Helmets are your friend
Options
Replies
-
Yesterday I went for a short ride (Headwinds from the north!) A vehicle was going around me, giving plenty of space, which I appreciated. But they failed to check oncoming traffic. Fortunately, the oncoming vehicle spotted it and came to a complete stop, wreck avoided.2
-
3rdof7sisters wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »
Perhaps you can elaborate?
My helmets don't interfere with my visibility or hearing, and they improve my visibility3rdof7sisters wrote: »Just curious tiny_clanger, how does it make you more likely to be in an accident wearing a helmet? I am not trying to be a jerk about this, I would really like to be educated about your reasoning for this. I realize that there may be a vision issue with certain types of helmets, but the design of them has greatly improved over the years so vision is better with a proper fitting helmet.
If you take a look at the article I linked to it references the work to demonstrate the association.
Riders have greater risk appetite, and cagers are less willing to give concessions to those that they see as experienced.
Personally one thing that I've found that makes a huge difference is making eye contact with drivers, something I learned when I was doing high speed driving training. Eye contact generates a personal link that improves the likelihood of being treated reasonably.
Appreciating that it's an N=1 situation, but I've noticed distinctly different driver behaviour depending on what bike I'm on. In cycling kit on a road bike I'll have a very different experience than when I'm wearing a suit on a commuting folding bike. On the folder I've also done the same ride both with and without a helmet, and seen very different approaches from drivers.
I have no issue sharing the roadways with pedestrians, bikers etc. When driving, and there is not oncoming traffic, I will move over to give more room, and I appreciate when pedestrians and bikers do the same. Courtesy is a two way street, and while I do not bike, I do walk, on roads that have a 55 mph speed limit, and I always move as far over as possible when meeting traffic. Frankly I don't notice what a biker is wearing. Frequently, bikers will ride two, or more abreast, and make no effort to move to single file, let alone get over on the shoulder, biking in the traffic lane when there is space to move over. To me, that is sheer lunacy on bikers part. With all the crazy drivers, everyone (bikers and vehicles) need to keep this in mind. I absolutely do not condone road rage, but people have to use common sense, and a motorized vehicle vs: a bicycle or pedestrian, stand very little chance of coming out on the best end of a confrontation between the two. I know that everyone has a right to be on public roads, but, common sense needs to prevail, and every little thing that may help (ie: helmet) shows some smart personal responsibility.
Yes, but a car driver cannot see the road obstacles that a bicycle must deal with - ditches, potholes, gravel all keep a cyclist from getting as far over as s/he otherwise might.
Agreed.
But, not down the middle of the lane just to make a point that we have to share the road, this happens all the time where I live.
And there is no reason to ride 2 or more bikes abreast when sharing the road with vehicles that are moving 55mph (or faster) without getting over in the lane (single file) to allow the faster vehicles to pass.
And please note what I said in my other post:
Frequently, bikers will ride two, or more abreast, and make no effort to move to single file, let alone get over on the shoulder, biking in the traffic lane when there is space to move over
Well, that's not cool.0 -
midwesterner85 wrote: »denversillygoose wrote: »It's amazing what comes out of the woodwork when you simply tell a story about a helmet saving a life...
Yes, you popped the cork on a lot of pent up frustration between cyclists and drivers!
I'm a cyclist, I ride with care and have been treated well by cars. However, I've also come across cyclists who seem to intentionally make it hard/impossible for cars to pass them. Bloody anoying
It isn't just cyclists and drivers. I'm a driver, not a cyclist... and I drive a LOT of miles (around 30K annually); but I'm also a runner. I prefer trails not only for the scenery, but also because I've encountered drivers on several occasions who felt it was acceptable to speed up and save a second or 2 rather than give me the right of way as I cross intersections. This is starting to become a real pattern of idiot drivers... I'll be running along coming up to an intersection, a driver will see me, and will speed up or continue from their stop sign as I'm crossing just because they don't want to wait an extra second to let me go past them.
