A drill bit that saved a life

[ChuckM]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newf...n-back-of-ambulance-saves-mans-life-1.6439365

 

[Coen]

Yeah yeah, the bike helmet propaganda is worldwide.

More head injuries can be prevented by helmet use in cars...

[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]

Fun fact... Gazelle, the Dutch bike brand, doesn't (yet) dare to push the ... in NL. But they have no problem doing it in Germany.

 

[Bob D.]

Do they 'push' it because they want to (their choice) or because they have to (government regulation)?

 

[mino]

Do they 'push' it because they want to (their choice) or because they have to (government regulation)?

Third option.

They have to because of the brainwashed customers. You do not want to attempt selling to Germans something their gov proclaimed "not good". The culture there is to follow the gov, often it is for the good. Sometimes it is for the bad.

In practice the push to use helmets /and even more so the various mandatory rules/ is VERY effective in having people avoid using bicycles for non-sport purposes.

You want people to use cars. Easy. Make bike helmets mandatory.

 

[Coen]

Do they 'push' it because they want to (their choice) or because they have to (government regulation)?

Probably because whoever in Gazelle decided it serves the interests of the car lobby more than the interests of his own employer.  Because that is where it comes from; the car lobby pushes for mandatory bike helmets. In public for safety. But the real reason is very clear; mandatory bike helmets increase car use, decreases cycling, leads to more injured cyclists and a less healthy population in general. You can look to Australia for exactly that effect.

 

[Michael Kellough]

I’d rather not wear a helmet either but the value of what has accumulated in my head exceeds the cost of a helmet.

 

[Paul_HKI]

Why wouldn’t someone wear a helmet?  I mean, aside from their vanity or desire to be ‘individualistic’?

 

[Svar]

I always wear bike helmet. Just common sense, nothing to do with conspiracy theories, government, or car lobby overlords. Doesn't make me avoid using bicycle. I've fallen of a bike in the past and value my wellbeing.

 

[Cheese]

Why wouldn’t someone wear a helmet?  I mean, aside from their vanity or desire to be ‘individualistic’?

I don't see it's either of those issues, if a person grew up not wearing a bicycle helmet then it's not in their DNA to even think about wearing a helmet. That's certainly the case with me.  [smile]  Even on my motorcycle, if I'm just going to quickly run to the nearby hardware store and it's all city street driving I don't put a helmet on.

 

[Coen]

Why wouldn’t someone wear a helmet?  I mean, aside from their vanity or desire to be ‘individualistic’?

Because for utilitarian cycling, it adds nothing. An inch of polystyrene won't do anything when a car crushes you.

In fact, your "head" becomes bigger, making it more likely you hit anything. Then car drivers assume the helmet gives the cyclist magic protection and they pass closer, killing and maiming more cyclists in the process.

Wearing a wig -making you look like a woman from the rear-, adds more for your safety than a helmet. Or adding a kid seat with a polystyrene child in it..

Mandatory bike helmets reduces cycling, increases passive car-centric life forms, increases obesity, reduces happyness, etc. etc. All in all it reduces life expectancy.

If safety was the whole goal, the push would not be for bicycle helmets, but for ISA, minimum passing distance, improved infrastructure for cyclists, enforcement against cars driving around with their mist lights on etc. Germany and the UK now have a law stating cars have to pass cyclists with at least 1.5m distance.
Funny story on that;https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ocket-prosecuted-closely-passing-cyclist.html

The share of jerks among car drivers is just too big. Near here is a roundabout (we have 5000+ of those in a country of 17M) with priority for cyclists. But too many car drivers don't yield. Now, the route to the store where I buy piping (copper, PVC sewer, etc.) passes that roundabout. The funny thing is, if you transport things like steel or copper pipe, car drivers suddenly DO remember to yield. And the reason is simple; because without the pipe, all the danger and damage of not yielding is to the cyclist and the bicycle. With copper pipe in hand... they might loose their car window with the cyclist not having any damage. That type of driver just needs to be stripped of their license.

Another type of car driver looks to the cyclist... if they see the cyclist has noticed them... they don't yield. That is why I don't rotate my head toward those that have to yield to me. I do my best to give the impression to everyone who has to yield to me that I have not seen them.

And yes, I buy pipes going by bicycle. 4m doesn't fit in the car anyway. 1/4 sheets of plywood also by bicycle. Both only when there isn't much wind. It's harder in the west of our country cause of the wind.

 

[mino]

I always wear bike helmet. Just common sense, nothing to do with conspiracy theories, government, or car lobby overlords. Doesn't make me avoid using bicycle. I've fallen of a bike in the past and value my wellbeing.

I guess You do not happen to be a Lady with an hour spent each morning making your hair. Do you ?

Or a father of a girl who will refuse to bike-commute to school for the exact same reason.

And those are only the show-stopper scenarios. Then there is the "inconvenience aspect" which affect absolutely everyone. Even manually working men with short hair.

The thing is, this narrative that helmets IN COMMUTE CYCLING are a net positive is pushed by a LOT of well-meaning people. Mostly, though, these are people who did not grow up bike-communing and the importance of situational awareness etc. does not ring a bell to them.
There were always such well-meaning people causing mayhem. But the legislation is indeed eventually driven by the forces which Coen mentioned. Those and the normal lawmakers who are bothered when their limousine has to slow down behind a cyclist so will agree on anything that will get those pesky bicycles off the roads.

The thing (#2) is that for anyone who grew up in a "cycling town" like me /and I presume Coen/ the narrative is totally absurd.
When I was a kid, starting in 8+ years almost everyone went to school by bike. In a town of 50k I have NEVER heard of a head injury of any seriousness from bike -commute- there. That was over 30 years where 1/4 the city or so commuted daily. Including winters when ice was on the roads. *)
Since I moved to a 500k city I know of ONE occasion where a guy went down after car driver opened door into him. He got unlucky and hit a Tram rail on the road head on. That was over a 10 year period here.

At the same time a LOT of friends had heavy injuries (rarely head though) from mountatin biking but no one from commute. The normal "injuries" from commute were strained wrists, bruised legs or back. Etc. Etc. The same as when walking or running. This is logical - a bike moves at a similar speed to a runner.

[member=8955]Coen[/member]
Well put.

*) Fun fact: When you know how, a bike is safer in the winter than walking. You have 3 contact points - two wheels and your leg - so can maintain stability even on flat ice. I learned that at like 10. Since then icy road was seen as a fun challenge, not a danger.

 

[Coen]

Also; there are more head injuries among car drivers. So the priority should be mandatory helmets for car drivers before even discussing bike helmets.

The thing (#2) is that for anyone who grew up in a "cycling town" like me /and I presume Coen/ the narrative is totally absurd.
When I was a kid, starting in 8+ years almost everyone went to school by bike.

That age was a bit lower for me. Sadly, the bicycle I had at the end of primary school had a single gear and maxed out at 39 km/h because of my own cadence limit (not power limit).

Now in my velomobile, that 39 km/h was my best average speed over 60 km distance  [cool]

 

[AlexThePalex]

I think there are two types of riding a bicycle, commuting/recreational and sport riding. There is no need at all for a helmet for simple commuting as the speed is mostly between 10-20 kph. Wearing a helmet at those speeds will add absolutely nothing in safety. Most accidents that happen there, in the city, are collisions with cars, and the helmet won't do jack for you.

But for sport riding the speeds go up to 30-40 kph or even more, and that's where a helmet is essential. Most accidents that happen to sport riders are single sided, like slipping, or a collision with a steady object, and that's where you can get seriously damaged.

Here in Holland everybody has had a bike since we could walk, and I rode my city bike for 40 years without any serious accident or injury. And then I got a faster touring bike with 3x8 gears, and suddenly 40 kph was a reality. I had the bike for less than a year, doing 30 kph, when I slipped on a wet spot on a bridge and broke my clavicle and bruised my head. Head injury was nothing serious, luckily.

Nevertheless, in the hospital they very thoroughly checked my head for internal bleeding, as that can suddenly kill you overnight. When I got home I saw in the news that happened the same day Michael Schumacher hit his head while skiiing, and became a vegetable. I decided that from now on, I needed a helmet with these speeds. Funny thing was, I was 35 km from home when I fell, later I bought a very professional helmet for peanuts from a guy living only 500 meters from that spot. Some things are just meant to be.

