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

771–780 of 797 posts

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

#771

Post by Kim_Bruning »

grumple wrote: post #752
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've got the gist of it. I'm trying to point out how .nl statistics come out funny because the infrastructure has been made so safe. Commuters actually make up the majority of cyclists in the Netherlands, there are a lot of them (cycle commuting is heavily encouraged for all kinds of people at all ages), and they don't wear helmets. Despite the large number of commuters on bicycles, commuting is (apparently) so saf…

What distance are these commuters going? What I see in those videos looks just like my university, a bunch of people on what we call beach cruisers going a very short distance. Their speed indicates they aren't going far and aren't in much of a rush. Are people in the Netherlands strict about arrival times? Do they usually move at a slower pace? In my city commuters go fast. We're going a few miles on a commute at le…

They're going quite a few miles on bike alone. 30-60 min commutes are not uncommon. Kids, Adults, Seniors. Hot or cold, rain or shine.

The time culture is similar to Germany: you have to be punctual. This means you need to leave on time in order to arrive on time. As a general rule in real-world traffic: Speeding might not actually help you arrive all that much quicker, you just feel like you do. An objective instrument (such as a GPS) may well inform you otherwise.

Also, on a bike: if you're traveling longer distances, you need to pace yourself, lest you run out of steam half-way.

The infrastructure is good though, in municipal zones the cycle distance (and time!) can often be shorter than the car-distance; because bikes can take more short-cuts and are easier to park. And for longer distances it's possible to eg. park your bike at a station and continue by bus or train.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3-tUMgwCt8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDXB0CY2tSQ [edit] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UxCbmT9elk <- a commute with more biking in it

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

#772

Post by mcguire »

_abox wrote: post #747
mcguire wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" In absolute terms, more people were killed in a car accident (237) than in a bicycle accident (203) last year, but this is different per kilometre travelled. Traffic mortality per billion vehicle-km was much higher among cyclists than among passenger car occupants (11 versus 1.6 deaths). " ( https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2020/31/decline-in-road-fatali... )

Well, obviously cyclists are more vulnerable. Considering that the numbers are pretty low IMO. The Netherlands have 16 million people, most of which use bicycles for daily travel. 200 died in a year, especially elderly who are exceptionally vulnerable. It's not something that warrants extreme worry. There's always risk in a life. Also, it's something that is only a risk to the rider themselves so leaving it to their…

Dividing fatalities by population might be reasonable to look at acceptable death levels; in NL in 2020, that's 229 / 17,440,000 or 1.3 per 100,000. Automotive numbers would be pretty similar.

(Correction: They would not. There were ~610 auto deaths in NL in 2020. That gives 3.5 per 100,000.)

In the US, 2020 had 11.7 automotive deaths per 100,000 people and 0.38 bicycle deaths per 100,000.

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

#773

Post by mcguire »

charrondev wrote: post #689
mcguire wrote: post #657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" In absolute terms, more people were killed in a car accident (237) than in a bicycle accident (203) last year, but this is different per kilometre travelled. Traffic mortality per billion vehicle-km was much higher among cyclists than among passenger car occupants (11 versus 1.6 deaths). " ( https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2020/31/decline-in-road-fatali... )

Is it as much about vehicle-km or per vehicle-km? At the end of the day people generally will avoid super long trips on a bicycle because it’s slow and strenuous.

There are a lot of ways to slice those numbers; I like deaths / km as it describes the risks of traveling from point A to point B by various methods. On the other hand, it's likely skewed somehow by the fact that you rarely have more than one fatal accident per trip.

Another way of looking at it is deaths / trip; a quick search shows 4,800,000,000 bicycle trips in 2019 for a rate of 48 deaths / billion trips and 229 deaths versus 3,600,000,000 car trips and 610 deaths or 169 deaths per billion trips.

The average trip length in the US is apparently something like 10-15m which might make the number of automotive deaths per billion trips something like 130-200. Maybe. (I can't find an actual estimate of the number of trips.)

Another way is deaths per population, see one of my other comments.

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

#774

Post by darkerside »

scatters wrote: post #722
darkerside wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is sarcasm, right?

Not sarcasm. If a car isn't beside you they can't side swipe you. You are aware that London basically doesn't have multi lane roads, right?

Why would I be aware of that? A quick Google Maps search shows some multi lane roads.

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

#775

Post by zikzak »

michaelcampbell wrote: post #755
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. I don't have a dog in this fight, but I wonder what the velocity of one's head hitting the pavement is if you just stand still and fall over. That's 0MPH, but it still seems like it'd be enough to do damage.

