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

731–740 of 797 posts

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

#731

Post by edmcnulty101 »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #720
edmcnulty101 wrote: post #709

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should get them some full body Kevlar and chain mail as well. There are more shootings and stabbings than bicycle head injuries. Just to be safe.

Curious what sources you have. Because several family members and I have experienced head injuries riding bicycles, none of us have been shot at or attacked with a knife. That said, I'm down for making all private gun possession illegal.

There's like 250,000 shootings and stabbings in the US per year estimated.

There's like 27000 bicycle head injuries in the US.

I'm surprised you haven't googled it.

Here's the head injury source. You can easily Google shooting and stabbings per year and add them together. https://www.nsc.org/safety-first-blog/bicycle-safety-statist...

Its pretty clear you should pick up some Kevlar and chain mail for your kids.

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

#732

Post by jessaustin »

niemandhier wrote: post #552

Is Pedal me going to pay if a cyclist is gravely injured without his own fault because he did not wear a helmet? Risk compensation ( the reason they give for the decision ) is incredible hard to measure, since it involves causality. We suck at detecting causality in observational data. Basing a decision on ( most likely ) bad statistics is madness.

Possibly they might consider any fatal crash to be company-ending event? After all they could be paying the passengers' families as well as the employee's. This is the purpose of a limited-liability company, to enable the operation of potentially-insanely-risky businesses.

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

#733

Post by naniwaduni »

jessaustin wrote: post #727
naniwaduni wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting aside whether reverse risk compensation actually works (and it would be absolutely bizarre to have >100% risk compensation), Tullock's spike has the problem that it makes driving less effective , i.e. people get from point A to point B more slowly. If your policy goal is for people to drive less then sure. If your goal is for people to be safer in the course of achieving their actual objective of getting from…

That's really not the point. The thought experiment doesn't consider the safety, and far less the convenience (did you call this "effectiveness"?), of drivers . Rather, it examines the safety of all those who suffer the presence of drivers: pedestrians, cyclists, road workers, wild animals, unleashed dogs, etc.

Of course it's not the point! The problem with the thought experiment is that it misses the point!

Getting from point A to point B faster is more than an incidental convenience to a driver, it is the primary goal of having a car and driving it!

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

#734

Post by Widdershin »

serf wrote: post #664
Widdershin wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wouldn’t generally exceed 15mph street skating. Competent downhill skaters can reach 50mph+, with world record speeds exceeding 80mph. That alone makes safety gear much more essential for downhill. In addition, if someone shows up to a spot without adequate gear, crashes and badly hurts themselves, it can cause the spot to be blown for other riders. Downhill skateboarding is much easier when you’re on the good si…

> You wouldn’t generally exceed 15mph street skating. Competent downhill skaters can reach 50mph+, with world record speeds exceeding 80mph. it's all context, no? You wouldn't try to trick over a 17ft drop on a longboard, either. [0] [0]: https://www.vice.com/en/article/kzn58e/the-leap-of-faith-was...

Agreed. For what it’s worth, I think street skaters should wear helmets most of the time.

The 17ft drop is equivalent to the 80mph example in my post, and should definitely involve a helmet, gloves and impact padding (which can be worn under clothes).

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

#735

Post by hedora »

This reminds me. I recently saw some idiots on one wheels (electric "skateboard" with a single wheel) in full stunt motorcycle garb (body armor, shin guards, motorcycle helmets and all) on a busy mixed use trail, going at least 30mph and doing stunts.

It was a negligent homicide suit waiting to happen.

However, banning staff from wearing bike helmets is idiotic.

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

#736

Post by gernb »

idiotsecant wrote: post #517
gernb wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I''m not defending Pedal Me but you could try to design the city so biking is safer https://www.treehugger.com/why-dutch-dont-wear-helmets-48581... Sure you can still get in an accident. That's true of everything though. I don't go for a walk in a plastic bubble just in case a car hits me https://www.google.com/search?q=cars+hitting+pedestrians&tbm...

You could have the best designed city in the world and you will still be at a high risk of your fragile brain case impacting the ground or something worse at speed. Whether you're pedaling down a country road or the busiest NYC intersection not wearing a helmet on a bike is stupid, full stop.

You can also trip on the stairs or a curb and smash your brain yet we don't wear helmets and armor to take a walk or climb some stairs. Apparently 30k-40k people a year die from stuff like that. (based on a quick google search so no idea if it's low or high)

https://www.lawfirms.com/resources/personal-injury/slip-and-...