And then there are the cases of cyclists in my state getting killed by drivers who are not even watching the road right in front of them (one case I already elaborated on, another where the driver was turned around attending to a child in the back seat while driving... as if that is acceptable), yet my neighbors and law enforcement / district attorneys seem to think this is just fine behavior by drivers.
Anyway, as a non-cyclist who drives a lot of miles, I must say I totally understand... drivers are idiots! And I'm not saying I'm perfect... I've made a few stupid errors myself while driving, but I'm not going around speeding up to try to beat a runner through an intersection (forcing the runner to slow down or stop to avoid getting hit) and I'm not just driving through a cyclist right in front of me on the highway. My mistakes are more tame than that... like a case in CO in 2014 where 2 pedestrians had begun across a cross walk (not in traveled portion of road yet, but off the curb and going through street side angled parking area... of course no parking in the cross walk, but on either side), and I didn't see them until it was too late to stop. Had they been 14 feet further along on their path, that would have been a problem... though it is also more likely I would have seen them since they would not have been between parked cars, but that isn't the point. There was no cop around and I didn't get "caught," but I still think about how I screwed up as a driver in that instance. Still, that doesn't compare to what I see sometimes when running when drivers definitely see me and speed up in order to try to 'race' past me to the intersection, causing me to suddenly stop to avoid being hit.
Since we're branching out here -
I'm a careful driver who gives pedestrians and cyclists and motorcycles a lot of room. I stop at crosswalks when there is someone waiting to cross. This often seems to confuse my fellow drivers who crawl right up my butt.1 -
I always wear my helmet. IMO its simply stupid not to take that one ounce of prevention. My SO though, has a head too large for any helmet so he rides unprotected.0
-
Actually, there is a very interesting video explaining why cyclists might ride two abreast here from Chris Boardman.While it is a common gripe of motorists when they come across a bunch of cyclists taking up the road, but as Boardman explains in the video it’s quicker and safer to overtake a group riding two abreast than it is to pass a long line of single file riders.
“Think of it like this,” he says. “In your car you have the driver’s seat and the passenger seat, that makes a car suitable for two people to travel next to each other. Cyclists riding next to each other are doing the same thing, maybe chatting just like you would do in a car.”
>>> Boardman: Helmet debate being used to avoid making real decisions
He added: “Cyclists will thin out into single file when it’s safe for cars to pass if it is the most appropriate action.”
While eight riders riding side-by-side may take up 10 metres of road space, the same eight riders in single file will take up 20m, meaning it is more difficult and less safe for a driver to overtake.3 -
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1012.html
That's quite an interesting site about use of cycling helmets. Seems that, as previously mentioned in this thread, They don't have any real impact on reducing fatalities because most cycling fatalities involve multiple injuries meaning death would have occurred with or without a helmet.
I think one issue with this is that a fatal bike accident is usually going to involve a motor vehicle and the rider getting hit...I think it's kind of a no brainer that your helmet isn't going to do you a lot of good when you get mowed down by a car.
I'd wager that most bicycle accidents don't involve a vehicle...head planting on the concrete with a helmet sucks...head planting without one would suck even more. I'd wager that at minimum, helmets have spared cyclists some substantial head trauma and brain injury.
When I had my accident (no vehicle) I fully cracked my helmet and was concussed...things would have been much worse had I not had my helmet.
As far as greater risk of fatality for those wearing a helmet goes...my guess would be that it's simply a matter of the person wearing the helmet is a cycling enthusiast at minimum and rides a lot vs someone not wearing a helmet being an occasional recreational rider. Kind of like you're more likely to get into an accident if you commute to work every day vs someone who works at home and gets in the car to go grab some groceries. The person who's on the road more is obviously at greater risk...0 -
A pack of 6+ riders is a very different beast than two riders going side by side.
