In reply: The main conclusion of our population-based study1 was that a consistent increase in bicycle-related injuries occurred over the study period. Our study was not designed to analyse the effect of helmet wearing. The potential benefits of helmet wearing were identified in the discussion as a means of reducing the increasing burden of injury.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1 Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC.
- 2 Department of Surgery, Monash University and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC.
Correspondence: peter.cameron@med.monash.edu.au
- 1. Sikic M, Mikocka-Walus AA, Gabbe BJ, et al. Bicycling injuries and mortality in Victoria, 2001–2006. Med J Aust 2009; 190: 353-356. <MJA full text>
- 2. Robinson DL. No clear evidence from countries that have enforced the wearing of helmets. BMJ 2006; 332: 722-725.
- 3. Hagel B, Macpherson A, Rivara FP, Pless B. Arguments against helmet legislation are flawed. BMJ 2006; 332: 725-726.
- 4. Hagel BE, Pless B. A critical examination of arguments against bicycle helmet use and legislation. Accid Anal Prev 2006; 38: 277-278.
- 5. Macpherson A, Spinks A. Bicycle helmet legislation for the uptake of helmet use and prevention of head injuries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; (3): CD005401.
- 6. Thompson DC, Rivara FP, Thompson R. Helmets for preventing head and facial injuries in bicyclists. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; (2): CD001855.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.