What body/head armor are you wearing when you take a shower?

> A study conducted by the Consumer Affairs Agency based in part on these statistics estimates that around 19,000 people lose their lives every year in accidents while bathing

Your odds of dying as a pedestrian appear to be 7x more than cycling. Why are you not wearing armor while walking? Clearly it's irresponsible not to.

https://danger.mongabay.com/injury_death.htm

Are you ready to live in a society where it's expected you'll wear a helmet except when sleeping? You certainly don't want to be one of those people that slipped in your house and died. I don't. But, I'm also not willing to wear a helmet just to exist.

Am I stupid? In 2050 will everyone be wearing helmets for walking and people like me will be considered needlessly risking death for not wearing one?

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

#737

Post by gernb »

petre wrote: post #629
_abox wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Netherlands we're doing fine without them though. Nobody wears one on a regular bike. I've had a few times where I slipped so fast I didn't even remember what happened but every time my arm was there protecting my head. Reflexes are awesome. Accidents can happen sure but the added hassle doesn't seem worth it. Of course things are different when you do high speed cycling or mountain biking.

In the Netherlands normal cycle commuters almost never exceed 15 km/h. But I keep watching some Dutch road cycling youtube channel and they all wear helmets.

Do you mean to write "they all do not wear helmets"? or does "road cycling" mean something other than just using a bicycle on the road?

I see few if any helmets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbsMKxNORgQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfDVmUD_2eI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJypp7igJho

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

#738

Post by petre »

gernb wrote: post #737
petre wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Netherlands normal cycle commuters almost never exceed 15 km/h. But I keep watching some Dutch road cycling youtube channel and they all wear helmets.

Do you mean to write "they all do not wear helmets"? or does "road cycling" mean something other than just using a bicycle on the road? I see few if any helmets https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbsMKxNORgQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfDVmUD_2eI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJypp7igJho

No, I mean they all wear helmets. Cycling as in road cycling, group rides, as a sport, not for transportation. They're not professional cyclists, they all have other jobs.

https://youtu.be/_QUPWs07mKU

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

#739

Post by u801e »

sirsinsalot wrote: post #676
u801e wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Differences in speed and mass are largely irrelevant if collisions don't occur. You can minimize the risk of a collision by following the rules of movement on the road (right of way and positioning) and anticipate if someone isn't following those rules and take appropriate action to avoid a collision before it's imminent. If passenger cars, large trucks and buses. and motorcycles can share the road, so can pedalcycli…

Yes, but humans being humans, this isn't the case and isn't going to be. Let's deal with reality, not reductionist fantasy. If we take death of out of the equation we all live forever. It isn't a useful "if".

I never said that it was ever going to be perfect. I did say one could minimize the risk by following the rules and practicing defensive driving. Crashes aren't as inevitable as people make them out to be. I've avoided crashes while cycling as well as motoring by paying attention to the situation ahead and behind and proactively taking action to avoid putting myself in a situation where I would have crashed into another vehicle or been hit (e.g., seeing that drive not stopping for the red light and not driving into their path).

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

#740

Post by u801e »

seoaeu wrote: post #648
u801e wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Differences in speed and mass are largely irrelevant if collisions don't occur. You can minimize the risk of a collision by following the rules of movement on the road (right of way and positioning) and anticipate if someone isn't following those rules and take appropriate action to avoid a collision before it's imminent. If passenger cars, large trucks and buses. and motorcycles can share the road, so can pedalcycli…

> If passenger cars, large trucks and buses. and motorcycles can share the road, so can pedalcyclists. Separated bike infrastructure empirically reduces cyclist fatalities. And it isn’t hard to guess why.

The vast majority of collisions cyclists are involved in happen at intersections (incluing mid block drivways and alleys). Very few collision involve hit from behind.

Cycling infrastructure that places cyclists in the pedestrian position when crossing an intersection exacerbates the risk of getting into a collision when crossing the intersection because motorists aren't really looking to see someone moving at cyclist speed as they're exiting the intersection. The other problem is that cyclists are hidden from view by parked cars until a short time before entering the intersection. This makes it difficult for both the cyclist and motorist to see each other until it's too late to avoid a collision. If you're not riding where motorists are looking, you're far more likely to end up in a collision, fatal or not[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4k6-AI_X1qE

Post reply on HN