fietsbob

Medical question, old people don't bounce back, like kids do..

rosefarts

I have lots of projects in my garage.

daoswald

There is no safe bone density for falling hard from a bike. Any fall involves risk of breaking something, possibly your skull, your elbow, collar bone, some part of your knee, and so on. All hard falls could cause a fracture, even without a bike being involved.

If you are cycling several times a week you're probably in good enough shape that you will still bounce back from a fall even if it involves injury. A person who is mostly sedentary will have a harder time bouncing back from an injury regardless of age.

To borrow a slogan from the pharmaceutical industry, "Ask your doctor if cycling is safe for you." Anything else is arm-chair speculation.

wphamilton

Only if there is already a specific medical condition that is causing concern. Beyond that, the general practitioner may be as uninformed about the risks as the general population, and offering his own speculative and biased opinion. IME.

Kedosto

Bicycling is unsafe. The risk of injury is always present. Virtually every bone in your body is at risk the moment you throw your leg over the top tube. Heck, the dangers in life start the moment you roll out of bed. But then you can't stay in bed forever either, considering the consequences of bed sores. So, in the end, LIVING is unsafe.

You should know that exercise, in all forms, helps improve bone density. Be careful. Wear safety gear and ride safely. Start slowly and build your skills slowly over time. In the end, the odds are overwhelmingly high that you'll be stronger, fitter, healthier and have greater bone density than when you started. And perfectly safe from bed sores.


-Kedosto

rydabent

You really have to feel sorry for Maelochs, he and many others have been brain washed by the UCI and bike mfg to remain stuck in 1890. Many advances have been made since 1890 like recumbents, and recumbent tadpole trikes.

My suggestion for the OP going to a trike is very logical. It is low and safe. It would seem to be the answer to the concern of the OP.

Maelochs

Well, sir, thank you for answering my question.

The obvious answer is, "Rydabent is about as thick as three bricks."

According to you, I am So Brainwashed ... wait for it .... so Totally Conditioned to Hate 'Bents ... it's coming ... So Completely Unable to Accept 'Bents ...

that I

Went online and checked out every rental and sales place within 100 miles, trying to find a tadpole trike to rent.

Yeah, that is a Sure sign I am opposed to recumbents. Dead giveaway.

Recumbents can be expensive ... and I am not interested in buying a crappy trike (or a crappy trike kit--- I looked into them as well) only to learn what I should have bought.

I went to the Recumbent forum, and everyone there recommended test-riding because 'bents were So different, it took a while to figue out was best for each rider.

I have even sent You, Mr. Rydabent, several personal messages saying I was interested in 'bents and was just ribbing you online.

But ... Thick As Three Bricks.

Seriously, Rydabent ... learn some reading skills, Stop yelling at clouds. Take your medication, and go for a ride.

Well done, sir.

Machka 

They say that good muscle strength really helps protect the body from injury ... or at least makes recovery better.

I'd recommend strength training and other activities the build muscle.

Maelochs

Improved general strength and fitness is a good think even if you don't fall ... he said, hoping he, too, was wise enough to follow Machka's advice.

VtwinVince

I got taken out by black ice at age 54, low speed incident which resulted in multiple fractures and massive soft tissue damage. The surgeon said that I should have had the accident 30 years ago as far as recovery goes. As others have stated, it's all about your perceived, acceptable level of risk.

Darth Lefty 

Rollfast

Other than dinging a toe up walking in the house and jamming something (not major) I've never had a broken bone.

It's my brain that's busted.

b88

There's a video on You Tube, The World's first airbag for cyclists.

rydabent

People that argue against bents and trikes are infected with the Henry Ford syndrome. He would have us still driving Model Ts. The Henry Fords of the cycling world would have people riding only DF bikes forever. Ford has been surpassed and so have DF bikes. It may be amazing news but there is a whole new world out there, and it DOES include bents and trikes. Especially when they are the answer to some peoples riding needs.

rosefarts

Rydabent,

I don't have an issue with bents, never have. I've known some friends who made the transition. I see them on the road and don't jerk the steering wheel into them or anything.

I don't ride one and if my back health allows it, I probably won't.

I think your comments are fighting words though. You are basically saying that all upright bikes are obsolete. That upright riders hate all bents. That we're all brainwashed. That's BS and you know it.

99% of people who ride for more than transportation love seeing other riders out there. Nobody cares what they ride. You can't carve corners, blast up switchbacks, and maneuver a sub 20lb bike through the washboards and water bars of life in an aerodynamic lawn chair.

I wouldn't ride if roads were flat and smooth. I have no idea how or why the Midwest does it.

Not a hater here, just a guy in the right machine for the job.

wphamilton

It is true that the low riding variants of recumbent bikes place you at a lower height, which cuts down the impact if you fall. Maybe a lower bone density would be safe on a fall from the 'bent. Question is, at what level of bone density, if any, is it "unsafe" to fall from the upright bike but not unsafe to fall from the 'bent? Even better, what would be the range of densities where that holds? Within that range, how much less likely would you be to break a bone in a fall?

If it's a narrow range or not much change in risk, there wouldn't be much point from that perspective. If it's a wide range and a significant change in risk, the 'bent would be worthwhile.

Koyote

This.

An old friend of mine once had a nasty spill while riding. He is 7+ feet tall and was probably around 300 lbs. With that much mass falling from such a height, it was no surprise that he ended up with a very badly broken hip. A much smaller rider might have just jumped back on the bike and kept riding.

bobwysiwyg

..and terminal as well.

rydabent

Dont get me wrong. If you race you have to use an approved DF bike. If you ride hills or in the mountains, of course you have to have a mountain bike.

But in the situation the OP presented, it seems only logical that the suggestion of a trike is a good solution. However some seem to think that I shouldnt post that suggestion. But in this case quite probably a trike just might be at least considered.

Oh BTW yes on a trike falling is a remote thing, and even on black ice, probably the worse that will happen is you will get sideways for a couple of seconds. And---------------------on my "aerodynamic lawn chair" I can ride all day long with no pain.

BlazingPedals

If you're going to fall, it's better to fall from lower.

zaqwert6

There is none., density is not the only factor that contributes to the likelihood of a fracture.

McBTC

It's a bit of a loaded question... the connotation of 'catastrophic' is that, you're 'gonna get hurt real bad... but, in any event, it won't ever make much sense to ride a bike on ice or you're just looking for trouble.

rydabent

Great picture of why the OP might be better off and have less worry if on a bent or a trike.

wphamilton

BTW, this risk chart is produced from the risk calculator link I showed earlier. I believe that it answers OP's question completely, if he's still reading the thread.

Yes, there are other factors involved in the risk, but bone density is ONE of the factors that DOES relate to the risk.



Average density, my own age height and weight