Originally Posted by
Six jours
Tell it to all the folks on this forum who have posted something along the lines of "and when I realized I'd forgotten my helmet I turned around and
very carefully rode back to my car to get it." I mean, it is
courage for your head, after all.
That would be undiplomatic. But I have several times suggested riding without a helmet every once in awhile, for this same reason. So that we don't become psychologically dependent on it. Generally, if I've been wearing a helmet consistently, I'll feel vulnerable for five or ten minutes and when that feeling passes I'm riding exactly as normal.
Originally Posted by
Six jours
Hell, the entire debate ignores the fact that there are different kinds of bicycling. It would be very convenient if we could quantify some general "danger of cycling" figure, but it should be obvious that the downhill mountain bike racer and the ex-pro doddling around on the bike path and the Copenhagener on his way to work have essentially nothing in common but two wheels.
We're discussing driving risk vs cycling risk in the last few posts, so it's only about the kind of bicycling that corresponds to a trip taken in a passenger car. At least I am - njkayaker broadens the scope to all varieties of driving vs the total amount of bicycle miles so you have a point regarding that side of it.
Originally Posted by
Six jours
One reason the Dutch injury rate is low is because they mostly ride at around walking speed. So much for the helmeteer argument that it's not speed but rather distance to the ground.
I would say that their lower speeds make accidents less likely (along with their infrastructure, shorter commutes, milder weather and different traffic patterns but that's another debate). The "helmeteer argument" is that the impact with the horizontal ground is independent of bicycle speed, or car speed. Two different factors.