Bikeshare users-- what are you doing about helmets?

(this would be a good use of a poll feature if there was one, so users could respond anonymously)

I have not yet made use of Divvy but will very likely be perusing Denver's B-Cycle on an upcoming trip.... looking to travel light and not excited about dragging a helmet along... plus the friend I'm going with doesn't own one as far as I know.

So are you generally carrying a helmet around with you? Or have you just got comfortable going without? Or some other solution I am not touching on?

Thx.

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joe Studer 8.0 mi on August 13, 2013 at 10:54am

To be fair, your response was kind of snarky, and did not demonstrate a lot of constructive working through the posts.

h' 1.0 said:

Oh, put a lid on it.

I am genuinely trying to work through this-- and my own assumptions were challenged by some of the responses.

And yours are dead wrong.

Can't you just not post if you're having one of your "I hate humanity" days?

Duppie 13.5185km said:

The working theory is that if you are going to do something and you have made up your mind on how you will be doing it, you should not ask for advice on The Chainlink. You run the risk that people will give advice that upsets your belief system causing you to have to respond in a snarky way.

h' 1.0 said:

So the working theory is that riding fast and "unrelaxed" is likely to result in a meeting between one's head and the ground, rather than riding in mixed vehicular traffic?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on August 13, 2013 at 12:12pm

As I unsuccessfully tried to point out, I'm not getting exactly where the "odds of a crash are lower." Asking for clarification as I personally consider intermingling with cars to be the main risk to one's head, and the speed of the auto, not the rider to be the primary determinant of the outcome of a crash.

Cameron 7.5 mi said:

Helmet use is always a bit of a cost benefit analysis. Helmets offer the benefit of protection in the event of a crash at the cost of dealing with the hassle carrying a helmet around. With Divvy I don't usually view the helmet as worth it both because as others have discussed the odds of a crash are perceived to be lower, therefore reducing the benefit of a helmet and the cost is higher because carrying a helmet around when not riding is a hassle. On normal bike I typically wear a helmet partially because I perceive the risks as higher and therefore the benefit greater, but mostly because the cost is lower. I can simply lock my helmet up with my bike, making it hardly a hassle at all, therefore any benefit makes it worth it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on August 13, 2013 at 12:20pm

We're doing AirBnB.... I guess there's a chance our hosts may have extras...

flying one of those super low budget airlines where they ding you for everything so leaning very very strongly against bringin any along.

Was a lot of the riding on faster streets or does Denver have a reasonably extensive network of quasi-protected bike facilities?

Justin B Newman said:

When my wife and I flew to Denver last year, we took helmets along, and used B-Cycle extensively. I felt a bit silly flying helmets across the country, but I'm much more comfortable with a helmet than without. The time or two I left my hotel room without, I felt naked. For what it's worth, I din't ride around Denver without a shirt on, either. :-D

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on August 13, 2013 at 12:29pm

I don't want to put words in your mouth h, but if the point of starting this thread is to advise everyone that based on your experience and perception, all Divvy users should wear helmets all the time, you should just say that.

It should be noted that bike share programs in cities which have mandatory helmet laws (Aukland, Brisbane, Melbourne) are far less successful than those that do not (NYC, DC, Chicago). Seattle is wrestling with the issue even as we speak.

h' 1.0 said:

As I unsuccessfully tried to point out, I'm not getting exactly where the "odds of a crash are lower." Asking for clarification as I personally consider intermingling with cars to be the main risk to one's head, and the speed of the auto, not the rider to be the primary determinant of the outcome of a crash.

Cameron 7.5 mi said:

Helmet use is always a bit of a cost benefit analysis. Helmets offer the benefit of protection in the event of a crash at the cost of dealing with the hassle carrying a helmet around. With Divvy I don't usually view the helmet as worth it both because as others have discussed the odds of a crash are perceived to be lower, therefore reducing the benefit of a helmet and the cost is higher because carrying a helmet around when not riding is a hassle. On normal bike I typically wear a helmet partially because I perceive the risks as higher and therefore the benefit greater, but mostly because the cost is lower. I can simply lock my helmet up with my bike, making it hardly a hassle at all, therefore any benefit makes it worth it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin B Newman on August 13, 2013 at 12:36pm

The only riding that was NOT on faster streets (near the downtown convention center, and in the areas between there and the zoo, botanic gardens, and capitol) was on the path running along the river... the Platte River Trail. As a mixed use path, it has its own hazards. IIRC, the only on-street bicycle-specific facilities we used were unprotected, unbuffered bicycle lanes.

Generally, we felt that traffic was more accommodating to bicycles than Chicago traffic. That may, of course, have just been perception. Or a Mary-poppins-esque response to the bike share bicycles.

As a side note, the Platte River Trail was a lovely urban hideaway.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Studer 8.0 mi on August 13, 2013 at 12:57pm

I don't actually know that the odds of a crash are lower. I just perceive them to be lower. All other factors of my ride are essentially the same when I ride a Divvy. However, me being on a Divvy is different and the way I ride the Divvy is different, and that greatly changes my perception of risk.

If there were something that demonstrated that my risks of an accident on a Divvy were equal to or greater than my risks of an accident when I ride my other bikes, that might change my perception, and cause me to lug the helmet around.

