Bicycle Culture of Boulder - why no helmets? (Denver, Aspen: live, dangerous)

[delta07]

Originally Posted by maulotaur

Being "behind the...coasts" sounds like a plus for freedom of choice here. Forcing people to do what you (and some other people decide) is "evolving" tyranny. While you can advise and present statistics all you want, in the end you should not be making that decision for me. If I choose to wear one, then I will do so or not based on my beliefs and conclusions.

True, but when taxpayer dollars are spent for yours or others medical care because of an accident, then the choice becomes obvious.

[brk330]

check out this page about Netherlands bike culture

I must admit I do not use a helmet. I also am not a road biker or mountain biker. I live in NH now where bike culture means spandex robots or homeless people. There seems to be no middle ground. To me the bike is a tool to get me to work/post office/store/etc. or maybe just a neighborhood tootle. I truly miss the townie bike culture of Colorado.

[a bag of it]

The reason the spandex crew wears helmets is because they're typically going a lot faster and they are obviously invested in the sport and realize the risks.

[Scott5280]

I thank God I was never severely injured; used to race up and down places like Super J , Flagstaff, Ward rountinely flying nearly 60 downhill passing cars like they were standing still without a helmet.."oh to be a young hard headed jackass again."

[katzenfreund]

closed until further notice...

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by katzenfreund

closed until further notice...

Thanks for stopping the bickering. Everyone please chill out.

I reconfigured this thread to be about BICYCLES only.

[oulous]

This is an interesting discussion. In general as it relates to risk and injury there is an argument to be made that helmets actually increase your chance of injury when on a bicycle. Like many things it depends on the person doing the riding.

Many of the safety measures we put in place alter our natural behavior and make us behaviorally increase our desire for risk. Wearing a helmet might make you less cautious than not wearing a helmet and actually increase your chance of getting into an accident.

This analogy of risk works in many facets of life... for example if wall street knows its going to be bailed out then its likely people are going to take even bigger financial risks. When there is a threat of loss you tend to be more cautious and riding a bike helmetless might make you more aware and cautious of your surroundings.

Analytical risk profiling doesn't work for everything but its plausible in this case for the average rider in a city like Boulder helmets might make you a more dangerous rider.

[Katiana]

Originally Posted by oulous

This is an interesting discussion. In general as it relates to risk and injury there is an argument to be made that helmets actually increase your chance of injury when on a bicycle. Like many things it depends on the person doing the riding.

Many of the safety measures we put in place alter our natural behavior and make us behaviorally increase our desire for risk. Wearing a helmet might make you less cautious than not wearing a helmet and actually increase your chance of getting into an accident.

This analogy of risk works in many facets of life... for example if wall street knows its going to be bailed out then its likely people are going to take even bigger financial risks. When there is a threat of loss you tend to be more cautious and riding a bike helmetless might make you more aware and cautious of your surroundings.

Analytical risk profiling doesn't work for everything but its plausible in this case for the average rider in a city like Boulder helmets might make you a more dangerous rider.

Sorry, but that is an excuse for not wearing a helmet, not a good reason. All the research shows that helmets are protective.

The helmet-less riders in Boulder seem to take plenty of risks, the first of which is riding w/o a helmet. In addition, they weave in and out of traffic, ride the wrong way on the streets (even two way streets, go figure), and much more.

[oulous]

Yes helmets are protective, you can not dispute that but do they decrease the number of accidents?

Try to see the difference here.

You are talking about injury while I am talking about accidents.

I am not on the side of yes or no helmets but the math of statistics, risk and human behavior. In general many things we do to make ourselves safe cause us to be more reckless.

Currently I live in Amsterdam in the Netherlands and no one, I mean no one wears a helmet here for day to day biking.

Nationally the total of bicycle accident deaths hovers around 200.
In Amsterdam about 6 people die in bike-related accidents yearly.
16 million Dutch own 18 million bikes.
About half the population of the NL rides a bike once a day.
The average distance traveled by bike per person per day was 2.5km in 2006.
The bicycle is used for almost a quarter of all journeys, and 35% of journeys below 7.5km.

By those stats the deaths per year are very low. If you can instill a culture of biking then helmets are not necessary as it becomes like any other chance death
you might have.

For example you can be walking on a 3 foot high wall, fall off and die. If you were wearing a helmet you probably wouldn't die but you don't need a helmet to
walk on a wall.

[DressageRider]

I'm all for instilling a culture of biking (especially here in Bikemont -- did you know Longmont's mayor pronounced that Longmont be called Bikemont for June 2012? Yep, it is true.) But we really have a long way to go. Cars rule the roads in America. Bike culture is ingrained in the Dutch (from what I can tell). It just isn't like that in our sprawling country.

But honestly, I'm less worried about getting hit by a car, then just bumbling my way through a pot hole or on some loose gravel and falling down in the road. I'm a klutz! I would prefer to have a few scrapes and bruises rather than brain damage.