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

581–590 of 797 posts

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

#581

Post by u801e »

aasasd wrote: post #316
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…

Another such example is drivers or passengers opening cars' doors without looking in the mirrors. A car's doors are reinforced plenty while having relatively sharp-ish metal ‘lip’ on the butt end, and you really don't want to run into one from that angle.

Doorings can be prevented by riding far enough away from parked vehicles (at least 6 feet away).

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

#582

Post by drdec »

This kind of analysis - that safety gear inspires reckless behavior - is used over and over again to argue against safety measures. The automobile industry used it to fight against seat belts. More recently, some people used it to argue against vaccines and/or masks.

I've never bought into it.

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

#583

Post by u801e »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #376
aasasd wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another such example is drivers or passengers opening cars' doors without looking in the mirrors. A car's doors are reinforced plenty while having relatively sharp-ish metal ‘lip’ on the butt end, and you really don't want to run into one from that angle.

That's why it's a good idea to not cycle in the "door-zone" on roads. Annoyingly, some bike "infrastructure" (i.e. bit of paint) is put directly into the door-zone of parked vehicles which typically makes it worse than useless and best avoided (which then of course risks getting ire from drivers who don't understand why you choose to cycle where you do). One interesting way of reducing doorings is to teach drivers an…

> One interesting way of reducing doorings is to teach drivers and passengers the Dutch reach.

That really doesn't work. First, a cyclist is moving at least 15 feet per second, which is the average length of a passenger vehicle, so by the time they're besides you, they're already past you. Second, your view is blocked[1] by the B and C pillars of the vehicle as well as the headrest, so you won't be able to see a cyclist approaching.

The second best approach is to check the outside mirror before opening the door, but that doesn't work for passengers in the vehicle. The absolute best approach is to never, ever, ride in the door zone, regardless of whether or not door zone bike lanes are present.

[1] https://i.imgur.com/MuvTxOz.jpeg

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

#584

Post by u801e »

aasasd wrote: post #395
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why it's a good idea to not cycle in the "door-zone" on roads. Annoyingly, some bike "infrastructure" (i.e. bit of paint) is put directly into the door-zone of parked vehicles which typically makes it worse than useless and best avoided (which then of course risks getting ire from drivers who don't understand why you choose to cycle where you do). One interesting way of reducing doorings is to teach drivers an…

Yeah, in regard to bike lanes between the road and the sidewalk, some note that passengers are even less likely than the drivers to look in the mirrors or just back out the window when getting out, since they expect mostly walking people on that side. Thankfully, some lanes are separated from the parked cars, usually with some flowebeds or just bollards in that space: e.g. https://i2.wp.com/www.theurbanist.org/wp-con…

> I suspect that a side-effect of the popularity of electric scooters will be that passengers will habituate a bit to seeing faster things on the sidewalks.

That's unlikely. Even if 95% of people did, there's still 5% who won't. The real problem is bad design that places preferential use lanes for cyclists too close to parked cars and expects cyclists and occupants of motor vehicles to figure it out. This results in serious injuries and deaths of cyclists.

Authorities should be encouraging cyclists to ride at least 6 feet away from parked vehicles. One way is to paint shared lane markings to guide cyclists to ride in the safest position in the general purpose lane far enough away from parked vehicles.

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

#585

Post by kuroguro »

timbaboon wrote: post #278

End of 2020 I had a serious bike accident. I was specifically riding slowly and carefully because I did not want to fall and end up in hospital - in the middle of the second wave in SA and a shortage of hospital space. Even so, I had the most ridiculous and embarrassing crash, whilst hardly moving, and ended up in the ER. I was wearing a helmet and I still got a concussion. My helmet was broken and certainly saved me…

Reminds me of when I first learned that most snowboarding injuries are at low speed or standing still and slipping. Not sure if it's true, but could be. Slipped on ice a few times - my tail bone didn't appreciate it.

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

#586

Post by u801e »

Nexxxeh wrote: post #530
aasasd wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another such example is drivers or passengers opening cars' doors without looking in the mirrors. A car's doors are reinforced plenty while having relatively sharp-ish metal ‘lip’ on the butt end, and you really don't want to run into one from that angle.

It's a significant issue. The British Highway Code now includes the "Dutch Reach" car door open (where you grab the door handle with the hand furthest from the door to force your body to turn, hopefully seeing inbound cyclists). A LOT of the updates to the highway code are for the sake of road users that aren't in cars. https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/changes-and-answers/category... >239 ... >where you are able to do…

> The British Highway Code now includes the "Dutch Reach" car door open (where you grab the door handle with the hand furthest from the door to force your body to turn, hopefully seeing inbound cyclists).

Unfortunately, it doesn't work unless you're in a convertible type vehicle. Otherwise, the B and C pillars as well as the headrest will block[1] your view of an approaching cyclist. Checking the outside/wing mirror is sufficient. The British highway code also includes a provision that says that cyclists can ride in the primary position given the situation. Riding far enough away from parked vehicles to avoid a potential dooring collision is one of them.

[1] https://i.imgur.com/MuvTxOz.jpeg

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

#587

Post by shrimpx »

searchableguy wrote: post #31
wzdd wrote: post #20

This is a pedicab service. A cynic would assume that Pedal Me is mandating this (and thus putting their drivers at risk) because passengers are more nervous about taking a service where the driver wears a helmet and they do not.

Exactly what I think as well. This might lower risk for the customers because driver may take less risk without a helmet in some situation but the risk for driver is only increased. This is optimizing for customers at the cost of drivers. I don't see any supportive extensive research linked from them .

How is it optimizing for customers, when customers don’t wear helmets either?

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

#588

Post by bigcat12345678 »

This whole idea of wearing helmet results riskier behavior is about bullshit as the WMD theory of Iraq invasion.

If pedal me indeed is spending resources on education and training of their employees, which they claimed allow them to maintain high standard of safety. Then, it's self evident that wearing helmet will be better, as the same training can help them overcome the tendance to be riskier wearing helmet.

There is no reason to claim that training for wearing helmet and not wearing helmet would not result into equally effective results.

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

#589

Post by comprev »

sharkweek wrote: post #573
jasonkester wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you suppose happened to the rest of skateboarding that pushed it in the opposite direction? Watching the olympics this summer, it was amazing to watch the street skating events with none of the competitors wearing any sort of protective gear. And it’s not like they didn’t need it either. They were getting wrecked in falls to the point where some of the couldn’t even finish the competition. It was nuts watchin…

It’s a style thing (as dumb as that is in practice). You just don’t look “cool” switch back smithing down hollywoood 16 wearing a helmet. I skated a ton growing up and it was beaten into you at skateparks how dumb you looked wearing a helmet. No major head injuries but definitely had some close calls. I look back and cringe and how stupid that was.

The "style" thing also applies to BMX - brakeless, no helmet and no knee/elbow pads.

Natural selection is rife.

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

#590

Post by comprev »

maccard wrote: post #571
harph wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protective gear was always uncool in street skateboarding. Vert (Tony Hawk's main discipline) was the exception. From what I understand it's about being counterculture, punk etc. Today even bowl riders mostly don't wear helmets or pads, and crashing in a concrete bowl is arguably even worse than on a wooden ramp.

There's a big difference between the speeds you travel at in a bowl and in very skating.

The distance from 1M air out of the bowl to the bottom is a very long way!
Post reply on HN