Headphones & Cycling?
#76
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
I suppose we should just not bother responding to the questions asked over and over again on the safety forum... after all, apparently without "credible support" such things just don't matter and those newbies should just find out for themselves.
BTW it appears that there is at least some form of credible support regarding the potential risk of portable electronic devices while cycling...
The use and risk of portable electronic devices while cycling among different age groups C. Goldenbeld a, ⁎, M. Houtenbos a , E. Ehlers b , D. De Waard c
Journal of Safety Research, 11 January 2012
But hey, perhaps you should investigate it and then deny their statistical methods or something.
BTW it appears that there is at least some form of credible support regarding the potential risk of portable electronic devices while cycling...
The use and risk of portable electronic devices while cycling among different age groups C. Goldenbeld a, ⁎, M. Houtenbos a , E. Ehlers b , D. De Waard c
Journal of Safety Research, 11 January 2012
But hey, perhaps you should investigate it and then deny their statistical methods or something.
And then there is the little item that the questionnaire only dealt with NL and may or may not have any relevance at all to North American cyclists on North American MUPs or anywhere else in North America.
Have YOU read it? What "obvious truth" was confirmed or revealed to you?
#77
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
I would expect him to stay right, but if he doesn't hear me because of the headphones he could meander left instead of right to avoid a rock, glass, pothole, because he doesn't know/isn't aware that I am passing... What are the chances? I don't know, but the chance is certainly there...
If comments and posts on BF reveal any "obvious truth" it is that pedestrians and cyclists do not necessarily respond to bicycling jargon or speedy cyclists' "communications" as intended.
Cyclists who want to pass safely on crowded MUPS have the responsibility to give sufficient lateral clearance to others and adjust speed accordingly and not depend on "communications" to shave the clearance distance to make high probability unsafe passes.
#78
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,531 Times
in
3,157 Posts
I read the abstract, nothing there to read about their statistical methods and it appears the method used is strictly a questionnaire and the main research questions concerned age differences in the self-reported use of electronic devices while cycling, self-reported crash involvement and risk, and self-reported compensatory behavior. Again the same old creaky study bugaboo arises about measuring risk based only on number of undefined "crashes" (self reported ones at that) with no regards for injury severity. The abstract specified "electronic devices", not listening to devices with headphones. Presumably a goodly number of electronic devices are cell phones which users likely do not use with headphones.
And then there is the little item that the questionnaire only dealt with NL and may or may not have any relevance at all to North American cyclists on North American MUPs or anywhere else in North America.
Have YOU read it? What "obvious truth" was confirmed or revealed to you?
And then there is the little item that the questionnaire only dealt with NL and may or may not have any relevance at all to North American cyclists on North American MUPs or anywhere else in North America.
Have YOU read it? What "obvious truth" was confirmed or revealed to you?
https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-s...l#post17791003 well after you jumped in on the first page and started with your typical denial style.
Hey... if it isn't obvious to you that trying to walk and chew gum can be distracting to some people... then SFW. But it IS the truth... Is it something to worry about... only if you are one of those easily distracted people.
#79
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
Is that a good reason why everybody/anybody else should refrain from a relatively safe activity?
Care to define "SFW"?
#80
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
Of course you don't care, just quote some stats or a reference to some study somewhere and it is irrelevant if it has any relevance or not if the intent is to impress another know-nothing; or just don't bother with stats or evidence or references or facts or anything else that may give credence to your "obvious truths" about bicycling safety. Just state the "obvious truth" with the certainty that self appointed bicycling safety experts exude.
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
BTW, even us slow, cautious cyclists do encounter others who are even slower, the desire to sometimes pass another isn't limited to "speedy" cyclists.
#82
Senior Member
And if any cyclist does hear the "on your left" refrain what are the chances he could meander left in response? Or cyclists (or pedestrians) on a MUP, with or without headphones, might meander any which way at any time whether they are aware of other cyclists or not.
If comments and posts on BF reveal any "obvious truth" it is that pedestrians and cyclists do not necessarily respond to bicycling jargon or speedy cyclists' "communications" as intended.
Cyclists who want to pass safely on crowded MUPS have the responsibility to give sufficient lateral clearance to others and adjust speed accordingly and not depend on "communications" to shave the clearance distance to make high probability unsafe passes.
