this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2024
188 points (93.1% liked)

micromobility - Ebikes, scooters, longboards: Whatever floats your goat, this is micromobility

2312 readers
13 users here now

Ebikes, bicycles, scooters, skateboards, longboards, eboards, motorcycles, skates, unicycles: Whatever floats your goat, this is all things micromobility!

"Transportation using lightweight vehicles such as bicycles or scooters, especially electric ones that may be borrowed as part of a self-service rental program in which people rent vehicles for short-term use within a town or city.

micromobility is seen as a potential solution to moving people more efficiently around cities"

Feel free to also check out

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

It's a little sad that we need to actually say this, but:

Don't be an asshole or you will be permanently banned.

Respectful debate is totally OK, criticizing a product is fine, but being verbally abusive will not be tolerated.

Focus on discussing the idea, not attacking the person.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Are you really calling source on the fact that:

  1. Biking without a helmet is dangerous.

  2. Biking at 30 mph without a helmet is more dangerous.

?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Wearing a helmet increases your risk of injury: https://road.cc/content/news/268605-wearing-cycle-helmet-may-increase-risk-injury-says-new-research

Paradoxically, wearing a helemt makes people feel safer doing more dangerous things, so it increases the actual risk. However, the existence of cars without sufficient infrastructure makes biking significantly more dangerous, reguarless of everything anything the bike rider is doing. So in countries with functional bike infrastructure, like the Netherlands, people don't wear helmets because it's safer not to. In dysfunctional countries, like the US, people have to wear helmets.

Faster biking without a helmet is obviously dangerous, I don't know if this is also related to cars. In the Netherlands, eBikes with acceleators are considered motorcycles and require helmets but eBikes that are just pedal assist are considered regular bikes and people generally use the assist to go farther not faster.

[–] PriorityMotif 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

People who wear helmets bike more and therefore have a greater risk of getting hit by a car.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They're more likely to bike more dangerously. Folks in the Netherlands don't wear helmets and it has the highest bike usage in the world.

[–] PriorityMotif 6 points 8 months ago

That also means there are fewer cars for people to get hit by.

[–] aeharding 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] PriorityMotif 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

This is about bike shares and the author states:

If you’re cruising along on a road bike at 20 mph, hit a rock, and get thrown forward onto your head, you definitely want a good helmet to absorb the blow. Studies have shown that wearing helmets while cycling reduces the risk of head and brain injuries by about 70 percent, and regular bike commuters should make the decision to wear a helmet, no question. Helmet law proponents argue that these benefits would carry over to bike-share riders, but in fact, the safety picture is more complicated.

Do we need to require that you carry your helmet all day in case you decide to hop on a clunky 40-pound bike-share cruiser to go two blocks from office to lunch? The risk of severe injuries on these short jaunts is low, and in the rare cases where riders are killed, it is most often in devastating collisions with cars and trucks where, as New York City Council Speaker Corey Johnson bluntly put it, “a helmet wouldn’t even help them because of the sheer scope of the accident.” The biggest threat to city cyclists is motor vehicles who don’t see them and don’t respect their space on the road and wearing a helmet is unlikely to mitigate the danger of these bike vs car collisions.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Dutchies wear no helmets because we're stubborn that way. There's more injuries compared to our neighbor Denmark where more than half of people wear helmets.

With the advent of eBikes there's been a huge upsurge in cycling related injury, certainly among the elderly. However the mental ownership of bikes makes us as unwilling to wear a helmet as stereotypical southern us state males were unwilling to adapt the seatbelt.

Inverse survivorship bias 'i never needed one' prevails. Only one in ten wears a helmet and if you bring up this topic in conversation it gets really uncomfortable soon...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Helmets are going to be required for older cyclists pretty soon though, yeah? I wonder how much that will impact things.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think our boomers would rather elect literally Hitler instead of submitting to bike helmet law (something national identity). It'll darwinise itself out in the long run.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh, is Geert Wilders against helmets? Heh.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Well any helmets outside of intensity hairsprayed blond domes

[–] PriorityMotif 1 points 8 months ago

wonder how much that will impact things.

According to one study it takes about 2300 Newtons to fracture a skull.

[–] Pipoca 5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

There's biking and there's biking.

In the Netherlands, for example, people wear helmets if they're doing bike sports like road racing or BMX.

But if they're just cruising down the street on their granny bike to get groceries, they don't bother because that's fairly safe.

It's rather like the need for a seatbelt on the highway, vs the need for a seatbelt on a 25 mph neighborhood street.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

A crash at 25 mph without a seatbelt can kill

[–] Pipoca 2 points 8 months ago

Can, sure. I'm having difficulty finding the fatality rate for unseatbelted people in car crashes at 25 mph, but for pedestrians it seems to be somewhere in the single digits.

[–] HollandJim 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That’s changing. Electric bikes are involved in many more accidents now, and it’s advised to wear a helmet if you’re young or older (I’ve lived here 25 years now and you can see the changes).

[–] Pipoca 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Many more accidents than what?

More accidents than traditional bikes per passenger mile, or passenger hour?

More accidents on ebikes than 5 years ago on account of more people buying them?

[–] HollandJim 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Can’t seem to post links.

Search for “netherlands older ebike deaths injuries” in google/ddg.

[–] Pipoca 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I see e.g. https://nltimes.nl/2023/08/01/trauma-surgeons-express-concern-e-bike-accidents-among-elderly

Dutch trauma surgeons have raised concerns over the rising number of elderly people suffering severe injuries from electric bicycle accidents, AD reported on Tuesday.

While some injuries result from collisions, most accidents are unilateral, caused by incidents like falling from a stationary position or losing control due to high speed,

It sounds like it's particularly impacting 65+ year old men - the same types who die from breaking a hip slipping and falling while walking.

I'm not sure to what degree this is caused by ebikes encouraging them to keep biking when they should have stopped, or ebikes just being more dangerous when they fall over.

[–] HollandJim 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There are a lot more links, but this is a good one. It appears many issues are possible: higher speeds, heavier bikes (maybe harder to turn), but then both require a faster mental acuity to manage them. Plus, we use a LOT of traffic circles, and very often bikes can be in blind spots - I read that circles and intersections are where most accidents occur. Older people also assume you’ll let them through, but then again - blind spots.

I’m not saying the Netherlands shouldn’t be used as an example of good infrastructure, but also there are challenges we haven’t resolved either. Let’s not ignore them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If you're young or older

Uh so everyone???

[–] HollandJim 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Young, usually under middle-school age.

Older, usually 55+. People here bike into old age.

[–] BeautifulMind 0 points 8 months ago

Older, usually 55+. People here bike into old age

LOL I'm in my 50s and still racing

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I would call you a sweet summer child, but I've stood in your shoes exactly. A while ago I had a serious bike accident because I slipped from the wet pedals and landed head first on the concrete. Doc in the ER told me I was able to walk it off because I was wearing a helmet (which now had a serious crack).

I posted online about it and while a lot of people are logged the story with their own various tales, it was also the day I learned about the very vocal minority of bike riders who completely detest helmets. many of them go so far as to say that helmets are actively dangerous.

Their arguments are mostly variations on

  1. there are no scientific studies on bike helmets
  2. good bike infrastructure should make wearing helmets obsolete (aka the Netherlands argument)
[–] deanimate 3 points 8 months ago

Yes, they are rather dense. Amuses me to think of them one day having a serious injury that could have been reduced by wearing a helmet and then arguing with the doctor that if the infrastructure was better they wouldn't have fallen off the bike in the first place

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

I'm sating this article is sensationalist shit. The information in the article does not lead to the conclusion from the title.