As an avid cyclist who prefers not to wear a helmet, your article about the Ministry of Transportation's plan to make riders wear one -- or face a fine -- made depressing reading ("Ministry plans to make cyclists put on helmets," Aug. 11, page 2).
The reason for this misguided plan was the number of fatalities involving bicycles in traffic accidents. Officials said that most deaths (483 out of 664) between 2003 and last year were the result of head injuries sustained in a collision with a moving vehicle. Or as your article put it, 72 percent died after being hit by a vehicle and falling.
I can't imagine a cyclist not falling off a bike after being hit by a moving vehicle. It's pretty obvious to me that it wasn't the fall that killed any of these riders; it was the impact of the collision.
Practically all serious research has concluded that wearing a helmet makes little difference to the number of cycling fatalities. For example, when the New Zealand government made helmets compulsory, their usage jumped from 43 percent to more than 95 percent, but there was no measurable change in the number of head injuries.
Basically, bicycle helmets are just designed to withstand falls at low speed without a vehicle being involved. Most are made to cope with a fall at a speed of around 20kph. In other words, even a bicycle rider wearing a helmet would most likely suffer fatal injuries if he or she was hit by a speeding vehicle.
To make a slightly more effective cycle helmet, the foam it's made of would have to be much thicker. But this would make it heavier and more uncomfortable. The current trend is to make cycle helmets lighter, with larger gaps that aid ventilation, which effectively means less protection in a crash.
I have a nice helmet, but Taiwan's weather is so hot and humid that I find it very hard to keep it on for more than 10 minutes. So if the government gets this stupid law passed, I can see myself becoming something of a renegade. And I don't think I'll be alone -- or maybe I will.
Whenever mandatory helmet laws have been introduced, they have invariably led to a reduction in the number of cyclists. Take Australia; when helmets there became compulsory, more than 30 percent of non-wearers curtailed their bike riding.
Perhaps the ministry's Road Safety Supervisory Committee members should take a trip to Holland. I was in Amsterdam a couple of weeks ago -- a city with one of the highest rates of cycle usage in the world. I don't think it's a sheer fluke that casualties from bicycle accidents there are very low. And I can't recall seeing any cyclist there wearing a helmet.
It's absolutely tragic that 183 cyclists died in Taiwan last year. But the ministry's researchers should realize that 118 of them were killed by a vehicle. Sadly, even if all of them had been wearing helmets, that figure wouldn't have been much different.
Graham Finch
Chungli
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations