This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Following orders from Commissioner of Police Arup Patnaik, the traffic department has started fining bikers wearing helmets that don’t meet safety standards. In the last three days, they have fined 643 bikers. But offenders who have been slapped with fines say that, while they knew of the rule that made helmets compulsory, they were not aware that the helmets needed to be ISI approved. “I was going towards Churchgate station on my bike when the cops stopped me near Azad Maidan and asked me which helmet I was wearing. I was surprised as I was wearing a helmet as per the rules. They told me that I would have to pay a fine since my helmet didn’t have the ISI mark,” said Asgar Sayed, a resident of Borivali. “They took me to Azad maidan police station. I argued with them but they told me that it’s our commissioner’s order that I pay the fine. When I refused to pay, they said that if I don’t pay the fine, they will put me in the lock-up and if I had a problem I should approach the court,” he added. On Friday, the Azad maidan police station had fined more than 10 people for not having ISImarked helmets. “May be the commissioner has organised this drive for the safety of the citizen, but when they make such an announcement, they should have advertised it, making it clear that we need to use ISI approved helmets. At least, then, we would be careful to look for the ISI certification while buying helmets,” said Sanjay Gurav, a resident of Fort who had also been fined for wearing the wrong helmet. “At least for first-time offenders, they should have let us off with a warning. If there is not publice announcement about this, how are we supposed to know about this move?” added Gurav. “We are following our commissioner’s orders. We are fining them under section 129 of the
Motor Vehicle Act. a police inspector from the Azad Maidan police station.000 persons sustained serious injuries during 2004 in Karnataka. Several proven and cost-effective strategies are available today based on years of scientific research. Injury to this part can lead to instantaneous death or various types of damage and disabilities.000 persons during the year 2004. it is a time of intense agony and suffering along with huge socio-economic burden. appropriate and a step in the right direction. Prevention of brain injuries should be of great importance in the Indian region. There is an unambiguous and direct relationship between presence of a universal helmet law. Human brain is the single most important organ in our body responsible for all our activities.”said Ashok Thube. More than 100.000 are injured every year in India. Undoubtedly. An estimated 7000 persons died and 51. Citizens need to take note of enormous benefits likely for . For the affected families. with more than a third due to traumatic brain injuries. which has demonstrated its effectiveness over a period of time from all around the world including India. The quality of life among injured is often poor and affects them for the rest of their lives. Among those killed and injured. Bangalore city witnessed about 900 deaths and injuries among 10. injuries and disabilities. helmet usage and decline in brain injury deaths and injuries. implementation of this intervention can lead to reduction of deaths. The present decision of the State Government is timely. Director's Message Road traffic deaths and injuries are continuously increasing in all states and union territories of India.000 persons are killed and around 500. nearly 40% occurred among motorcycle riders and pillions. Helmet legislation is one such strategy.
The risk of death is nearly 2. . Bangalore. nearly 500 motor-vehicles ( including 375 motorcycles. Evidence available till date indicates that helmets decrease the likelihood of death. Without helmet laws. Nearly 60% of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) are due to road traffic injuries (RTIs). only less than 5% of riders and pillions wear helmets in Bangalore and might be <1% in other parts of Karnataka state. neurological disabilities. Helmet use can reach nearly 80-90% when law requiring motorcyclists to wear helmets is notified and enforced. D. Every day.5 times more among unhelmeted riders compared with those wearing helmets.themselves and their families with this strategy. This single strategy brings enormous benefits to the society. Those injured and killed are predominantly men and in the age group of 15-44 years (75%). The number of women drivers is fast increasing in Karnataka and Bangalore city. Data from both police and hospital sources indicate that nearly 40% of those killed and injured are motorcyclists. and overall cost of medical care and social hardships. Dr. scooters and mopeds) are added on to the existing roads. Nagaraja Director/Vice-ChancellorNIMHANS. the severity brain of injury. Consequently deaths and injuries will increase among women in the coming years.1 Karnataka is experiencing motorization at a rapid pace. number of skull fractures.
