Were cycle helmets to be made compulsory, it would reinforce public perceptions of the bicycle as a dangerous form of transport and encourage the view that cyclists are responsible for their own injury. The weight of evidence is against the introduction of a statutory requirement on cyclists to wear a helmet. Moreover, where a cycle helmet law has been introduced, it has led to a substantial reduction in cycling. That represents a public and private loss because cycling is such an efficient, healthy and environmentally-friendly form of transport. The weight of evidence is also against the encouragement of cyclists to wear helmets.
Cycle helmets are a means of slightly reducing head injury if an accident occurs.
Wearing a helmet does nothing to prevent accidents. The primary means of reducing serious head injury among cyclists is to create an environment in which accidents are less likely to happen.