If comments and posts on BF reveal any "obvious truth" it is that pedestrians and cyclists do not necessarily respond to bicycling jargon or speedy cyclists' "communications" as intended.
Cyclists who want to pass safely on crowded MUPS have the responsibility to give sufficient lateral clearance to others and adjust speed accordingly and not depend on "communications" to shave the clearance distance to make high probability unsafe passes.
#84
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
I would expect him to stay right, but if he doesn't hear me because of the headphones he could meander left instead of right to avoid a rock, glass, pothole, because he doesn't know/isn't aware that I am passing... What are the chances? I don't know, but the chance is certainly there...
Those who understand they're sharing a public resource, and are willing to make compromises in their desires are not the problem. The problem is those who dig their heels in, "taking", "controlling", "blinding", or "insulating" as they see fit in their space on the road, with the demand that others deal with it on their terms.
It stands to reason that if these acts were always entirely benign and reasonable as a few claim, others wouldn't take exception to it.
Sharing takes "we", not just "me".
Last edited by kickstart; 05-10-15 at 05:38 PM.
#85
Senior Member
I think this topic is exactly the same as the helmet topic, depending what side you look at the odds...
1; You increase the chance of bad things happening if you wear headphones...
2; The chance is so small that it doesn't need to be considered...
1; You increase the chance of bad things happening if you wear headphones...
2; The chance is so small that it doesn't need to be considered...
#87
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Th question of headphones is like "taking the lane", in reality its the how, when, and where, plus the attitude of who's doing it that makes all the difference.
Those who understand they're sharing a public resource, and are willing to make compromises in their desires are not the problem. The problem is those who dig their heels in, "taking", "controlling", "blinding", or "insulating" as they see fit in their space on the road, with the demand that others deal with it on their terms.
It stands to reason that if these acts were always entirely benign and reasonable as a few claim, others wouldn't take exception to it.
Sharing takes "we", not just "me".
Those who understand they're sharing a public resource, and are willing to make compromises in their desires are not the problem. The problem is those who dig their heels in, "taking", "controlling", "blinding", or "insulating" as they see fit in their space on the road, with the demand that others deal with it on their terms.
It stands to reason that if these acts were always entirely benign and reasonable as a few claim, others wouldn't take exception to it.
Sharing takes "we", not just "me".
#88
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
Is this civilized common courtesy responsibility related to the responsibility to wave at every stranger who rides a bicycle so that they don't get a case of heinie-hurt??
#89
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
My opinion is wearing headphones while cycling increases risk of crash and injury to some degree. How much, and whether or not this increase is acceptable is up to the individual to decide.
#90
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
Managing risk is based on evaluating the probabilities of various negative events occurring and the likely results if a negative event should occur, then making appropriate decisions. This evaluation does not need to be a formalized procedure and most intelligent people can make these decisions quite well without the assistance of safety nannys braying away with their hyperbolic rhetoric and clichéd safety advice based on exaggerated risk factors/probabilities and unfounded "obvious truths."
#91
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
True, every physical activity involves incurring some degree of risk, even the decision to avoid a physical activity. Mounting a bike and riding down the road, street, MUP, what have you increases the chance of bad things happening on a bike.
Managing risk is based on evaluating the probabilities of various negative events occurring and the likely results if a negative event should occur, then making appropriate decisions. This evaluation does not need to be a formalized procedure and most intelligent people can make these decisions quite well without the assistance of safety nannys braying away with their hyperbolic rhetoric and clichéd safety advice based on exaggerated risk factors/probabilities and unfounded "obvious truths."
Managing risk is based on evaluating the probabilities of various negative events occurring and the likely results if a negative event should occur, then making appropriate decisions. This evaluation does not need to be a formalized procedure and most intelligent people can make these decisions quite well without the assistance of safety nannys braying away with their hyperbolic rhetoric and clichéd safety advice based on exaggerated risk factors/probabilities and unfounded "obvious truths."
#92
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
That is quite true. My point has been all along that some of our well meaning but misguided safety nanny pals are trying to influence other people's decisions by blowing smoke and fabricating facts with no regards for accuracy about comparative risks and alleged dangers of various cycling activities.
#93
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
Amusing yet disgusting anecdotal example,
A headphone wearing jogger who is unaware a cyclist is passing* decides to launch a snot rocket and hits said cyclist in the leg.
*safely, at an appropriate distance and speed.