statutory and administrative bodies. The citizens of Bangalore had publicly acknowledged the importance of helmets in . While educational programmes will be of help to clear these misconceptions. Even the media has strongly supported reintroduction of the legislation for a long period of time by taking scientific information to the public arena and stimulating a healthy discussion around the issue. the Hon’ble High Court of the Government of Karnataka. and several concerned citizens road safety groups. the Department of Transport and Police. The decision was pending for a long time despite recommendations by technical. strict-uniform and people-friendly implementation will undoubtedly reduce deaths and injuries.Baseless arguments float in the society discouraging helmet law and often leading to withdrawl of notification. These include NIMHANS and other academic institutions. professional bodies. This initiative of Karnataka should be welcomed by every citizen of the state1. academic. Introduction The recent decision of the Government of Karnataka with regard to reintroduction of Helmet legislation should be welcomed by all citizens of the State. health task force of Government of Karnataka. Needless to say political leadership will be the driving force. Research from all over the world indicates that there is no evidence for these arguments that exists among the public.
few had opposed the law for simple and trivial reasons. The time is appropriate at this juncture to clearly examine the scientific issues and societal benefits of helmet legislation and identify mechanisms for smooth and people-friendly implementation of the law during the coming years. Secondly. The report examines the current motorization pattern. The present report has attempted to bring in available scientific evidence on helmet legislation from all over the world and its efficacy to reduce brain injuries. nature and pattern of brain injuries among two wheeler rider and pillions along with impact of road traffic injuries on individual. Thirdly. specially among motorcyclists. the mechanism of brain injury and role of protective nature of helmets are discussed in brief.2005) have been conducted and newspaper articles have been in the city of Bangalore. family and society. several campaigns on helmet usage (Friends for Life Campaigns . the existing Indian Motor Vehicle Act (1988) and its implication are highlighted . increasing road traffic injuries and deaths in Karnataka and Bangalore.2003. In the last 3 years. Despite these recommendations and suggestions. Safe Chalao Citi Bajao . Road Safety Week Celebrations .media.2004.
Road Traffic Injuries (RTIs) are one of the leading causes of deaths. Cardiovascular diseases and others (WHO. The number of people killed. disabilities and socioeconomic losses in India. migration and changing values of the large middle class .along with what works to promote helmet usage in Indian Society. 2002). Aggressive marketing by vehicle manufacturers. Diabetes. HIV/AIDS. The efficacy and effectiveness of helmet laws are reviewed in Section 11 along with existing myths and facts of helmet usage ( section 12) as the fourth important issue. With liberalized economic reforms.young and middle age sections of the society. Karnataka and Bangalore. As t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d mo b i l i t y b e c ome s a n e s s e n t i a l component of our life. industrialization. the glamour of free and speedy mobility and the bear necessity to travel have resulted in increasing motorization. hospitalizations. easy availability of loans. the motorization phenomena in Karnataka has been rapid and marked. Lastly the report sets in place series of guidelines for proper implementation and enforcement of helmet laws in Karnataka. hospitalized or disabled exceeds the problems of many other emerging health problems like Cancer. motor vehicles have become a .
other accompanying problems like traffic congestion.in/epidemiology/doc/ep_ft24. The overwhelming majority of the world's helmets are produced there. this motorization has placed considerable problems in the society.nic. Even though motorcycles are economical for the individual.necessity. As there has been no significant increase in mass public transportation systems. http://www. Apart from injuries-deaths. all of the helmets we list in our Helmets for the Current Season article are made in China if not otherwise indicated.nimhans. air and noise pollution and other psychosocial problems are also placing a huge burden. as they are not highly expensive. Considering the constraints of time and the need for travel. There are many . An accompanying future of this change has been a consequent increase in RTIs and deaths. two-wheeled motorcycles have become the major choice of people.kar. individualpersonal modes of transport are becoming the law of the land.pdf China By default. Large number of poor and middle-income families are compelled to use two wheelers.
Most of the best known helmet brands in the US market are made in China. USA There are still millions of bicycle helmets made every year in the US. Australia Tommy Carron has informed us that bicycle helmets are manufactured in Australia by Pacific Brands under the Rosebank brand. Canada At least one Louis Garneau's helmet is made in Canada. The higher end includes their Impulse.manufacturers. and buy most of their helmets from a few producers known for consistent quality. In addition. If you find one. smooth helmet that is molded in the shell. France . They may still make some models there. found at Wal-Mart. please let us know. we don't know where their components are sourced. Headstart International also makes a child's helmet. IL. Major US companies sourcing there have to be very careful about quality control. Belgium Lazer used to make their helmets in Belgium. We do not know of any other major manufacturer making bicycle helmets here in the US.the HEADSTART Skins Flame 325 (as of 2006). however. We do not know of any bicycle helmet manufacturer or vendor who would satisfy the Buy America Act requirement that the product is assembled in America and all parts down to the sub-component level must be made in America as well. a round. Again. Playworks International also manufacture the FLITE 900 in Australia which is a children's helmet (as of 2006). Some Garneau models come from China. Most are made by Bell in Rantoul. and quality ranges from poor to excellent. Toys R Us and other big box discount stores. many helmets assembled elsewhere have at least some Chinese-made component parts like buckles and straps. and we don't have a list by origin. and are marked "Assembled in the USA from components made in China and the USA." They are in Bell's low-cost line. but we don't know which ones.
