Cycle Helmets, Yes or No?

Forums › Health and fitness › Cycle Helmets, Yes or No?

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 22

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979213 17-Mar-2018 22:06

Fred99:

Batman:

Aredwood: Another factor for the decline in commuter cycling since 1994 - Higher property prices and rents. This means it is less likely that you will live close enough to your workplace to easily bike to work.

If your commute takes say 1 hour each way by car. And / or involves motorways / roads with a 100Km/Hr speed limit. Biking to work is unlikely to be practical for you.

Also Hybrid and Electric cars now exist, which didn't in 1994. So assuming that you get cheap or free parking at your workplace. Fuel costs of driving to work are no longer such a big factor as previously.

Edited to add

Overseas based commentators discussing the NZ helmet laws might not be aware of the high house prices in NZ.

in general, house prices in AKL is no higher than other cities in the world. in fact they are generally cheaper than other cities.

Relative to median household income they very much are - and that's the thing which matters most in terms of affordability.

Improving, but 9th most unaffordable out of 92 (it had actually improved a bit since 2016) according to a Demographia survey.

Doubt it. Interest rates might be more important than income. And not everybody owns their homes, so percentage of renters and rental prices might also have an effect.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1979222 17-Mar-2018 22:42

i went into a retailer today and they had range of different priced helmets. I was surprised to see that the cheaper ones didn't appear to have any safety standard sticker inside , where the more expensive ones did. Can helmets that haven't been tested to NZ or Australian standards and with those stickers, be sold by NZ retailers ? If so, why aren't the standards mandatory, considering they are a safety device?

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1979234 18-Mar-2018 00:00

No adult cyclist on major roads should ever wear a helmet....

I call it "thinning the herd". The less MAMILs, the better.

In actuality, if you commute on a bike, you're an idiot if you don't (bike helmets were compulsory where I come from in 1990 and people still ride bikes.)

When I ride, I wear a helmet, to be a role model for my kids.

Bung

6477 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#1979240 18-Mar-2018 01:18

mattwnz:
i went into a retailer today and they had range of different priced helmets. I was surprised to see that the cheaper ones didn't appear to have any safety standard sticker inside , where the more expensive ones did. Can helmets that haven't been tested to NZ or Australian standards and with those stickers, be sold by NZ retailers ? If so, why aren't the standards mandatory, considering they are a safety device?

To be legal they must have a sticker but the range of standards is wider than just the AS/NZS.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1979294 18-Mar-2018 13:32

I just got back so am late to this but wanted to chime in anyway. Coming from Holland, where no-one wears helmets, I am strongly in favour of choice and will not ride a bike here as a matter of principle until I have one. Of course conditions are not the same. Roads are worse, dedicated cycle lanes are still woefully lacking, drivers are much worse. There needs to be a culture change to make cycling safer, but for adults it should still be a matter of choice, with plenty of education on the consequences of choosing wrong but no compulsion. Children are another matter. Cycling here is dangerous and for them helmets are a necessity.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1979636 19-Mar-2018 10:35

The reasons I stopped cycle commuting: -

1) Parallel parked door openers caused me to have two minor spills - lost skin but no real injuries;

2) Arriving at work hot and sweaty with increased wear on work clothes or a need to get changed at work;

3) Developed an ankle problem due to cycling.

These days I have a different job, and it's 5 minutes walk to work, so cycling would actually be slower.

Mike

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979759 19-Mar-2018 11:58

Up to the rider.

A meander round the vineyards of Martinborough on a summer afternoon? Perhaps the risk analysis says a Panama hat will do.

Commuting or mountain biking? Helmet probably a sensible plan.

Some Scandinavian students invented airbag helmets now on the market which I thought would be a good compromise - see here

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29760 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979770 19-Mar-2018 12:17

That won't fix the hairdo problem

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979771 19-Mar-2018 12:18

Batman: That won't fix the hairdo problem

Since it won't go off unless you crash, I would say it will.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1979852 19-Mar-2018 13:41

Geektastic:

Up to the rider.

A meander round the vineyards of Martinborough on a summer afternoon? Perhaps the risk analysis says a Panama hat will do.

That is implying that the rider is able to tell when an accident will occur. But an accident is possible on a summer afternoon rider around vineyards. People can easily be injuried by riding through trees. The wheel may get caught in a root and they go flying over the handlebars, they may get clotheslined by a wire or branch, or they may get hit by a crazy wairarapa driver as they go out onto the road.

IANAL, but most vineyards will be a 'workplace', so the owner will want to make sure everyone on the land is wearing a helmet, as they are likely required to do this under health and safety laws. So even if the law did change and helmets weren't compulsory, it is likely all workplaces would still require them.

When they eventually make ATV helmets compulsory, the some arguments are going to occur, because many people that use ATVs are using them on flat land, have been using them safely for decades without an issue, because they are in lower risk environments and they have judged how to use them safely and not take risks, including using them on uneven land. But they fact is that an injury could still occur, and they aren't doing everything to minimise risk. They will likely soon be required to wear helmets etc, to minimise risks. Although most will probably already wear helmets due to worksafe and minimising risk.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979870 19-Mar-2018 14:04

mattwnz:

Geektastic:

Up to the rider.

A meander round the vineyards of Martinborough on a summer afternoon? Perhaps the risk analysis says a Panama hat will do.

That is implying that the rider is able to tell when an accident will occur. But an accident is possible on a summer afternoon rider around vineyards. People can easily be injuried by riding through trees. The wheel may get caught in a root and they go flying over the handlebars, they may get clotheslined by a wire or branch, or they may get hit by a crazy wairarapa driver as they go out onto the road.

IANAL, but most vineyards will be a 'workplace', so the owner will want to make sure everyone on the land is wearing a helmet, as they are likely required to do this under health and safety laws. So even if the law did change and helmets weren't compulsory, it is likely all workplaces would still require them.

When they eventually make ATV helmets compulsory, the some arguments are going to occur, because many people that use ATVs are using them on flat land, have been using them safely for decades without an issue, because they are in lower risk environments and they have judged how to use them safely and not take risks, including using them on uneven land. But they fact is that an injury could still occur, and they aren't doing everything to minimise risk. They will likely soon be required to wear helmets etc, to minimise risks. Although most will probably already wear helmets due to worksafe and minimising risk.

1) Not literally through the vineyards. On the quiet country lanes which surround them, where members of the public commonly cycle

2) The rider should be permitted to make his or her own decision in that respect

3) TLDR but no doubt this has been referenced in some form already

I do not know if the airbag helmets I linked to above would comply with the way the regulations are written in NZ, but if they do then they would probably persuade many more people to wear helmets without grumbling, because in effect the helmet is a scarf until you need it to be a helmet!

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979874 19-Mar-2018 14:09

Geektastic:

1) Not literally through the vineyards. On the quiet country lanes which surround them, where members of the public commonly cycle

2) The rider should be permitted to make his or her own decision in that respect

So the same should apply to seatbelts in cars when on quiet country lanes? Quiet urban streets too. ACC can continue to pay our tax dollars to fix them up, I'd prefer an additional seperate tax levied for that.

Personally I favour optional in non car areas such as cycleways, or cycle/pedestrian ways.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1979876 19-Mar-2018 14:15

Although a lot of these roads aren't resealed and are narrow, and can have potholes etc, which are easy to catch a wheel in. I would potentially feel safer on a main road, than a small country road, especially as a lot of accidents do occur on them. Also there are a lot of crazy motorists who speed around these roads. Cyclists really have very little control over how safe conditions really are, as often accidents are caused by a third party.

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#1979877 19-Mar-2018 14:19

tdgeek:

Personally I favour optional in non car areas such as cycleways, or cycle/pedestrian ways.

Although to get on and off a cycleway, the cyclist will usually have to ride on a normal road first. So I can't see that working, unless they are walking the bike to it. IMO, if the current system isn't broken, why the need for fixing it.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1979884 19-Mar-2018 14:30

mattwnz:

tdgeek:

Personally I favour optional in non car areas such as cycleways, or cycle/pedestrian ways.

Although to get on and off a cycleway, the cyclist will usually have to ride on a normal road first. So I can't see that working, unless they are walking the bike to it. IMO, if the current system isn't broken, why the need for fixing it.

According to the article by the OP, it is broken! :-) Worth a protest even.

I agree, it isn't broken, it isn't affecting cycle use apart from gals that got a perm. Me, I would ride with a helmet to nearby cycleways, once there, if it was optional I'd remove the helmet cos I can, hang it on seat or whatever. Cycleways where I am are everywhere, some are labelled keep left for cycle and pedestrian, as per car driving. Certainly if the cycleway was dodgy I'd just leave the helmet on, its no consequence either way

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | ... | 22