Coen, from here and previous posts of you I sense a lot of mistrust towards car drivers from you. I do not share your sentiment, at least not here in Holland. In my experience, cars are always very careful around cyclists, except maybe the occasional 21 year old in an overly tuned Japanese car. On the other hand, I see a lot of dumb things from cyclists, especially those on a racing bike, as they think they own the entire road, speed by in crowded spots, and ignore traffic lights as they please.

 

[Bob D.]

To each his own. If you don't want to wear a helmet don't. If you do then be my guest.

There are pros and cons to each position, the biggest beef seems to be in being forced to wear one for those that prefer no to.

I rode a Harley (1980 Low Rider) for many years. In my state (NJ) helmets are mandatory, so I wore the helmet for 99% of my time in the saddle. A group of us rode to Laconia, NH to see our first race there in 1981, it is a no-helmet state and we all could not wait to take them off. We crossed the state line, pulled over and removed our helmets. Rode the next 30 some miles to the place we were staying overnight and to a man (and woman) we all said it was not a pleasant experience. Just not used to the noise I guess, and the sound of traffic was louder so everything seemed closer (by sound) than we were used to.

Anywho we all wore our helmets for the rest of the trip. It's what we were comfortable doing so not a problem. When I would ride to Delaware I kept my helmet on, even though Delaware is a no-helmet state also.

If you don't want to wear a helmet, you shouldn't have to, same for seat belts. It makes no difference to me. Your body, your choice.

 

[Vtshopdog]

Reminds me of my bike racer days back in late 80’s early 90’s when US Cycling and UCI mandated helmets for events. Lots of pushback.  They started it with juniors and us higher category guys were all too cool (read: “stupid”) to want to do this and standard practice was to warm up with it strapped to your bars, pull it on at start line then off again at finish.

Many helmets back then were heavy and hot, not the case today and there’s no reason to not wear one.

I would disagree that commuting is inherently safer than sport riding. Perhaps on dedicated bike lanes, but in urban environments dealing with cars, skateboarders, dogs, pedestrians (whatever) introduces many variables that can lead to one’s head meeting with hard objects.

I bike commuted probably 300 days a year and my rule of the road was to assume cars COULD see me and that they were actively trying to hit me. It was on me to get out of their way….

 

[AlexThePalex]

I would disagree that commuting is inherently safer than sport riding.

I would disagree too. Commuting is more prone to accidents than sport riding because traffic in a city is a lot more complicated. I am saying, the NATURE of the injuries is different. If you go fast on a racing bike, your head is in real danger. If you go slow in the city, your head is not the first thing to worry about. The skull is also a natural helmet.

 

[Coen]

Coen, from here and previous posts of you I sense a lot of mistrust towards car drivers from you. I do not share your sentiment, at least not here in Holland. In my experience, cars are always very careful around cyclists, except maybe the occasional 21 year old in an overly tuned Japanese car. On the other hand, I see a lot of dumb things from cyclists, especially those on a racing bike, as they think they own the entire road, speed by in crowded spots, and ignore traffic lights as they please.

Go over the border into Germany... all the jerks in cars have a Dutch license plate on their car. If German police would enforce their passing distance law... the gas tourism would end soon  [cool]

My best friends' sister was killed by a drink driver. I was hit a few years ago by a dipshit that was standing still and accelerated onto the priority bike path while I was straight in front of him. And just last week a guy (am I allowed so say; "with migration background"?) in a Mercedes tried to ram me out of this life because I disagreed with him using the bike path as a place to turn his car around. I always like to say; if he had done so in the USA, I probably could have shot him right in the head, no charges. But his Mercedes with enlarged rims had a bad turn radius and my response time is nil, so I did a 180 and rode away. Had it been the USA... I would have loved the "stand your ground" idea man...

Also look at past two years; way way way less traffic due to Covid lockdowns, but still almost the same number of "traffic deaths". Meaning car drivers abused more space on the road to illegally drive past the speed limit more often.