Uvex makes their most expensive models there. Their site in is Hebrew. or you can use this link to their helmets if it is up. The company isPolybid. Most Expanded PolyUrethane (EPU) helmets come from there. so you might want to read our writeup on them. They have a nicely rounded bicycle model. We don't have info on them. but Google can translate if you need it. but at least three say all of their models are still Made in Italy: MET. Japan Most helmets made in Japan are for the internal market. Some have mixed Italian and Chinese origin lines like Limar.The French company BiOS has a Made in France line at the bottom of their Web pages. but we don't see them in the US market. Italy Italian manufacturers have been among the last to switch to Asian manufacturing for their helmets. KED Helmsysteme. and they are part of Kibbutz Mismar HaNegev. the Performance Bicycle house brand. Others may as well. whose helmets we have not seen. Again there may or may not be Chinese-made components. They would be made to fit the rounder Asian head shape. Germany At least two manufacturers still make helmets in Germany. Israel We have had reports since the 1990's of a kibbutz-based manufacturer of bike helmets in Israel. . the Pro 2 and others for youth and toddlers. advertises on their Web site that their helmets are "garantiert made in Germany. Sweden At least one Swedish manufacturer still makes their helmets there." We have more on both manufacturers in our annual helmets for the current season page. LAS andSelev. Taiwan A number of manufacturers make helmets in Taiwan. Manufacturers include Ascent and Tirreno. A few of their less expensive models are made in China. Their helmets are made to a different drummer design.
Along with the layer of comfort padding in a helmet. in memory of William “Pete” Snell. with no bias to the government or the manufacturer. Every good helmet has a Snell sticker in it. 47 states had complied. In 1953. but spread out the energy created by impact.F. This was the beginning of the development of the modern-day motorcycle helmet. The standard had been set. So the safety agencies lobbied for mandatory helmet laws. Between 1931 and 1953. nobody really thought of motorcycle helmets. This plan had its desired effect – by 1975. the U. Their testing focused on performance. It was formed in 1957. . Mr.The first motorcycle was reported to have been invented by Gottlieb Daimler in 1885. safety agencies. We don’t think it was built for speed – not like motorcycles today. motorcycles were made to go faster. The number of head and neck injuries was increasing. and helmet manufacturers quickly followed Lombard’s lead. a sports car racer fatally injured in a racing accident. and the use of helmets had been proven to reduce this number. And with speed not being a factor. One safety agency that wasn’t government-aided was the Snell Memorial Foundation. federal government introduced the Highway Safety Act of 1966 that required states to have mandatory helmet laws if they wanted to receive federal funds for highway maintenance and construction. recognized the need for head protection for riders. His friends and widow formed the Foundation for the purpose of providing independent motorcycle helmet testing. rather than materials and design. the American National Safety Standard for Motorcycle Helmets was introduced. But as people developed their need for speed. Lombard applied for a patent for his helmet. In 1966. the California Highway Patrol set an example by requiring their motorcycle officers to wear helmets. this helmet also had another outer layer of padding that not only absorbed.S. Safety agencies see a need for motorcycle helmets Since the first motorcycle helmet was introduced. These examples weren’t limited just to America. requiring performance standards for helmets that manufacturers were obligated to meet. The following year. 1961. It was only then that University of Southern California (USC) Professor C. “Red” Lombard developed a motorcycle helmet designed to absorb the shock of an impact. many of them government. the American race for the fastest motorcycle was run by two competitors – Harley-Davidson and Indian Motorcycles. on January 1. In 1958. They’re now recognized and respected as the world leader in helmet testing. in Australia. Then the safety agencies really got into the act. But as the speed of motorcycles increased. so did the number of accident fatalities. the world’s first mandatory motorcycle helmet law was introduced. For instance.