Two riders sided by side are doing so for their own amusement, not for safety (IMHO).HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Actually, there is a very interesting video explaining why cyclists might ride two abreast here from Chris Boardman.While it is a common gripe of motorists when they come across a bunch of cyclists taking up the road, but as Boardman explains in the video it’s quicker and safer to overtake a group riding two abreast than it is to pass a long line of single file riders.
“Think of it like this,” he says. “In your car you have the driver’s seat and the passenger seat, that makes a car suitable for two people to travel next to each other. Cyclists riding next to each other are doing the same thing, maybe chatting just like you would do in a car.”
>>> Boardman: Helmet debate being used to avoid making real decisions
He added: “Cyclists will thin out into single file when it’s safe for cars to pass if it is the most appropriate action.”
While eight riders riding side-by-side may take up 10 metres of road space, the same eight riders in single file will take up 20m, meaning it is more difficult and less safe for a driver to overtake.
1 -
@cwolfman13, you would win that bet.
Six most Frequent Sources of Injury Percent
Hit by car 29
Fell 17
Roadway/walkway not in good repair 13
Rider error/not paying attention 13
Crashed/collision 7
Dog ran out 40 -
A pack of 6+ riders is a very different beast than two riders going side by side.
Two riders sided by side are doing so for their own amusement, not for safety (IMHO).HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Actually, there is a very interesting video explaining why cyclists might ride two abreast here from Chris Boardman.While it is a common gripe of motorists when they come across a bunch of cyclists taking up the road, but as Boardman explains in the video it’s quicker and safer to overtake a group riding two abreast than it is to pass a long line of single file riders.
“Think of it like this,” he says. “In your car you have the driver’s seat and the passenger seat, that makes a car suitable for two people to travel next to each other. Cyclists riding next to each other are doing the same thing, maybe chatting just like you would do in a car.”
>>> Boardman: Helmet debate being used to avoid making real decisions
He added: “Cyclists will thin out into single file when it’s safe for cars to pass if it is the most appropriate action.”
While eight riders riding side-by-side may take up 10 metres of road space, the same eight riders in single file will take up 20m, meaning it is more difficult and less safe for a driver to overtake.
Visibility is a factor in safety, though? As is discouraging unsafe over-taking. I ride at the edge of the road as a courtesy to make myself easy to pass, but technically, in the UK anyway, you are supposed to give the cyclist you are overtaking as much room as you would give a car. That means moving into the opposite lane, just like you would a car. Hardly anyone follows that rule, but if more did, cyclists riding two abreast wouldn't be so aggravating.0 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »3rdof7sisters wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »
Perhaps you can elaborate?
My helmets don't interfere with my visibility or hearing, and they improve my visibility3rdof7sisters wrote: »Just curious tiny_clanger, how does it make you more likely to be in an accident wearing a helmet? I am not trying to be a jerk about this, I would really like to be educated about your reasoning for this. I realize that there may be a vision issue with certain types of helmets, but the design of them has greatly improved over the years so vision is better with a proper fitting helmet.
If you take a look at the article I linked to it references the work to demonstrate the association.
Riders have greater risk appetite, and cagers are less willing to give concessions to those that they see as experienced.
Personally one thing that I've found that makes a huge difference is making eye contact with drivers, something I learned when I was doing high speed driving training. Eye contact generates a personal link that improves the likelihood of being treated reasonably.
Appreciating that it's an N=1 situation, but I've noticed distinctly different driver behaviour depending on what bike I'm on. In cycling kit on a road bike I'll have a very different experience than when I'm wearing a suit on a commuting folding bike. On the folder I've also done the same ride both with and without a helmet, and seen very different approaches from drivers.
