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

#411

Post by toast0 » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:44 PM UTC

stefan_ wrote: post #190

treesprite82 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you wear a helmet when you drive inside your car? If not, why not? Cars already have airbags and seatbelts which help a lot for the kind of collisions that would otherwise result in head injuries. > It might make you much safer in case of a crash, according to your reasoning. I don't see what in their comment could be construed to say that helmets make you much safer regardless of vehicle. > Wearing a helmet can…

But a helmet will help even more. It costs nothing, what is there to reject?

A competent bike helmet costs little, but not nothing; maybe $20 to start, and a little extra weight, and it messes up your hair a bit, takes seconds to put on if already adjusted and maybe a minute otherwise. May remove a bit of vision, but only vertically up.

A competent car helmet is probably a motorcycle helmet, which is more like $100 to start, but it impacts hearing, reduces vision in all directions, is a significant weight, usually doesn't adjust much for sizing, takes longer to put on (especially if you wear eyeglasses).

A bike helmet in a car would likely be more trouble than anything, it would interfere with the headrests and probably increase neck injuries.

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

#412

Post by dharmab » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:44 PM UTC

rollcat wrote: post #359

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…

Background: I do downhill longboarding as a hobby. > If some riders choose to not wear a helmet [...] ...we take their board from them, until they show up with one. This sport is almost completely unregulated (outside of official events), but somehow the community has developed an incredibly strong culture of keeping both yourself and the others around you safe. I guess something about being a niche sport, perhaps a…

I'm sure one serious injury can ruin an entire day for everyone at an event. It makes sense that the community would expect consideration from boarders of the consequences on an accident on others.

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

#413

Post by ChrisLomont » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:45 PM UTC

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #341

nayuki wrote: post #241

This is very much like: > The name "Tullock's spike" refers to a thought experiment in which Tullock suggested that if governments were serious about reducing road casualties, they should mandate that a sharp spike be installed in the center of each car's steering wheel, to increase the probability that an accident would be fatal to the driver. Tullock's idea was that the normal process of risk compensation would the…

It's a good thought experiment but assumes that everyone has the same ability to assess risk, which isn't true. Not only does the ability to correctly assess risk vary greatly between individuals, it varies greatly over the lifetime of an individual and sometimes even over the course of a day for the same individual.

>but assumes that everyone has the same ability to assess risk

It does not make, nor need, that assumption. If only a few people drove better from understanding increased risk, then that may be enough to lower bad outcome rates.

Why did you claim Tullock "assumes that everyone has the same ability to assess risk"? I can find no such reference or claim online - except yours. Have some info about it?

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

#414

Post by cush » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:46 PM UTC

y7 wrote: post #63

Maybe relevant: the Netherlands is probably the country with the highest use of bicycles for transport, yet no one, except for cyclists on racing bikes/MTBs or foreign tourists, ever wears a bike helmet. This is because they're only marginally effective at preventing injury, and the disadvantage of reduced cycling use if helmets are mandated results in far worse public health outcomes. See also https://dutchreview.co…

I'd bet a Dutch cyclist would wear a helmet when riding on American roads, with American drivers in American cars.

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

#415

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

mslate wrote: post #366

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good thought experiment but assumes that everyone has the same ability to assess risk, which isn't true. Not only does the ability to correctly assess risk vary greatly between individuals, it varies greatly over the lifetime of an individual and sometimes even over the course of a day for the same individual.

So the takeaway here is that some people should not be issued drivers licenses.

That's certainly the case for people with eyesight problems and conditions such as epilepsy.

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

#416

Post by dharmab » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

323 wrote: post #358

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It concerns me that there's so many stories of bike helmets cracking in two and allegedly having saved someone's life. Bike helmets are designed to compress under impact and as such, they are very weak under tension, so when you see a helmet split into two, it indicates that it wasn't working as designed. Compressed polystyrene in the helmet would indicate that it was doing its job.

It's not the polystyrene which cracks, but the plastic shell holding it in place. The separation will happen after the compression force is removed, because the compression will keep the split parts close together. Meaning that the helmet falls apart after it's done the job. Also, there are various degrees of helmets, from a simple polystyrene to a mountain bike one to a motorcycle helmet. You can always go to the ne…

Motorcycle helmets are typically also polystyrene, although with multiple densities for handling both light and heavy impacts.