20 years ago the road near my parent's house was a through-route. The police put down a speed radar once in a while and the results were published in the local newspaper... "1560 vehicles passed the check, 1386 were fined, allowed speed 50 km/h, average speed 65 km/h, maximum 92 km/h"
The daughter of the neighbors in that street was also killed by a car driver than ran here over in the street. And 30 years later they also lost a grandkid to the same shit. Now it's not a through route anymore... but a more empty road. So now the speeding is not a constant stream of cars doing 15 km/h over the limit... but every night a steady dripple of cars going 50+ over the limit.

Last year... empty road, middle of the night... car drivers drives into parked car... two cars total, one damaged. "I just tried to grab my phone". Yeah... fucking idiots.

Do you remember Hans Wiegel? Famous Dutch politician. His first wife died in a car crash... he then married her sister... and she also died in a car crash.

Car violence is ominous, outside NL even more.

If I could get 50% of the fine for all the stuff car drivers pull off... I would work on the bicycle for 8 hours per week and have a paid-off home by the end of the year. I fact, I could sit in front of my parents house in a lounge chair and live from the speeding tickets alone. Or I could walk 2 km from here and sit in a lounge chair and live off the tickets for all the car drivers that drive through a sign explicitly banning cars from that road...
Or sit next to the N-road and fine all the drivers with the mist lights on. Every 3 minutes €90 * 50% = €1350 per hour.

 

[Svar]

I guess You do not happen to be a Lady with an hour spent each morning making your hair. Do you ?
Or a father of a girl who will refuse to bike-commute to school for the exact same reason.
And those are only the show-stopper scenarios. Then there is the "inconvenience aspect" which affect absolutely everyone. Even manually working men with short hair.
The thing is, this narrative that helmets IN COMMUTE CYCLING are a net positive is pushed by a LOT of well-meaning people. Mostly, though, these are people who did not grow up bike-communing and the importance of situational awareness etc. does not ring a bell to them.

LOL. I'm secure in my masculinity and will have no problem riding a pink lady bike while wearing pink helmet. I grew up riding a bike everywhere long before helmets were common. I don't find them inconvenient the slightest.
The leading cause of death in bike accidents are head injuries. It's just a fact. Saying helmets are useless in a car collision is like saying airbags or seatbelts etc. are useless because if you are hit by a freight train head on...  All simply decrease risks, none is inconvenient enough to prevent me from using them.
I wish schools spent more time teaching probability theory and additive and multiplicative properties of risks. That would be large contribution to public and personal safety.

 

[Coen]

I wish schools spent more time teaching probability theory and additive and multiplicative properties of risks. That would be large contribution to public and personal safety.

Sure. Then everyone would know the probability for an American to be killed "in a traffic accident" is TRIPLE the chance of getting shot death by someone else. Outside specific gang-land territory that is probably 30 times...

Also that mandatory bike helmet laws decrease public health.

Perhaps people would then also understand the relative risk of "traffic" versus the covid-cough....

[member=8955]Coen[/member]
Well put.

*) Fun fact: When you know how, a bike is safer in the winter than walking. You have 3 contact points - two wheels and your leg - so can maintain stability even on flat ice. I learned that at like 10. Since then icy road was seen as a fun challenge, not a danger.

You should try a recumbent tricycle  [tongue]. That would just go 180 on you on ice. [cool]

 

[mino]

I guess You do not happen to be a Lady with an hour spent each morning making your hair. Do you ?
...

LOL. I'm secure in my masculinity and will have no problem riding a pink lady bike while wearing pink helmet. I grew up riding a bike everywhere long before helmets were common. I don't find them inconvenient the slightest.
...

I see you are not a Lady indeed.

Were You, You would know that putting on a helmet is impossible without destroying your hair styling. An absolute show stopper for a Lady or a Miss.

I will not flame the other parts - Coen already made a great points on these aspects. Just one thing to repeat. The point of contention are helmets in commute/transport use of bikes. I know, such is not really a thing in US while common in the much more compact European cities.

Sport use is a completely separate world where they definitely make sense as Alex noted eloquently.

Mandatory helmets - be it socially or by law - are an effective way to prevent using bikes for casual transport and force people into cars. What they do is they do NOT affect freaks like us here. They affect the casual people who will simply choose the lesser resistance an use a car instead. That is the ONLY affect they really have. Yeah, and increasing the quantity of dead cyclists per mile ridden. They are very good at that too.