Pedal Me bans staff riders from wearing helmets for safety reasons • Hacker News Board

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

#431

Post by DangitBobby » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:57 PM UTC

bluejekyll wrote: post #406

DangitBobby wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> … 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.

This seems to be a good article on this: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/mar/21/bike-he... “ In 2006 he attached a computer and an electronic distance gauge to his bike and recorded data from 2,500 drivers who overtook him on the roads. Half the time he wore a bike helmet and half the time he was bare-headed. The results showed motorists tended to pass him more closely when he had the helmet on, coming…

Well, this explaination at least makes some sense to me

> Walker said he believed this was likely to be connected to cycling being relatively rare in the UK, and drivers thus forming preconceived ideas about cyclists based on what they wore. “This may lead drivers to believe cyclists with helmets are more serious, experienced and predictable than those without,” he wrote.

The article also mentions this risk-taking study where some participants were asked to gamble and some had helmets on and some had hats on, and found that people with helmets on took greater risks. If I were asked to do something like wear a helmet where one is completely unwarranted, I might feel silly and do silly things for that extra fun factor. Wearing a helmet on a bike results in a completely different mindset than wearing a helmet at the office, if not solely for the fact that it's unusual behavior.

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

#432

Post by skeeter2020 » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:59 PM UTC

buildingsramen wrote: post #287

spankalee wrote: post #272

I 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…

Did you read the article? These bikes are 2-3 meters long. There is no chance of this type of injury occurring with them.

hHe article is full of BS, you don't hurt yourself "going over the handlebars" you hurt yourself with sudden impact to your head. This might happen after you go over the bars, hit your head on the bars, get t-boned or something hits you from behind. The logic that "helmets make risky people take bigger risks" is criminally false. It's like saying wearing a seat belt makes you drive aggressively because you feel your now invincible.

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

#433

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:59 PM UTC

pengaru wrote: post #387

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #367

Earlier 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 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.

The full-face helmets provide much better protection, but they have the trade-offs of being more uncomfortable and hotter.

I'm not convinced that cycling is especially dangerous and my experience is that I've inevitably put my hands out when falling, so I think that gloves should be the first part of PPE recommended for cyclists. Luckily, I've never hit my helmet/head when coming off so I've found that a bike helmet is most useful for stopping low branches etc from hitting me. I'd recommend cycling/protective glasses too - very good for protecting against insects hitting your eyes.

I find it interesting that people seem to have a skewed attitude towards head protection and cycling. If head protection is that important, then why are helmets not recommended for car passengers, people showering, changing a lightbulb etc.?

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

#434

Post by DangitBobby » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:01 PM UTC

cycomanic wrote: post #420

DangitBobby wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the claim particularly hard to believe. I ride at least twice a week with my brother and we behave exactly the same with and without helmets. If you have a habit of always wearing your helmet, it just starts being something you don't even really consider as part of the equation. In fact, we will occasionally go almost an entire ride before realizing that one of us forgot to put on our helmet. I find it much mo…

I think I have seen several studies that showed that drivers are more aggressive towards riders in lycra and with helmets, so it could still be true that it is riskier to wear a helmet even if you don't take more risks.

That's fair. In my neck of the woods, cyclists are universally hated (or ignored), helmet or no.

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

#435

Post by supertrope » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:02 PM UTC

988747 wrote: post #365

anonymousab wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Netherlands and several other European countries, there is presumed/strict liability on the part of the automobile driver. Regardless of fault, a car driver has responsibility for any accident between their car and a bicycle. There is of course more nuance to this, but that's the basic overlying principle. A joke I heard a few times was "If a bike fell out of the air onto a parked car, the car owner is going t…

Which sounds terrible, and goes against "innocent until proven guilty" rule. Also, in some situations it gives the driver perverse incentive to finish the cyclist off (and therefore get rid of the only witness), instead of, say, calling an ambulance.

There a lot of cultural bias against bicyclists already. While leaving the scene of an injury accident is a crime, murder is an extreme escalation.

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

#436

Post by shkkmo » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:02 PM UTC

indymike wrote: post #350

shkkmo wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have the exact same causal issue to untangle. Do safer riders wear helmets or does wear a helmet make you safer as a rider? In reality there are confounds both directions. The effects of helmet wearing are higly contingent based on the geography and demographics.

No, I really don't untangle anything. Safer riders ride safer, but they can and do sometimes have accidents and the road will not check your safety record before impact to see if it should hurt your more or less. Research on helmets has been ongoing for 40 years, and has even led to ANSI standards for helmet design and protection. The UCI requires hemets in amateur and professional events. This isn't about risk takin…

> Additionally, I've never seen any research showing any kind of demographic relationship to severity of head injuries in bicycle accidents.

