed on two key cyclist bridges over the Swan river, Perth, Western Australia, recorded an average of 16,326 cycle movements weekly for the three months October to December 1991 (pre-law). The same months in the post law years 1992-94 recorded 13067, 12470 and 10701 cyclist movements per week, reductions of 20%, 24% and 34% on pre-law cycling. A telephone survey in which adults responded on behalf of themselves and their children found 13% of Perth and 8% of country cyclists had given up or cycled less because of the law. However, when the adult respondents in the telephone survey replied for themselves an estimated 27% of the State's adult population - cyclists and non cyclists - (the equivalent of 64% of current adult cyclists) would cycle more if not legally required to wear a helmet. Before the helmet law cycling was in increasing in WA, e.g. an increase from 220,000 regular cyclists in 1982 to 300,000 in 1986 and 400,000 in 1989. Census show cycling to work increased from 1.5% in 1981 to 1.7% in 1986 to 1.9% in 1991, falling to a much lower rate 1.2% in 1996. Travel surveys showed a 33% decline in cycling to work from 1986 to 2006 (from about 1.5 to 1.0 trips per weekday per 100 people), consistent with the census data. Shopping trips fell by 55%, from about 5.2 to 2.3 per weekday per 100 people; trips for education by 79%, from about 8.2 to 1.7 per weekday per 100 people. Significant upgrades to the Perth rail system, including electrification of the 3 existing lines in 1992, and the opening of a new line in 1993, have been the subject of a transport mega project case study. Census data also shows that between 1986 and 2006, in Perth train travel to work more than doubled (from 2.2% to 5.1%), and travel to work by bus in Perth decreased by almost 50% (from 8.6% to 5.3%).

Regular telephone surveys conducted by the South Australian Health Commission reported a decrease in the proportion of people aged 15 years and over who cycled at least once a week from 12% to 10.4%, but no change in the frequency of at least weekly cycling for younger people (61%). However, from 1988 to 1994, cycling to school (which comprises about 20% of trips for children under 15) declined by 38.1%. Reductions in cycling to school were offset largely by an increase from 25% to 34% of children cycling on their "own property" (where mandatory helmet laws do not apply).

Helmets and bike-share schemes

Melbourne inaugurated a bicycle sharing system in 2010. Mandatory helmet laws have been cited as one reason for its low initial usage. Increased access to helmets in local shops saw usage of the bike share scheme almost double in late 2010 to an average of 183 trips a day. The bike share scheme has seen its usage increase in 2011 from a low point of 257 average daily trips in July, to 519 in January 2012. Nonetheless, this is still low by international standards at 0.4 trips per bike per day in July and 0.8 trips per bike per day in January, while 8 to 10 trips per day is usual elsewhere. Some politicians has suggested that the helmet laws should be altered so as to aid bike hire schemes. The Lord Mayor of the City of Sydney, Clover Moore, has indicated that an exemption from compulsory helmet laws will be sought for a future bike hire scheme after a network of inner-city bikes lanes is completed.

Enforcement, fines and legal aspects of compulsory helmet use

In Victoria more than 19,000 fines for not wearing a helmet were issued in the first 12 months of their helmet law. Before the law was enforced in Queensland, bicycle travel represented about 2.3% of total vehicle kilometres; after the helmet law was enforced in 1993, bicycle offence notices increased to 7.9% of traffic offence notices, implying that per kilometre, bicycle offence notices were about four times higher than all other traffic offences put together - speeding, drink-driving, not wearing seatbelts, careless driving or riding, etc. In 2005 almost 10,000 cyclists in NSW were fined for not wearing a helmet. The figure had dropped to 6,537 in 2010.

The Sydney Morning Herald has reported that the number of cyclists who have been fined decreased from more than 13,000 in 2005-06; to 10,807 in 2007-08; and to 8,866 in 2008-2009. The chairman of the Pedestrian Council of Australia was quoted as saying that in the past 5 years there have been no fines issued for most bicycle-related offences; that 74% of the fines related to helmets, not riding offences; and that it appeared that the government was going soft on cyclists. An article in The Age quoted the officer in charge of Victoria Police's bicycle unit as saying that cyclists without a helmet were a particular focus, because it is a most fundamental safety rule. The newspaper also reported that Bicycle Victoria, a cycling advocacy group, supported the increased fines.

Public attitude to helmets

In 1989, an officially-commissioned survey showed that public support for mandatory helmet laws was 92% for children and 83% for all riders. A 1995 study by Williams reported that prior to the legislation in NSW, compulsory helmet wearing had an approval rating of over 70%, rising to 92% in 1994.

A 2011 survey of 1000 Australians by the Cycling Promotion Fund found that 515 respondents were not interested in cycling for transport, with 15.7% citing "don't like wearing a helmet" as one of their reasons. This was the 13th most popular response with safety issues ("Unsafe road conditions" "Speed/volume of traffic" and "Don't feel safe riding" the top three responses). 158 people had cycled for transport in the past month.

An April 2012 survey of 1,910 Australian respondents found 94% approved of the government making helmet wearing mandatory while 1% strongly opposed.

An online survey of attitudes to cycling of 1,007 randomly-selected Australian women aged 18 and over was commissioned in February 2013 by the National Heart Foundation of Australia and the Cycling Promotion Fund. In response to the statement "Wearing a helmet ruins a woman's hairstyle", 39% of survey participants agreed, 33% disagreed, 27% responded "neither" and 1% were unsure. In response to the question "What would encourage women to cycle more?", 4% of participants listed "Not having to wear helmets" as a main reason, and 11% listed it as an other reason.

See also

• Bicycle helmet laws
• Cycling in Australia
• Bicycle helmets by country

External links

• Bicycle Helmet Research Foundation - Australia
• VicRoads: Wearing a bicycle helmet
• NSW Cycling Research
• Bicycle Network Victoria
• Cycling Resource Centre
• Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute: Research Page
• Mandatory bicycle helmet law in Western Australia