Or, if there were some ultra-portable helmet that I could just fold up and keep in my bag, that might change the calculus. I would likely not use some sort of shared helmet that might be available with the shared Divvy bike. Putting the helmet on my head makes it much too personal for me to want to use a helmet that who-knows-whom-or-what was also using.

h' 1.0 said:

As I unsuccessfully tried to point out, I'm not getting exactly where the "odds of a crash are lower." Asking for clarification as I personally consider intermingling with cars to be the main risk to one's head, and the speed of the auto, not the rider to be the primary determinant of the outcome of a crash.

Cameron 7.5 mi said:

Helmet use is always a bit of a cost benefit analysis. Helmets offer the benefit of protection in the event of a crash at the cost of dealing with the hassle carrying a helmet around. With Divvy I don't usually view the helmet as worth it both because as others have discussed the odds of a crash are perceived to be lower, therefore reducing the benefit of a helmet and the cost is higher because carrying a helmet around when not riding is a hassle. On normal bike I typically wear a helmet partially because I perceive the risks as higher and therefore the benefit greater, but mostly because the cost is lower. I can simply lock my helmet up with my bike, making it hardly a hassle at all, therefore any benefit makes it worth it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by BruceBikes on August 13, 2013 at 1:21pm

In 15 years of downtown bike commuting, I have been in several crashes (say 8-12). In one of them, I even smacked my helmeted head hard enough on the pavement to make me a little woozy. (Good thing I was wearing a helmet, right?) In all of those crashes, however, I perceive the primary factor leading to the crash to be my own speed and risk taking (e.g. cutting between rows of traffic, riding too fast for conditions, disobeying traffic control devices, etc.) and not the presence and speed of autos.

Over the years, I have slowed down quite a bit and take far fewer risks, and my crash rate has definitely gone down (to basically zero.) Divvy further reduces my speed and increases my risk aversion.

While I have no data to back it up, I perceive my odds of getting into a crash on a Divvy to be far lower, by the nature of how I ride, than the odds of crashing on my own lightweight bike. By extension, the risk I associate of getting into a crash on a Divvy does not outweigh the inconvenience of carrying a helmet when I otherwise would not.

And before someone compares that inconvenience against a lifetime of disability, I'd like to compare this risk against the risk of sustaining a head injury during a bus or train crash, or by falling or being hit as a pedestrian on the sidewalk, or falling down the steps at home. These things definitely happen, but no one questions the lack of protection in those cases.

Is cycling that much more risky, that we should be wearing a helmet no matter what? I would argue that for some people in some cases, no, it is not. In lieu of hard data to review, each individual must decide for themselves.

h' 1.0 said:

As I unsuccessfully tried to point out, I'm not getting exactly where the "odds of a crash are lower." Asking for clarification as I personally consider intermingling with cars to be the main risk to one's head, and the speed of the auto, not the rider to be the primary determinant of the outcome of a crash.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Duppie on August 13, 2013 at 1:25pm

Ah, now your response starts to make sense.

I think that if I ride more relaxed the odds of a crash are indeed lower. I think the risk is largest at intersections. More than once when trying to make the yellow light on my regular bike, I have nearly been hit by car wanting to turn (left cross). By deferring to that car, I minimize one potential risk point. And I like to think that when I am using Divvy I do ride more relaxed, since I mainly use Divvy for leisurely destinations (to go to that nice lunch place, or a date with my wife, for example)

Before you respond, keep in mind that this is my opinion. It is not backed up by any research. And you are free to ignore it.

But then again, can you point to research that validates your assumption that the odds of a crash are the same or similar across all types of bikes?

h' 1.0 said:

As I unsuccessfully tried to point out, I'm not getting exactly where the "odds of a crash are lower." Asking for clarification as I personally consider intermingling with cars to be the main risk to one's head, and the speed of the auto, not the rider to be the primary determinant of the outcome of a crash.

Cameron 7.5 mi said:

Helmet use is always a bit of a cost benefit analysis. Helmets offer the benefit of protection in the event of a crash at the cost of dealing with the hassle carrying a helmet around. With Divvy I don't usually view the helmet as worth it both because as others have discussed the odds of a crash are perceived to be lower, therefore reducing the benefit of a helmet and the cost is higher because carrying a helmet around when not riding is a hassle. On normal bike I typically wear a helmet partially because I perceive the risks as higher and therefore the benefit greater, but mostly because the cost is lower. I can simply lock my helmet up with my bike, making it hardly a hassle at all, therefore any benefit makes it worth it.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on August 13, 2013 at 4:53pm

You know, I'm just trying to figure out what to do here. I'm leaning towards skipping the helmet but not thrilled about the idea.

I have no idea how it was determined that I was attempting to use chainlink to conduct a scientific research study*. Were I to do so, I would certainly have the courtesy to make sure Julie got a slice of the grant money.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on August 13, 2013 at 4:55pm

...*or a helmet awareness campaign...

Kevin C said:

I don't want to put words in your mouth h, but if the point of starting this thread is to advise everyone that based on your experience and perception, all Divvy users should wear helmets all the time, you should just say that.it worth it.