Motorcycle helmets also have degrees of protection, from the useless DOT standard to the less bad Snell standards to the quite good ECE and FIM standards.

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

#417

Post by II2II » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #199

II2II wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "tiny risk" and potentially large consequences is why people should choose to wear helmets, regardless of experience. You never quite know when an accident is going to happen and it is difficult to account for that. The big risks are easier to account for, to be alert and modify your behaviour accordingly. I have seen experienced ice skaters go from not wearing a helmet to being fanatical about wearing one, simpl…

Out of all the people who are vehemently arguing that it is pure idiocy not to wear a helmet, how many of them wear a helmet when driving? I can pretty safely guess that the answer is a big fat zero. Driving is high risk activity that can lead to severe head injuries. It is even easier to keep a helmet with your car than with your bike. The cost to risk profile here is extremely similar but the resultant behavior is…

Is there even a need for a helmet in most motor vehicles? Many safety features are already incorporated into the vehicle and the vehicle itself must meet safety standards. Contrast that to bicycles, which are often sold without legally mandated safety features and it is very much possible to purchase a new bicycle which should be considered criminally unsafe.[1]

The only reason why we are asking these questions is because things that are legally required for automakers is left, at best, as a responsibility to the consumer when it comes to bicycles.

[1] To be specific, any department store should be regarded as a death trap prior to a knowledgeable person verifying that it has been assembled properly. Even then one has to be careful since the components are typically intended for very light use.

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

#418

Post by cycomanic » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:47 PM UTC

kwatsonafter wrote: post #320

prepend wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It's a common misconception amongst amateur cyclists that because helmets marginally increase the chance of neck injury and that head injuries are relatively uncommon on bicycles that helmets deliver negative returns in terms of safety but as others have pointed out the data doesn't seem to suggest this is actually the case. Also in terms of common sense consider that all professional cyclists wear helmets when they'…

> It's a common misconception amongst amateur cyclists that because helmets marginally increase the chance of neck injury and that head injuries are relatively uncommon on bicycles that helmets deliver negative returns in terms of safety but as others have pointed out the data doesn't seem to suggest this is actually the case.

The question is actually more interesting with public health. I have seen several studies that showed that mandatory cycling helmets decrease life expectancy. That's because less people will ride a bike if they have to wear a helmet and the benefits of cycling outweigh the dangers of not wearing the helmet. That doesn't mean it isn't good to wear one anyway if out cycling.

>Also in terms of common sense consider that all professional cyclists wear helmets when they're competing.

Mentioning professional cycling does not help your argument. The riders organisations were fighting strongly against mandatory helmets, and professional cycling was very late with requiring helmets they came many years after they were mandatory for amateur races. There is also the observation that professional cycling has become riskier, although I would not necessarily link that to cyclist wearing helmets, it would be worth investigating though.

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

#419

Post by bluejekyll » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:48 PM UTC

frereubu wrote: post #400

bluejekyll wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the article is very short, this was still easy to miss, “… and those driving around them take greater risks too.” So it does in fact mention that both people driving around those wearing helmets as well as the cyclists themselves take greater risks. The argument is that in the GP’s anecdote that the cyclist (and perhaps even the truck driver) would have taken less risky actions preceding the crash, thus avoidin…

I know you're just elaborating the parent comment's point, so this isn't really directed at you, but the only study I've ever heard of which said anything like that was one academic riding a bike with and without a helmet, and measuring how close cars came to him. IIRC the difference was a matter of one or two centimetres and, perhaps unsurprisingly, the p-value was just under 0.05. That study was regularly thrown ar…

I linked to an article that I found on this in a sibling comment. It’s an average of 8.5cm closer when wearing a helmet. Obviously a p95 etc would be valuable here.

Personally, I believe the correct thing is to provide separate infrastructure from cars for bicyclists. One big nuance in the helmet debate is that the helmet is really best designed from mistakes while riding, ie when done for sport.

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

#420

Post by cycomanic » Sun, May 22, 2022, 4:49 PM UTC

DangitBobby wrote: post #369

prepend wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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.