The effects of a helmet on overall safety when ridden at low speed on dedicated bike paths is very different from when ridden at high speeds in traffic with no bike lane.

Thus the the design of the city and streets (geography is perhaps not the perfect term for this) and the what/how of the local culture's bike riding behavior (perhaps demographics is a bad term for this, not sure of a better one.) have huge impacts on how much a helmet affects your safety simply because the risk profiles are very different.

The data is messy due to regional variability plus the difficulty of reliably removing the confounds mentioned above. I would never discourage someone from wearing and will actively encourage it when riding in bicycle hostile areas. At the same time, I think the push for helmet laws and helmet education is often a cop out to avoid talking about how we need to redesign cities to support safe bicycling. If we did the later, we would see much larger safety gains and the former would be much less necessary.

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

#437

Post by toast0 » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:02 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #238

nathan_f77 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you wear a helmet when you drive inside your car? If not, why not? It might make you much safer in case of a crash, according to your reasoning. Would it? I've never heard anyone recommend this, but if this did actually reduce the likelihood of a serious head injury in the event of a car crash, then I would seriously consider wearing a helmet while I drive a car. I have no problem wearing one while I ride a bicy…

Motor vehicle accidents are a leading cause of traumatic brain injury related deaths. If you are under 55 the obly higher cause is suicide. (If you qre older than 55, your chances of a TBI related death from an accidental fall start to skyrocket with age.) There is a reason why race car drivers wear helmets, and it isn't just to have another place to plaster sponsor logos. I am not aware of any studies looking specif…

Race car drivers are at a lot higher risk of a collision, spin, vehicle fire, or rapid disassembly in general than general traffic. And in many forms of racing, they usually go significantly faster than general traffic too. Helmets, neck restraints, five point harnesses, and flame retardant suits all reduce risk of injuries, and would likely reduce risk in general traffic as well, but the risks seem low enough that the expense (including time to equip) of that additional equipment is too much to justify its general use. Although, if there were an easier intervention to help with neck injuries, it might likely be adopted.

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

#438

Post by skeeter2020 » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:04 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #296

spankalee wrote: post #272

I 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…

This is one of those situations where there is a lot of fear and anecdotes but data shows that more accidents and injuries occur with helmets than without. A company should design their safety protocol well and it includes what equipment workers should and should not wear to protect them best. So prohibiting helmets is very responsible. Criticizing them seems to be taking an irrational stance that it’s better to addr…

>> but data shows that more accidents and injuries occur with helmets than without.

It's total BS to try and combine accidents with injuries and I'm aware of no reputable study that claims both of your statements.

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

#439

Post by akjssdk » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

ascar wrote: post #297

sokoloff wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also significant legal penalties for being at-fault and injuring/killing a cyclist in the Netherlands as compared to the US.

Can you elaborate? The US has such a high incarceration rate for in European eyes often benign offenses that I find that statement hard to believe even though I don't know the Dutch laws (I'm German). E.g. I can't imagine a Dutch person being incarcerated for injuring a cyclist unless it's on alcohol/drugs. I can totally imagine that for the US though. But I might be totally wrong. Would be really curious for some de…

Cyclists are protected by law, such that even if an accident is the fault of the cyclist, the car driver is still 50% liable. This in combination with the infrastructure, which separates cyclists and cars as much as possible, makes the Netherlands very safe for cyclists.

Note that younger children still usually wear a helmet, since they are more likely to have an accident on their own (i.e. falling over).

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

#440

Post by pengaru » Sun, May 22, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #433

pengaru wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The full-face helmets provide much better protection, but they have the trade-offs of being more uncomfortable and hotter. I'm not convinced that cycling is especially dangerous and my experience is that I've inevitably put my hands out when falling, so I think that gloves should be the first part of PPE recommended for cyclists. Luckily, I've never hit my helmet/head when coming off so I've found that a bike helmet…

> then why are helmets not recommended for car passengers, people showering, changing a lightbulb etc

Strawman much?

car passengers: airbags and seatbelts are in direct conflict with and superior to helmets.

people showering and changing lightbulbs are not traveling at speeds exceeding a walking pace in an orientation predisposing them for a head/facial impact for hours at a time.

The full-face helmet I wear is heavily vented like any other bicycling helmet, there is practically no worse comfort than any other cycling helmet worth wearing. And considering how much I appreciate my teeth and not potentially needing to drink hamburgers through a straw while my broken jaw heals due to a cycling mishap, even if it were less comfortable I'm totally on board.

I've written this up with details in previous comments on this subject, but I have multiple friends/friends' family members who have suffered substantial facial/dental injuries in seemingly totally benign cycling activities gone awry. All of them would likely have been non-events had they been wearing a full-face MTB helmet.