I have no issue sharing the roadways with pedestrians, bikers etc. When driving, and there is not oncoming traffic, I will move over to give more room, and I appreciate when pedestrians and bikers do the same. Courtesy is a two way street, and while I do not bike, I do walk, on roads that have a 55 mph speed limit, and I always move as far over as possible when meeting traffic. Frankly I don't notice what a biker is wearing. Frequently, bikers will ride two, or more abreast, and make no effort to move to single file, let alone get over on the shoulder, biking in the traffic lane when there is space to move over. To me, that is sheer lunacy on bikers part. With all the crazy drivers, everyone (bikers and vehicles) need to keep this in mind. I absolutely do not condone road rage, but people have to use common sense, and a motorized vehicle vs: a bicycle or pedestrian, stand very little chance of coming out on the best end of a confrontation between the two. I know that everyone has a right to be on public roads, but, common sense needs to prevail, and every little thing that may help (ie: helmet) shows some smart personal responsibility.
Yes, but a car driver cannot see the road obstacles that a bicycle must deal with - ditches, potholes, gravel all keep a cyclist from getting as far over as s/he otherwise might.
Agreed.
But, not down the middle of the lane just to make a point that we have to share the road, this happens all the time where I live.
And there is no reason to ride 2 or more bikes abreast when sharing the road with vehicles that are moving 55mph (or faster) without getting over in the lane (single file) to allow the faster vehicles to pass.
And please note what I said in my other post:
Frequently, bikers will ride two, or more abreast, and make no effort to move to single file, let alone get over on the shoulder, biking in the traffic lane when there is space to move over
If you have a couple of riders, it is appropriate to go single file when you have traffic trying to pass...however, it is safer for all involved, both the riders and the motorists to be two abreast in a peloton as they are actually taking up less road space than they would going single file.0 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »@cwolfman13, you would win that bet.
Six most Frequent Sources of Injury Percent
Hit by car 29
Fell 17
Roadway/walkway not in good repair 13
Rider error/not paying attention 13
Crashed/collision 7
Dog ran out 4
Whomever wrote that survey was useless is selecting their categories. Maybe you could conclude 1/3 caused by car and 2/3 were under the riders control?0 -
Perhaps. Here's the first report on the survey's results and second report, if you're interested.HeliumIsNoble wrote: »@cwolfman13, you would win that bet.
Six most Frequent Sources of Injury Percent
Hit by car 29
Fell 17
Roadway/walkway not in good repair 13
Rider error/not paying attention 13
Crashed/collision 7
Dog ran out 4
Whomever wrote that survey was useless is selecting their categories. Maybe you could conclude 1/3 caused by car and 2/3 were under the riders control?
0 -
If a cyclist is on the far outside edge of the road, a car overtakes the cyclist and cuts in too soon or too close to the cyclist, the only place to go is to leave the roadway... which can be very dangerous in some instances and impossible in others. If a cyclist is in the center or inside (left in the U.S.) side of the lane, then at least there is room for the cyclist to move further right when/if an automobile cuts off the cyclists or passes so closely as to cause a side-swipe.
This has been awhile ago, but my driver's ed. instructor successfully petitioned my state to change the DOT recommendations for motorcycle lane position for this very reason. Riding a motorcycle in the right tire track leaves nowhere to go if a passing vehicle comes too close. Riding in the middle means driving over a majority of the slick spots from leaking vehicles (oil deposits on roadways), and riding in the left wheel track puts the motorcycle in the correct lane with space to move further right when/if getting cut-off by a passing vehicle merging back into the right lane too early.2 -
@midwesterner85 Entirely agreed, 100%. Unfortunately, the cyclist also has to balance the increased safety from using one's legal entitlement to prime position with the increased risk of aggression from some motorists.1
-
Only truly needed the helmet in one fall. I was more or less at a standstill and my front wheel got caught between railroad ties (not paying attention and was looking around how to get around a stupid train parked on trail out of town). My left side of my head landed on the rails after the fall as I decided to rest my head against it but drop faster than anticipated (more like banging your head with you palm for doing something stupid and misjudging your strength). All other falls, >10, my helmet(s) weren't even scratched (spanning many years since 1985 although not contiguous). I wear it for insurance not because of it's inherently safer; there's an art to falling but one cannot always control the outcome. One of the best training to supplement cycling is Judo, just the basics, as it teaches you how to protect your body (head) in a fall.0
-
5 years ago my husband went on a bicycle ride with our dog. He held the leash and the dog ran beside him.
