Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

bikebiz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 797 posts

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#71

Post by somewhereoutth »

throwawayhelmet wrote: post #44

Okay, true story. Years ago I struggled with this exact logic regarding skiing with helmet. After serious consideration I decided to start skiing so carefully that I do not need a helmet. As you may guess at this point, The very first day I left my helmet home, I got into an accident and got a skull fracture. I started using my helmet again after that. (But another safety related thing I have started to really doubt.…

I suspect skiing was invented to cull the clumsy (and the simply unlucky) from the ranks of the rich.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#72

Post by sampo »

perlgeek wrote: post #5

This assumes that the risk primarily originates from the riders, not from other traffic participants. Is there any data to substantiate this?

> Is there any data to substantiate this?

Risk compensation is a known theory in psychology. But as is normal for psychology, arguments fly back and forth, and there is no settled consensus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Bicycle_helm...

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#73

Post by nchudleigh »

Have friends that have been saved multiple times from serious head injury by their helmet. Cases of streetcar tracks and car doors opening on them unexpectedly, no extra risk taking happening there.

This approach is not right, the fact the bike is larger helps a bit but does not stop the driver or riders from being thrown from the bike.

The additional risk taking factor should be curbed through other means. Removing the helmet is not the right approach.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#74

Post by littlestymaar »

perlgeek wrote: post #5

This assumes that the risk primarily originates from the riders, not from other traffic participants. Is there any data to substantiate this?

There is none, the “risk compensation” theory is a myth invented by Sam Peltzman without any evidence for the phenomenon (but as a good member of the Chicago school of Economics, his goal wasn't to make scientific discovery backed by facts, but to create a narrative against state regulations of any kind)

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#75

Post by whimsicalism »

littlestymaar wrote: post #56

Yet another example of the terrible and lasting impact the so called risk compensation myth has had on society. Another great contribution of the Chicago school of Economics to the misery of the world. About the story behind this harmful myth https://slate.com/technology/2021/11/risk-compensation-debun...

I wonder what the largest negative impact from this kind of thought has been.

My guess is it is going to be related to PrEP and HIV rates. PrEP is extremely effective and yet stigmatized due to the worry that it will decrease condom wearing.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#76

Post by wl »

glenngillen wrote: post #45
wl wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Riding on roads isn't like mountain biking where you mostly control the amount of risk you take on. Riding on roads puts you at the mercy of other people's choices. I feel the need to wear a helmet anytime I'm riding on a road for that reason.

I don’t know any mountain biker that doesn’t wear a helmet. Most I ride with wear full face. I don’t think there’s any riding situation where you can think you’re in complete control of the risk.

I wear a full-face helmet on a mountain bike, too.

My point is that when mountain biking, you encounter varied terrain and obstacles and you decide how to approach that based on your skill and experience. Some approaches are riskier than others. And sometimes you decide the best thing to do is just nope out and ride or walk around whatever it is.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#77

Post by teruakohatu »

polote wrote: post #62
mabbo wrote: post #32

This feels a bit like the narrator in "Fight Club" explaining "the formula" car manufacturers use. > Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one. Pedal Me has done the math on what the average settlement for a traumatic brain injury to it…

Quoted post unavailable.

Comments like this do not make HN a better place. If you think helmets are a safety hazard, please make your case rather than mocking the OP.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#78

Post by _Wintermute »

Sebb767 wrote: post #55
_Wintermute wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From their point of view, it's like if a delivery company banned drivers from installing roll-cages and racing harnesses - the initial question should be, why on earth do you think you need that?

It's more like if a delivery company banned their drivers from installing seat belts and airbags. Even if you are a perfect driver, other people aren't and on a bike, your will be the one hurting after a crash.

Not at all. Seatbelts are a legal requirement, helmets are not. This is employees wearing body amour, which is seen as either encouraging risk-taking, or giving the illusion that the activity is risky.

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#79

Post by loloquwowndueo »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #50
heikkilevanto wrote: post #36

Must be a cultural thing. If someone tried this here in Denmark, they would get such a shitstorm. Helmets are generally understood to increase cyclist safety.

Interesting! AFAIK, in the Netherlands helmets are considered to slightly reduce safety in the general case (but this is not a strong effect). The general objective is to make infrastructure sufficiently safe so that helmets become redundant.

No amount of infrastructure safety will help if you take a tumble and hit your head - a helmet would totally help.

Even experienced cyclists take the occasional fall :)

Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons

#80

Post by sampo »

davidg109 wrote: post #34

Do drivers take greater risks from wearing a seatbelt? Where’s the data to substantiate their claims?

> Do drivers take greater risks from wearing a seatbelt?

Some people have suggested even that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation#Seat_belts

Post reply on HN