I watched an old guy die in a parking lot because of this. His hat blew off, he bent over to pick it up, and then fell forward onto his head. He died soon after. Now, he could have had some kind of other issues leading to this (he was elderly and had mobility issues). My wife parked while I ran over to render assistance, I called 911 while a military medic tried to revive him but it was too late.

So yeah, that can be enough (might have been a heart attack as a result of the shock, I am NOT a doctor, but he was gone by the time the ambulance arrived).

Also, one of the reasons street fighting is so dangerous has nothing to do with MMA dudes, it's when someone falls down and hits their head. This happens all the time. They sometimes die from the fall.

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

#776

Post by ekianjo »

CaptainHardcore wrote: post #216
stefan_ wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you wear a helmet as a pedestrian then? You are so unprotected!

I guess if I was going to walk in the road with traffic.

like an everyday pedestrian you mean?

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

#777

Post by ekianjo »

Tade0 wrote: post #274
stefan_ wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you wear a helmet as a pedestrian then? You are so unprotected!

> So you wear a helmet as a pedestrian then? I'm not going multiples of walking speed on something standing upright only thanks to gyroscopic forces, so no. Also even when running I have way better maneuverability than as a cyclist. Generally limbs > wheels when it comes to getting out of trouble. I wear a helmet when skiing though.

If a car collides with you when you walk you could make the argument its safer to have a helmet. this is not evem remotely rare in terms of occurence.

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

#778

Post by ekianjo »

yellowapple wrote: post #170
ekianjo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sorry, and pardonner mou Français, but what in the actual fuck? 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. Wearing a helmet can itself become a leading factor to cause an incident, and it's clearly what they are hinting at in the linked article: that data seems to indicate that riders wearing helmets may be…

> Do you wear a helmet when you drive inside your car? If not, why not? My car has other safety measures in place to protect me from head injuries. A bicycle does not.

sure, but if a helmet makes things even safer by all means lets mandate helmets in cars. I want people to follow that safety logic to the end.

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

#779

Post by ekianjo »

nathan_f77 wrote: post #207
ekianjo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sorry, and pardonner mou Français, but what in the actual fuck? 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. Wearing a helmet can itself become a leading factor to cause an incident, and it's clearly what they are hinting at in the linked article: that data seems to indicate that riders wearing helmets may be…

> 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…

All rally drivers wear helmets. Pretty sure its not just to have more sponsor stickers.

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

#780

Post by RC_ITR »

davisoneee wrote: post #765
RC_ITR wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t want to be rude, but wide receivers and running backs get CTE as much as other positions and their movement patterns are nearly identical to rugby. I agree linemen are a novel concept, but they’re not the only victims.

I was not suggesting it's only linemen. I think my point still stands about NFL being all about 'set plays'. NFL is all "set up, set up, set up, RUN, TACKLE, STOP", whereas rugby is more "run run tackle run tackle run tackle stop". Combine that with the fact when a Rugby player makes an extended run, they aren't often tackled directly head or side-on, it's more perhaps an "anchor" tackle from the back to pull them do…

>I think my point still stands about NFL being all about 'set plays'. NFL is all "set up, set up, set up, RUN, TACKLE, STOP", whereas rugby is more "run run tackle run tackle run tackle stop".

Is your core argument that rugby is safer because the players are more tired at any given point so they don't hit as hard? Other than that, I am struggling to figure out the mechanism between stopping more frequently and football being more dangerous.

>Combine that with the fact when a Rugby player makes an extended run, they aren't often tackled directly head or side-on, it's more perhaps an "anchor" tackle from the back to pull them down. In american football, the safeties and deep players have more opportunity to get head-on with a receiver while the ball is in flight, while a rugby full-back having to watch and run horizontally while the player is running means they are less likely to be directly head-on.

I'd suggest you watch videos like [0] to diligence your claim that head-on tackles aren't common in rugby.

The nuance that you are missing is the power equation - American football's best tacklers focus on short-duration, high-work contact (i.e. maximizing power) to knock an offensive player off their feet [1]. Think of it like placing a nail. You can swing a metal hammer and a rubber mallet (of the same mass) against the same nail and the metal hammer will always drive it better because the dt portion of the power equation (i.e. the denominator) is smaller.

The metaphor extends: rugby players may put in the same amount of work (or more!) on a given tackle, but the dt part of their power equation is much higher than in the NFL because humans are squishy (in practice this is also why you see so much more form tackling in rugby - it's hard to generate enough power to just knock someone over without wearing pads).

Ultimately, high power hits are what cause the rapid, high energy head movements that cause CTE and those are just easier to do in pads.

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOFO_MzZi50 [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3Bh9LHMEeY

Post reply on HN