This is incredibly dangerous, and for everybody reading this thread, please exercise more caution than this. Dogs sometimes make sudden and unpredictable moves, like when they see another dog, or a cat, or when they're startled. Riding a bike while tethered to a dog drastically increases your risk of being pulled off balance and crashing. Your husband probably thought he'd be able to drop the leash in time if anything happened, but, clearly, this isn't how it went down.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Reading this entire thread, I get the idea that wearing helmets isn't what we really need here. Instead, we need cars to stop hitting us.
That would be ideal but until courts start aggressively prosecuting distracted / oblivious drivers who maim and kill cyclists we can only ride defensively (I ride with a very bright flashing LED front & back during the day & still have too many close encounters) and wear our helmets.2 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »
Perhaps you can elaborate?
My helmets don't interfere with my visibility or hearing, and they improve my visibility3rdof7sisters wrote: »Just curious tiny_clanger, how does it make you more likely to be in an accident wearing a helmet? I am not trying to be a jerk about this, I would really like to be educated about your reasoning for this. I realize that there may be a vision issue with certain types of helmets, but the design of them has greatly improved over the years so vision is better with a proper fitting helmet.
If you take a look at the article I linked to it references the work to demonstrate the association.
Riders have greater risk appetite, and cagers are less willing to give concessions to those that they see as experienced.
Personally one thing that I've found that makes a huge difference is making eye contact with drivers, something I learned when I was doing high speed driving training. Eye contact generates a personal link that improves the likelihood of being treated reasonably.
Appreciating that it's an N=1 situation, but I've noticed distinctly different driver behaviour depending on what bike I'm on. In cycling kit on a road bike I'll have a very different experience than when I'm wearing a suit on a commuting folding bike. On the folder I've also done the same ride both with and without a helmet, and seen very different approaches from drivers.
I have no issue sharing the roadways with pedestrians, bikers etc. When driving, and there is not oncoming traffic, I will move over to give more room, and I appreciate when pedestrians and bikers do the same. Courtesy is a two way street, and while I do not bike, I do walk, on roads that have a 55 mph speed limit, and I always move as far over as possible when meeting traffic. Frankly I don't notice what a biker is wearing. Frequently, bikers will ride two, or more abreast, and make no effort to move to single file, let alone get over on the shoulder, biking in the traffic lane when there is space to move over. To me, that is sheer lunacy on bikers part. With all the crazy drivers, everyone (bikers and vehicles) need to keep this in mind. I absolutely do not condone road rage, but people have to use common sense, and a motorized vehicle vs: a bicycle or pedestrian, stand very little chance of coming out on the best end of a confrontation between the two. I know that everyone has a right to be on public roads, but, common sense needs to prevail, and every little thing that may help (ie: helmet) shows some smart personal responsibility.
So going back to the point that you asked for clarification on, rider appearance can have an impact on accident risk. Whilst you may not notice what someone is wearing it's clear that people do, and make decisions based on what they see. Those decisions may be conscious or unconscious, but they're made, and as a result incidents occur.
As you're not a cyclists I appreciate that some things that a cyclist is deeply aware of may not be obvious to you. What you think of as common sense may be one of the most dangerous things a cyclist can do. Things that you might think as obvious are more likely to make a cyclist either a target, or extremely vulnerable.0 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »in the UK anyway, you are supposed to give the cyclist you are overtaking as much room as you would give a car. That means moving into the opposite lane, just like you would a car.
it's the same here, and idek what the legal definition of that is. people are 89% good here, and they give me space. they don't need to move into a whole other lane to do it though. i think that would be overkill, since i'm not as wide as a car.
i will say though, that when i ride around wearing one of those acid-yellow hi-viz mesh shirts with the huge scotchlite X across it, i get markedly more space from drivers. the difference is really dramatic. it's like the shirt scares them or something
2 -
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions