Hacker News Reader

Comment by seanmcdirmid | Hacker News Reader

The statistics don’t lie. Biking in the Netherlands is incredibly safe even without helmet wearing.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09257...

Turns out there are other ways to make cycling safe. One could argue that helmet wearing might make it even safer, but we are talking about optimizing a number that is already very low.

I’ve been to Stanford before and the campus is pretty car free. It is big and mostly flat, so most students have bikes to get from one building to another, but you aren’t speeding around or anything, it’s a very Dutch biking experience.

View on HN

Biking could indeed be even safer in the Netherlands if people wore helmets:

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/neur.2020.0010

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00014...

Arguing that it’s a small optimization is one thing, but that doesn’t mean it’s “not needed”.

No safety steps are needed. The criteria should be whether the cost of the intervention results in more benefit than if that cost was spent elsewhere. If you're going to have no defined ceiling on additional safety measures, the obvious step is to stop bicycling and choose a safer form of transport, or to stop traveling.

Virtually everything can be made safer, including sleeping and breathing. You don't have to prove it. You have to prove its cost-effectiveness.

Is your argument that any small optimization is needed?

Any form of transportation could be made safer with helmets, presumably cars far more so than bikes. Hell, surely some number of people suffer brain injury after falling out of bed. Should we all wear helmets to sleep?

But you look like a dork. And what about your hair?

The discouragement of biking is a big deal in the Netherlands. They’d rather have everyone biking casually than a few dedicated speedsters decked out with the right equipment.

We have these boomer speedsters wearing helmets now, on electric bikes racing through traffic like they were boomers.

We hate 'em.

I presume you meant discouragement of helmets.

> I presume you meant discouragement of helmets.

I assume he didn't - the point is asking people to wear helmets discourages biking. In practice it's overall healthier to not ask people to wear helmets.

Ah, along those lines. Yes, I can confirm there is no discouragement of cycling. Like ever, not even when you are totally drunk.

Having visited Amsterdam once, I'm honestly a little surprised there are so few cycling accidents. The number of bikes is huge and the flow of it looked a bit like a controlled chaos.

The Dutch seem to have understood the street smarts and the unwritten rules of cycling (as applies to their environment) really well, so that probably explains it, along with a cycling-friendly environment.

Remember we learn as very young kids, not only to properly cycle, but also the limits while playing.

I'm sure it's something that becomes instinctive, and that develops best at a young age even if it can be learned a bit later as well.

I don't know if the environment regarding play is somehow different to other European countries so I'm not sure what you mean with that. I believe engaging in play that tests one's limits without risk of serious injury makes a person more aware of one's body and limits, though, and I find it a good idea, too. I wonder if the Dutch have a different culture somehow in that respect.

I also learned to ride a bike as a child, and so do most others where I live, but the culture regarding what's considered safe or typical cycling is somewhat different here.

Traffic and road infrastructure for cycling and cars is radically different from the US. Has anyone attempted to compare cycling injury and death data while controlling for street design, relevant laws, and driver behavior?

> we are talking about optimizing a number that is already very low.

In the US, we have almost zero change of optimizing the factors that are better at reducing not only bicycling but traffic injury and fatalities generally. Americans are so enamored with the personal automobiles that fixing the roads and infrastructure is basically a non-starter. Holding that factor constant, the safety of wearing a helmet starts to become quite significant.

It's difficult to compare it if you also don't compare the culture. If you look are /r/idiotsincars, most of the commenters from the US would be treated as murderous psychopaths, as they can't comprehend people can ride bikes for anything else than sports and they are considered to be "blocking" 4 lane highways.

Yeah, I alluded to that with "driver behavior", which is determined by culture. Those murderously psychopathic car-centric attitudes are part of why the US transportation infrastructure is how it is and why it's so hard to change it. What is it with Americans willingness to allow the most extreme selfish points of view harm the public good?

But the Dutch have experience, from a very young age.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com