Had an accident a few years back, not my fault. If it wasn't for the helmet I would sit on a wheelchair.
Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
381–390 of 797 posts
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very good point. The reasoning in the post assumes that the rider is responsible for all accidents.
While the article is very short, this was still easy to miss, “… and those driving around them take greater risks too.” So it does in fact mention that both people driving around those wearing helmets as well as the cyclists themselves take greater risks. The argument is that in the GP’s anecdote that the cyclist (and perhaps even the truck driver) would have taken less risky actions preceding the crash, thus avoidin…
> … and those driving around them take greater risks too
Really? Data shows that a driver will subconsciously take stock of the fact that a cyclist is wearing a helmet and adjust their risk assessments accordingly? I find that incredibly difficult to believe.
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could be both? Usually it is the outer shell that is cracked and described as split. I could see that happening more on the road style helmets, due to their shapes.
The pictures that I've seen of the various "saved my life" destroyed helmets have the polystyrene split apart - it's usually quite easy to split polystyrene if the force is applied the right (wrong) way.
Interesting and scary. Curious what could cause the wrong behavior.
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the polystyrene which cracks, but the plastic shell holding it in place. The separation will happen after the compression force is removed, because the compression will keep the split parts close together. Meaning that the helmet falls apart after it's done the job. Also, there are various degrees of helmets, from a simple polystyrene to a mountain bike one to a motorcycle helmet. You can always go to the ne…
The pictures that I've seen of the various "saved my life" destroyed helmets have the polystyrene split apart - it's usually quite easy to split polystyrene if the force is applied the right (wrong) way. I don't like the concept of requiring PPE for a relatively safe activity as cycling as it makes cycling seem like a far more risky activity than it is and there's also the problem of "helmet hair" which can dissuade…
Cycling is risky. I've stopped cycling on roads with cars because I realized it's just a matter of time until I get in a serious accident.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/express/wp/2016/05/12/how-saf...
I'm with you on the mandatory helmet issue, I don't like it either, but mostly because I don't like needlessly restricting ones freedoms, if you want to risk your life, that's fine with me as long as you don't risk others lives too.
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read the article? These bikes are 2-3 meters long. There is no chance of this type of injury occurring with them.
Unless Pedal Me provide open-source data on which they based this decision, I don't believe it is based on safety. It's seems like marketing and cost-cutting issue for them. Customer: "Driver is wearing a helmet, and nobody provided helmets for us.. Are we in danger?" Pedal Me: "Say no more.. " Plus it seems they only bought caps & jackets for their drivers previously, no safety gear. Drivers are replaceable, aren't…
I don't think it's based on safety, either. It's almost certainly a safety perception / marketing thing.
However, the type of bike they are using is much safer than a normal bicycle because of its size.
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#386I once saw an accident where a cyclist going straight through an intersection was hit by an oncoming truck turning left that was impatient, didn't see the cyclist and gunned it between cars. The cyclist was launched headfirst into the bumper of a car stopped at the light and her helmet loudly cracked in two. She was still hurt, but I'm sure she would have died without that helmet. If some riders choose to not wear a…
It concerns me that there's so many stories of bike helmets cracking in two and allegedly having saved someone's life. Bike helmets are designed to compress under impact and as such, they are very weak under tension, so when you see a helmet split into two, it indicates that it wasn't working as designed. Compressed polystyrene in the helmet would indicate that it was doing its job.
Well, when I was hit by a car and hitting the asphalt head first as a teenager, I found it adequate, that the helmet was cracked to pieces afterward. Did it save my life? I don't know, but with the helmet I only had a light concussion (and broken leg) compared to very possible skull crack.
Compressed polystyrene I know only from light accidents, but it has been a while and I suppose todays helmets are a bit more durable. (But luckily never had to find out, if they fare better nowdays. Also I learned to fall and only rarely wear a helmet nowdays)
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the polystyrene which cracks, but the plastic shell holding it in place. The separation will happen after the compression force is removed, because the compression will keep the split parts close together. Meaning that the helmet falls apart after it's done the job. Also, there are various degrees of helmets, from a simple polystyrene to a mountain bike one to a motorcycle helmet. You can always go to the ne…
The pictures that I've seen of the various "saved my life" destroyed helmets have the polystyrene split apart - it's usually quite easy to split polystyrene if the force is applied the right (wrong) way. I don't like the concept of requiring PPE for a relatively safe activity as cycling as it makes cycling seem like a far more risky activity than it is and there's also the problem of "helmet hair" which can dissuade…
Cycling has a pretty high probability of crashing/falling, and in such an event there's a good chance your face/head will impact something.
Not that I'm in favor of requiring wearing any safety gear, I'm totally in favor of weeding out morons from the gene pool.
But to act like helmets aren't a good idea for cyclists is asinine. Personally I try always rock a full-face MTB helmet when I'm cycling.
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#388Is there a way to fight risk compensation?
[deleted]
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
The pictures that I've seen of the various "saved my life" destroyed helmets have the polystyrene split apart - it's usually quite easy to split polystyrene if the force is applied the right (wrong) way. I don't like the concept of requiring PPE for a relatively safe activity as cycling as it makes cycling seem like a far more risky activity than it is and there's also the problem of "helmet hair" which can dissuade…
Cycling is risky. I've stopped cycling on roads with cars because I realized it's just a matter of time until I get in a serious accident. https://www.washingtonpost.com/express/wp/2016/05/12/how-saf... I'm with you on the mandatory helmet issue, I don't like it either, but mostly because I don't like needlessly restricting ones freedoms, if you want to risk your life, that's fine with me as long as you don't risk ot…
Cycling is only risky due to the shared infrastructure with cars. The thing that raises the risk is cars. We should all be demanding that our streets are made safe for all users. We already have sidewalks in many places for this reason, we just need to extend similar safe infrastructure to bicycles and other road users too.
Just throwing your hands up and not asking for change is a sure way to not improve things.
Re: Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons
#390Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
One of the hackers news guidelines is to take the generous view of comments rather than reply based on the most negative readings. Often the negative readings can turn out to be an uncommon, Nonstandard interpretation. Yes The context of the scope of the word “the” in the comment that you’re replying to is not specifically written out, but most people and the poster will infer it to be the context of the binary choic…
I don't understand why I'm not allowed to point out that the comment presumes.
Someon's feelings do not define that which is reasonable for anyone else but theirself. But the comment presumes it is. The comment skips past the arguability of that position as though it were not arguable, and all I said was that this is in fact arguable.
Whatever your problem with that is, isn't valid.