#94
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
That is quite true. My point has been all along that some of our well meaning but misguided safety nanny pals are trying to influence other people's decisions by blowing smoke and fabricating facts with no regards for accuracy about comparative risks and alleged dangers of various cycling activities.
If your claim was that it can be done safely if thought and effort is put into it, there would be little argument. The thing is, your presentation is that considering the reasons why one should refrain from, or be selective about how, and where its done makes one a "misguided safety nanny". That is nothing more than denial, and a patent falsehood.
Last edited by kickstart; 05-10-15 at 09:58 PM.
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,143
Bikes: Fully customized 11-spd MTB built on 2014 Santa Cruz 5010 frame; Brompton S2E-X 2014; Brompton M3E 2014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What is "accuracy"? How does one formulate an optimal universal cycling strategy between state to state or even area to area?
Given that traffic conditions, road quality, driver attitudes, etc can vary greatly, how does one ever reach an acceptable consensus based on a hodgepodge of "he says, she says"?
Shouldn't most people encourage the inquirer to play it safe and stick to the rules unless they're (intimately) familiar with the route in question?
Given that traffic conditions, road quality, driver attitudes, etc can vary greatly, how does one ever reach an acceptable consensus based on a hodgepodge of "he says, she says"?
Shouldn't most people encourage the inquirer to play it safe and stick to the rules unless they're (intimately) familiar with the route in question?
#96
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kansas
Posts: 2,248
Bikes: This list got too long: several ‘bents, an urban utility e-bike, and a dahon D7 that my daughter has absconded with.
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times
in
48 Posts
As far as headphones, like others here, I sometimes wear one in a single ear to listen to the news (morning edition). However, my commute is short so I generally don't bother. On long rides I will sometimes wear headphones.
#97
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,942
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,511 Times
in
1,027 Posts
What is "accuracy"? How does one formulate an optimal universal cycling strategy between state to state or even area to area?
Given that traffic conditions, road quality, driver attitudes, etc can vary greatly, how does one ever reach an acceptable consensus based on a hodgepodge of "he says, she says"?
Shouldn't most people encourage the inquirer to play it safe and stick to the rules unless they're (intimately) familiar with the route in question?
Given that traffic conditions, road quality, driver attitudes, etc can vary greatly, how does one ever reach an acceptable consensus based on a hodgepodge of "he says, she says"?
Shouldn't most people encourage the inquirer to play it safe and stick to the rules unless they're (intimately) familiar with the route in question?
BF inquirers looking for someone else to make their decisions would be best served with a response along these lines:
It depends on the individual and circumstances and there is no "optimal universal cycling strategy" that applies to your situation. A cyclist might try this way or that way (and this way or that way seems to work OK for the responder) but the inquirer has to use his/her own judgement and make their own decisions.
#98
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 8,951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
12 Posts
FWIW: I like/use Westone UM-1 headphones on the bike. With the right tips they seal well and really decrease wind noise. You can adjust volume to a low comfortable level while stationary and still hear it fine when riding at speed.
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,920
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3344 Post(s)
Liked 1,054 Times
in
634 Posts
To the pro ear bud users I ask, dont you just love the jogger or biker right in the middle of the trail that cant hear your call "on your left"?
Further, as far as safety goes, my ears and my rear view mirror are my primary safety devices. With sight and sound, I hold myself instantly ready to take to the ditch. Drunk drivers, and fools texting are all around us, and we need to be ready to take action at a moments notice.
Further, as far as safety goes, my ears and my rear view mirror are my primary safety devices. With sight and sound, I hold myself instantly ready to take to the ditch. Drunk drivers, and fools texting are all around us, and we need to be ready to take action at a moments notice.
#100
Tortoise Wins by a Hare!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Looney Tunes, IL
Posts: 7,398
Bikes: Wabi Special FG, Raleigh Roper, Nashbar AL-1, Miyata One Hundred, '70 Schwinn Lemonator and More!!
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1549 Post(s)
Liked 941 Times
in
504 Posts
That is quite true. My point has been all along that some of our well meaning but misguided safety nanny pals are trying to influence other people's decisions by blowing smoke and fabricating facts with no regards for accuracy about comparative risks and alleged dangers of various cycling activities.
Thankfully, BF also has a special police task force that seems quite happy monitoring said safety nannies… tirelessly pointing out their infractions in a never ending attempt to keep them in line. Eh, I suppose someone has to do it. Thank you, Sir!