3 billion was saved between 1984 and 1999 from helmet use. Those figures were reflected by many other states when they followed suit. Let’s take Louisiana.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) introduced their Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. They estimated that over $13. But with all this new technology. So those bare-headed riders’ hospitalization costs were paid for by the taxpayer.1 . The number of motorcycle injuries and fatalities again rose sharply. they were wrong about that! Many studies were done. for example. Congress withdrew the requirement and. one of the states that repealed their helmet law. A motorcyclist is 21 times more likely to be killed. probably for the same reasons they didn’t wear a helmet. In the 1970s. Throughout the controversy over mandatory helmet laws. Motorcycle helmet use has increased through North America Some other interesting statistics surrounding motorcycle helmet use were issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). 218 (FMVSS 218) for Motorcycle Helmets. giving motorcycle riders more comfort and more protection. “Freedom” was their cry. In 1982. And that doesn’t include the social ramifications of their accidents. along with the effects of motorcycle crashes. the USC Head Protection Research Laboratories (HPRL) lobbied the government to upgrade the FMVSS 218. for some reason. Mandatory motorcycle helmet laws – right or wrong? But in 1975. What seemed to have been forgotten is that motorcyclists are injured or killed in over 80% of accidents. the U. Stronger and lighter helmets were developed. per mile driven. the first full facial helmet was introduced.In 1974. half the states had repealed their laws. These strict standards were mandatory for helmet manufacturers and every helmet was required to have a DOT-approved sticker inside. And they said that another $11. within 3 years. helmet manufacturers did what they could to provide better protection to riders. involving family and friends. there were still those who thought they were becoming more and more restricted by the new motorcycle helmets. measuring the effectiveness of motorcycle helmets. In 1967. For example. and the number of motorcycle deaths was immediately reduced by 30%. and they believed they had the Constitutional right to choose whether they should or shouldn’t wear a helmet. Wearing a helmet would reduce that risk by 29%. providing improved vision. The results emphatically proved that those who chose not to wear a helmet hadn’t considered a number of factors. they reinstated mandatory helmet use. Well. motorcyclists with head and neck injuries didn’t carry health insurance. They argued that it didn’t affect anyone else if they were injured or killed in a crash. than a car driver. In 1997. technology created an increased use of energy-absorbing materials and better eye protection.
000 motorcycle riders had completed the course. but by 2001. so they have been able to institute a national mandatory helmet law. or shouldn’t you? That’s the big question these days for motorcycle riders – should you wear a helmet? The statistics lean heavily towards saying “Yes”. In Quebec. training is voluntary.billion could have been saved if all motorcyclists wore helmets. Keep up the good work. Canada doesn’t have that structure. as we’ve seen. Does that prove the point? Another positive development in Canada came in 1974. more deaths. but there are incentives for those who chose to take it. Now. But our job here. And. you should follow the Canadian example and wear your motorcycle helmet. you do). In 1973. when the Canada Safety Council (CSC) introduced a Motorcycle Training Program called “Gearing Up”. So it seems that Canada is setting the best example. they feel a stronger need for freedom. The decision is yours. Happy riding! . In the U. no matter what they’re doing. the federal government can’t make national helmet laws because it’s under the jurisdiction of individual states. What’s the message there? Another sector of motorcyclists is increasing in number – what’s known as “Rubies” (rich urban bikers). Another fact stood out – only 2% of all vehicles are motorcycles. in this history of motorcycle helmets and their governing laws. 19. according to the Constitution. And it’s done its job. In Ontario. However. It’s a voluntary program. which includes the freedom to ride their motorcycles without a helmet. the results speak for themselves – no helmets. in some states. some state governments choose not to do that. This category of riders also has an increasing number of motorcycle fatalities. but 8% of crash fatalities are motorcycle riders.. 70% of all newly-licensed motorcyclists take this training program. Canada! Should you. but this is hard to enforce. motorcyclists are required by law to take the training program. there were only 120. In 1997. is just to present the facts. only 3 states have no mandatory helmet laws. with mandatory helmet laws in place. And the results in those states speak for themselves. You do have that freedom (well.S. But if you don’t want to end up as a statistic. Many states require only minors (17-21 years old) to wear helmets. There will always be those who feel that their freedom is under attack. Again. It’s up to the government to regulate those people. As people get older. there were 903 motorcycle fatalities in Canada. Only 20 states and the District of Columbia have all-rider mandatory helmet laws.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.