You forgot the 3rd category of people wearing helmets on a bike: Tourists. It's one of those things that makes them easy to spot.

A few years ago, my Dutch family of three went helmetless cycling in downtown Santa Fe, New Mexico. There were hardly any cars around, yet drivers seemed more afraid of us than we were of them. Kind of funny...

Thanks for these Michael, my students are hugely surprised by the different cycling culture in the Netherlands.

I've recently moved from the Netherlands to Australia (Melbourne) and before I arrived I thought I'ld be fine to reluctantly wear a helmet and take a bike to work. It only took one glance at the (lack of) infratructure and the traffic cyclists have to navigate to change my mind to a hard Nope. Not gonna risk my life by getting on a bicycle here.

I don't know why your videos don't have more views and likes. They are well done, informative and fun to watch. My only criticism is that they aren't long enough. I would like to see more of your bicycling life in the Netherlands as I'm sure many others who live in car dependent cities and countries do as well (I live in Detroit). Videos such as yours give hope and joy to those of us who can't experience what you do everyday.

In the Netherlands we consider cycling just a faster way to walk. We even dress the same for it. Who wears a helmet when you go for a walk? And yes this means that when you work in the financial district you see people in suits riding their bicycle! Also, cycling is not riskier than walking. Dutch people will start cycling from the age of 3-4 years old, we feel as comfortable on our bikes as on our feet.

I wish I had saved the source now, but I read a Dutch study on bike safety and a comparison of bike related injuries. Which showed that it is safer without. Most people without a helmet are more mindful of how they cycle. And helmets can be a false security, making you more careless.

Also a reason for helmets is it gives drivers a false sense of security resulting in being less carefull with bikers. It wears a helmet it can take some bangs.

Do you have to bike when you're wearing a helmet in the Netherlands?

One small correction: you ARE required to wear a bike helmet if you are riding a speed pedelec (a bike that goes 50 km/hour). And when you go mountain biking through the woods using designated mountain bike trails, of which there are many, everyone also wear a helmet. But that’s just common sense…

Another reason apart from safety to use a helmet in Australia is the heat/sun on your head, it's actually cooler for your head to have a helmet vs a hat due to the ventilation in a good quality helmet, you also can get the visor on a helmet similar to a cap, wearing nothing on your head in the Aussie sun will soon fry your brain

Heel goed,.... excellent ! I clearly remember seeing "normal" cyclists wearing a helmet for the first time. Must have been about 1988 and it was a group of USA tourists touring the tulip fields. I was awestruck and just shook my head and laughed hard... Have been a competition cyclist for the largest part of my life. It was the death of Fabio Casartelli in 1995 that made helmets compulsory for the "pro's". After that they gradually became "fashionable". Somehow i still feel they are "dorky". And worst of all they limit the feeling of "de wind door je haar" ! ;-)

Wearing/not wearing a helmet is a personal choise that will depend on how people feel safe about riding in their country. For me (I live in Switzerland), even though bike infrastructures are ok, many times I have to ride on the side of the road with cars overpassing me at 60-80 km/h. For this I always wear a helmet even if I know that being hit by a car could seriouslly injured me or even kill me. But overall wearing a helmet will always decrease the risk of injuries (especially in the case of a low-speed accident, which are the most frequent). My wife is working as a medical doctor in an emergency service of a big hospital and tells me almost everyday about how many people arrive with head injuries after a bike accident (even if the "fall by themselves" without being hit by a car). People wearing a helmet generaly have broken wrists, knees, shoulders, etc. but the head is rarely injured (sometimes a light concussion) and overall helmets protects well the head. In opposite, people not wearing helmet frequently have much more serious head injuries even when riding at low speed and in the case of higher speed, serious brain damages can occure leaving the person with long terme effects or even worse (death or vegetable state).

Having not a helmet obligation results in more people using the bicycle instead of a car. The added health benefit from this outways the added risk from having no helmet.

I once rented a bike in San Francisco. As I drove away, the bike rental agent yelled to me to put on the helmet. But I was stubborn and then took it off anyway. Because, despite the hilly streets, I thought SF was safe to ride without a helmet. And I thought to myself, I am an experienced Dutch cyclist. Until I drove over the Golden Gate bridge and then descended. Suddenly I was driving on a kind of highway and the cars rushed past me. This while I was still descending quickly. I didn't think twice and put on the helmet. The helmet then stayed on my head all day.

In my observation more people in the Netherlands wear helmets then 20 years ago. The biggest difference is in bike racers, but a also see an increase in helmets with senior citizens with an electric bike and young children.

No helmet needed here in the Netherlands. But as you can see here at 01:55 is learning how to swim of even more importance. Wearing a helmet doesn't give you much protection against drowning when a strong gust blows you away from the cycling path, into a river, creek or one of the many, many canals in Holland. That's why most elementary schools make learning how to swim a priority lesson. Learning how to swim is often the first diploma our children earn.

