Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 212 posts

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#21

Post by hartleybrody »

rayiner wrote: post #6

What's so wrong with helmets?

Yah, the author claims that we Americans cling to our "helemet = safety" notion dogmatically, but then she takes it as fact that people won't ride bikes if the law says they have to wear a helemet. But I don't think wearing a helmet is really that bad that it's keeping people from riding.

Like the fact that biking is aerobic exercise and people hate that.

The policy implications are very interesting and I'm sure it might affect behavior at the macro level, but for me as a cyclist, I'm going to wear a helemet AND ride a bike, so it seems like I don't fit her model.

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#22

Post by zobzu »

cshesse wrote: post #12
rayiner wrote: post #6

What's so wrong with helmets?

I think we can solve this with a bulleted list: * Scare people off from using bikes * Uncomfortable * Supply excuse to not make biking safer * Expensive * Don't actually make you any safer

That's not exactly a very good list. Here's what i think is a better one:

- doesn't look cool

- slightly less comfortable

- one more thing to think about and carry along when you go for a ride

On the plus side:

- does actually make you safer

- its cheap unless you need a super competition-brand-etc (then you've a different issue)

- its light

- when everybody wears it you don't have to feel like you're the only clown who fears for his life wearing one

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#23

Post by mikeash »

zobzu wrote: post #14

So i had one single bike accident in my life so far. Happened to be in a urban area. Happened that a car cut the way and i hit it, and the ground with the head. I have a permanent scar (its not so bad) on the side of my face. Without helmet it'd have something much worse (yeah i broke other body parts, the hit was rather violent - i can avoid a car going at regular speed, but if i'm going fast and the car is speeding…

This would be much more compelling if you could bring some statistics into the argument rather than tell a personal story and then, basically, guess.

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#24

Post by jarek »

rayiner wrote: post #17
cshesse wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can solve this with a bulleted list: * Scare people off from using bikes * Uncomfortable * Supply excuse to not make biking safer * Expensive * Don't actually make you any safer

The first point just begs the question. The third one is questionable at best. The last two are just incorrect. I think the "no helmet" thing is just a weird bit of biker culture that's going to eventually die out, much like smoker culture is dying out in the US.

> I think the "no helmet" thing is just a weird bit of biker culture that's going to eventually die out, much like smoker culture is dying out in the US.

Is this a US-only claim, or do you reckon people in Amsterdam and Copenhagen will see your light and start wearing helmets?

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#25

Post by papalalu »

jmspring wrote: post #7

Until there is a distinct change in driver attitudes, riding without a helmet in most of the US is just nuts. Sure, there are places like Portland with dedicated bike lanes and an overall emphasis on pro-bike culture, but it is a rare spot. In the bay area, there is a very large biking community -- road, mountain, around town, etc. The problem is, the infrastructure isn't there for bikes compared to Amsterdam. We hav…

the fact is that a helmet is not enough to guarantee your safety - if cycling without one is "nuts", cycling with one is too.

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#26

Post by mikeash »

leviathant wrote: post #20
cshesse wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can solve this with a bulleted list: * Scare people off from using bikes * Uncomfortable * Supply excuse to not make biking safer * Expensive * Don't actually make you any safer

My mother worked in a head trauma unit while I was young, and I particularly take umbrage with that last bullet point. While wearing a helmet won't do you much good when you ignore a stop sign and get plowed over by an SUV, neither will a seat belt save your life if you lose control going 110 down a tree-lined rural highway.

I'm rather shocked at the number of comments in this thread that just extrapolate anecdotes. Your mother's profession has nothing to do with this whatsoever, unless it involved studying the actual statistics of bicycle helmet safety.

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#27

Post by zobzu »

jey wrote: post #15

It's apparently not very clear whether bike helmets increase or decrease biker safety: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/09/bike-helmet-doubts.htm...

every of these articles manipulate the data to make you believe a simple fact "helmet or no helmet is the same".

Just use common sense instead (yeah I know it's so freaking hard). If you're going to ride on a safe road, bike path, etc, like many people do, helmet or no helmet makes an insignificant difference.

If you're going to ride in traffic, in SF, NYC or Paris, that is where you want to wear one. If you're going to go down hill in the forest at extremely high speeds (ie: you're doing competition), you're going to wear a helmet. Heck those guy don't need to be told, they know the risk if they don't.

That's all there is.

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#28

Post by zem »

cshesse wrote: post #12
rayiner wrote: post #6

What's so wrong with helmets?

I think we can solve this with a bulleted list: * Scare people off from using bikes * Uncomfortable * Supply excuse to not make biking safer * Expensive * Don't actually make you any safer

* plays badly with city-supplied shared bicycles

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#29

Post by papalalu »

zobzu wrote: post #14

So i had one single bike accident in my life so far. Happened to be in a urban area. Happened that a car cut the way and i hit it, and the ground with the head. I have a permanent scar (its not so bad) on the side of my face. Without helmet it'd have something much worse (yeah i broke other body parts, the hit was rather violent - i can avoid a car going at regular speed, but if i'm going fast and the car is speeding…

the test that your helmet has to pass is a 12.5mph impact.

Re: To Encourage Biking, Cities Lose the Helmets

#30

Post by zobzu »

mikeash wrote: post #23
zobzu wrote: post #14

So i had one single bike accident in my life so far. Happened to be in a urban area. Happened that a car cut the way and i hit it, and the ground with the head. I have a permanent scar (its not so bad) on the side of my face. Without helmet it'd have something much worse (yeah i broke other body parts, the hit was rather violent - i can avoid a car going at regular speed, but if i'm going fast and the car is speeding…

This would be much more compelling if you could bring some statistics into the argument rather than tell a personal story and then, basically, guess.

Statistic of how many head injuries you get if your head is smashed against a car door or the ground at high speed?

I suggest you make the experiment, because, I can only guess it hurts every time, and uhm, that's not backed by any statistic.

--

I'm not allowed to reply because this has been down-voted, so i'll reply here:

the study you linked is a net result of people NOT riding bicycles because they don't want to ride if they have to wear a helmet. Thus they die "faster" from lack of exercising. That's twisted crap, IMO. It doesn't mean not wearing a helmet is safer. It means: NOT DOING EXERCISE IS UNHEALTHY. That's a very different thing. Note that everyone else "against helmets" in the HN threads linked to similar stats (!)

As I wrote, I'm all for people being allowed to wear one, or not wear one. But at the end of the day, it's safer to wear one in many environments such as SF/NYC/Paris (yes, Paris too It's not like Amsterdam, at all.).

But since you like stats, here are stats, that helmets protected 85% of helmet-wearing riders, as this study does not compare to "people who wouldn't ride because the think a helmet is ugly":

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198905253202101?HIT...

Post reply on HN