The Freakonomists want to know, and link to lots of interesting research. But no mention of the Peltzman effect? I usually cycle with a helmet myself, but when I don’t, I feel vulnerable and take extra care. Does that mean I am safer without the helmet after all?
I once wrote a column on the subject, concluding:

I’m forced to concede that if safety features encourage drivers to jabber on mobile phones and break the speed limit with relative impunity, then that is a benefit to those drivers, though it may not be the benefit that legislators or safety engineers had in mind. So I am tempted to argue in favour of a few safety features aimed at protecting the rest of us: rubber bumpers, automatic speed limiters, and perhaps the return of the man with the red flag walking in front of each vehicle.

The only trouble is that if these ideas catch on, we cyclists are likely to overcompensate and run red lights, leave our cycle lights and helmets at home, and whizz along on the wrong side of the road. More than we do already, I mean.

Stephanie Flanders has more.

Update: And Megan McArdle has graphic pictures of her own painful cycling experience.

October 18th, 2007 in Everyday economics, Undercover Economist | Permalink