There's more reasons. We don't wear helmets because: 1. Cyclists rule. Hit one, you're to blame unless they really made a big mistake. 2. No helmets means less fuzz, which means you'd sooner take a bike. The more cycling the healthier the people. Check obesity in the UK as a reference. 3. On an individual level, yes helmet is safer. On a collective level not. Scientists discovered when we all don't have helmets, we are care more for each other. Add to this: We can also read each other's faces better because chaotic Dutch cycling means many little interactions with others to make it work.

You have to mention the 'knooppunten route' system of touring the Netherlands by bike.

Furthermore a biking helmet gives you only some protection when falling. If you fall with your bike on that road you showed in Australia where you're cycling in that 1 cm free space between the fencing and the cars, and you're hit or get runover by a car than a helmet does not protect you in any way. That is why in the Netherlands biking helmets are seen as fake security.

On the nethetlands nobody wears a helmet

Great job handling an inevitably controversial topic. I wish you'd put more emphasis on the word HAVE though. I wear a helmet whenever I'm going to ride on a road, or at high speed. But the fact that it's mandatory and routinely enforced with fines for me to wear a helmet to go to the corner shop on a bike is a pain. We should be treated as adults, and allowed to choose the circumstances we feel that any extra protection may be helpful. Or we could just mandate helmets for all forms of mobility.

And another… we are almost born on a bike.

1:36 That doesn't however mean that every bicyclepath is connected to another bicyclepath. Still a lot of work to be done here, especially near the border!

Hi! I remeber reading a survey that showed that cars passing cyclists unconsiously kept less distance from them if the cyslist was wearing a helmet. So wearing a helmet actually put you in more danger with cars. Flipside is that if something happens you're not wearing a helmet...

I always wear a helmet. I only have one head. It doesn't matter if it is on the road or a cycleway.

I'd take issue with the "you'd have to be mad not to wear one" comment tbh, people really don't realise just how futile helmets are. No doubt someone reading this is about to leap in to reply that a helmet saved their life, but it really didn't. You have to understand the testing criteria that are used to certify a cycling helmet fit to sell as a product. They're dropped, from stationary, at a height of 1.5m, on to a hard surface. That's it. So, assuming you're a child or a short adult riding with a low seat position, and you fall over when not moving at all, and the manner in which you fall means your head moves downward in an almost vertical trajectory, then in those very limited circumstances congratulations, your helmet will protect your head from bruising and abrasions. Even under those ludicrously ideal conditions however, it will not protect you from brain injuries of any kind - if you hit your head hard enough to cause a concussion or anything more serious, then you will get a concussion or something more serious whether you're wearing a helmet or not. If you're skeptical of that, here's an exercise to try: go and have a look around at helmet manufacturer websites, bike retailers, at packaging and at marketing for helmets, and find one, single explicit claim from a company making or selling bicycle helmets - the people who would be legally liable for such a claim - that they will protect against serious head trauma, concussion etc. Occasionally you'll see dramatic pictures of cracked and shattered helmets and claims that had the person not been wearing them, the car wheel that ran over their head or the vehicle that struck them would have killed them, but that is also unfortunately untrue. If the helmet is shattered, or even merely cracked and the foam dented, that means the helmet has, in the sense of its structural integrity, *failed*. When an object fails in that way, essentially all of the force of the crush/impact that was in excess of the amount required to cause the failure is transferred onwards into what's underneath - the reason they aren't dead had nothing to do with their helmets, and everything to do with their skull, which is *significantly* more resilient than any cycling helmet. Even when considering sports cyclists on racing bikes, there is no protection a helmet can provide that couldn't be equalled by a strapped skull cap made of a resilient fabric. If you really believe that cycling is dangerous enough to need head armour, then buy a fully enclosed motorcycle helmet, because that's the only kind that is actually tested and rated to provide meaningful protection - bicycle "helmets" are basically just silly hats.

Honestly Helmet mandates just seem like yet another concession to motorists. Cars are dangerous for other road users? Oh best force cyclists to wear a helmet!

1:43 bicyclepaths are per definition seperated from other traffic, if not it's a bicyclelane. High standards? Yes, and I need to have those to confront the authorities that we also need those high standards of the whole land at the border!

I would go as far as to quote Jeremy Clarkson on this, from the top of my head: "Driving a Volvo is like going to the beach on a hot summers day with your life jacket already on" I would also go as far as to say they made cars too safe. Sometimes there isn't that much wrong with knowing the activity you are performing has an element of danger in it and being a little bit scared actually makes you aware. The only real difference being car crashes are almost always deadly somehow, even with all the protective measures, and head injuries there are way more prevalent than on straight up sitting slow Dutch bikes, so the logic is a bit skewed to think a helmet there would make any sense and not for any regular car driver. I have a bike helmet and when I go out mountainbiking or road race cycling I sure do wear it religiously, but when I go to have a beer with some friends, somewhere on a terrasje, on my beat up old Dutch bike, it is flat out ridiculous to do so.

Menyenangkan sekali kawan melihat anak kecil bermain seped

a whatnow?

As an inexperienced tourist yes.

Answer: no. You don't.

Are pedestrians allowed on all the 'off road' trails shown in this video? In the UK those paths would be full of dog walkers and peds with headphones on....

Biking actually is still safer than walking even in places like Australia or the USA despite the lack of good infrastructure.

The Dutch have it .

In answer to the question…. If you want to be identified as a tourist, then yes!

I think the answer to that question lies with the staff of A&E departments. Cycling without a helmet is just daft.

Instead of making roads safer for cars we should require a roll cage for every car even though it's inconvenient

even on that australian infrastructure, it is safer not to wear a helmet. Cars give you more space and you are less likely to be hit by a car.

Helmets and other protective gear should be to safeguard you for your own actions. Because it is impossible to defend yourself against actions from others, how can I dress up as a pedestrian so a truck can hit me and I will survive? Or an airplane? And even if, what if that truck makes me land in the water with all that gear on?

there are more people wearing helmets: TOURISTS.....

A fine of over 300 dollars aus for not wearing a helmet sounds like a method of stopping the popularity of cycling, as is making a helmet mandatory. Anti-cyclists at work, it's not about safety.

Wearing plastic helmets?…. Same as wearing this silly plastic hat in (slippery) bathrooms or by going up & down the stairs and wearing a parachute in an airliner….

Only tourists wear helmets on bikes and elderly people wear sometimes helmets on their e-bikes. Because that's what the governement advises, that's what the dutch people call: "betutteling".

We ride bikes because it's the fastest way to get from a to be in a city, and the cheapest....not because we like it... Our ancient city centres are not build for cars... And cities that are build for cars, build in the 50s or 60s are often slums like Lelystad for example, the ugliest city in the Netherlands.

Wearing a helmet is an individual thing between you and the insurance company. Other road users do not benefit from it whatsoever. When motorcycle helmets became mandatory in America, it became a big fuss and now in most states you can ride your motorcycle without a helmet if you pay an extra fee to the insurer. In Florida during Bike Week, almost everyone rides without a helmet. Is that wise? In my opinion, you can decide that yourself. You are not doing anyone any harm by doing so. I am a Dutch man who likes to cycle without a helmet. we don't dress for the ride but for our destination. Kees van Breukelen

1:02 yeah duh, they drive on the wrong side of the road! Hahahaha..

2:02 clever young lady, wearing a basball cap.. much sturdier then a helmet.. throw both off a 5 storey building, guess which one is still in one piece? Eh? Hahahaha!!

The only helmets that are useful in bike-car accidents, are motorcycle helmets. Bicycle helmets only protect your head from impact trauma in case of a one-sided accident at a maximum speed of 15km/h, e.g. someone falling of their bike while riding slowly, or slipping in a corner. If you want to protect your head (why not other body parts??) at higher speeds (25km/h and up), you should really wear a full-face motorcycle helmet. A good way to prevent having to wear helmets at all, is having a decent (separated or speed-adjusted) infrastructure, where the chances of getting hurt by using a bicycle are dramatically lower than in “mixed traffic” situations, prevalent in so many countries. Having to cycle between, or next to cars is a perfect recipe for discouraging people from cycling at all.

wearing a helmet is a good thing to do, ask the ER people how many head injuries they have to treat tat could be avoided.

NO !!

When they wear helmets, they are German. By the way, tourists should wear helmets, for their safety.

Feck no.

TL/DR : No.

Only foreigners are requirred to wear helmets

Jep. You should. Infrastructure is great but the behaviour of car drivers isn´t.

If you fall off your bike and hit your head on the tarmac it makes little difference whether that is in the Netherlands, UK, Australia or any other country come to think of it...a helmet will give you a certain degree of protection. For me getting on a bike without a helmet, regardless of whether I am popping into town or cycling around country lanes for a bit of exercise, would feel like being seriously under-dressed...it seems like a sensible habit.

It’s a shame that more and more people are using helmets. It is ugly and does not reduce the risc of accidents. Considering the small risc of accidents, in combination with the small risc of falling on your head makes it rather silly. I cycle a lot but, but meeting people with helmets and sunglasses is not very nice. A free and nature-friendly way of transport is reduced to something that appears dangerous.

Wearing helmet ⛑️ is good for all

Why do you have to wear a bike helmet in Australia? Because the state governments there became nanny states with it when they began coercing people to wear them from the early 1990s! That's why! When I visited last time in 1995, they had begun the laws on that and I was appalled and under the circumstances I had to play along! Not to mention big government overregulation of many things at the same time. One thing that the poster and many others seem do not get on the basis of the state propaganda, is that the bike helmets are simply useless fluff which do nothing for safety and actually up the dangers of the whole business of cycling. Yes, you have greater risks on some Australian roads like you documented for riding bikes, but no, the helmets do not make you safe or safer. I'll take unhindered peripheral vision and better naturalized responses wearing a cap, over a retarded plastic hat any ruddy day, and stave off having the accident in the first place!

No, because they are an arrogant people