copenhagencyclechic.com
Well, this was an interesting find.
A study published in the March 2007 issue of Accident Analysis & Prevention stated that drivers drove an average of 8.5 cm closer, and came within 1 meter 23% more often, when a cyclist was wearing a helmet.From the report:
The closer a driver is to the cyclist, the greater chance of a collision.
The bicyclist’s apparel affects the amount of clearance the overtaking motorist gives the bicyclist.
This research thus implies risk compensation, not among cyclists but among fellow road users.
News article
The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Accident Analysis and Prevention, which is connected with the Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine.
5 comments:
Facebook friend #1:
dont get me wrong about what im about to say (I am avid biker and would love a world with more bikes and less cars).. but come on, when something is sourced wikipedia and is likely written by a tree huggin corporate hating bike messenger, i would take it with a grain of salt...
the article's good for a laugh though..
Facebook friend #1:
the source seems surprising legit though, which is a first for these types of articles
Evan:
Wikipedia is only cited as the source of the little summary.
The report is from the peer-reviewed journal, Accident Analysis & Prevention, which is associated with the Association for Advancement of Automotive Medicine.
Since your initial reaction was so wrong about this report, perhaps it was wrong about other of 'these types of articles'.
Most of theme come from reputable medical journals.
I think this is the weakest argument I have ever heard for not wearing a helmet while riding a bicycle. If you actually read the article that you reference (in which all experiments take place on English roadways, not in Canada), it shows that distance from the edge of the road plays a much bigger role in the closeness of drivers overtaking bicyclists than wearing or not wearing a helmet. In fact, at a distance of 1m from the edge of the road, the data shows the opposite trend where cars passed closer to bicyclists WEARING A HELMET as opposed to not wearing a helmet. Hardly convincing evidence. All this research shows is that if we ride as far to right as possible, wearing a helmet or not, cars are less likely to pass close by to a cyclist.
1. If you've read my previous articles on helmet legislation, I don't care to make a big deal of this issue.
2. I actually read the article.
3. Yes, distance from the edge of the road -- of course -- had the greatest effect of distance to vehicle. Durrrr....
4. However, helmet-wearing also had an effect.
5. The first does not nullify the second.
6. "The data shows the opposite trend where cars passed closer to bicyclists WEARING A HELMET as opposed to not wearing a helmet."
Was that a typo on your part or...?
7. No, this evidence supports previous risk-management findings, in which perceptions of safety relate to risk-taking behaviour.
Obviously you didn't read the article if you are accusing me of making a typo! This is a direct quote from the paper:
"This is
perhaps best seen in Fig. 2, which shows a rider is more likely
to experience particularly tight passing events when wearing a
helmet, and that this effect increases as riding position moves
from the edge of the road towards the centre.The exception
to this is the 1m point where the helmet effect was absent. At
present, we have no explanation for this anomaly, although it
seems possible it is related to the fact that on many roads, the
1m position would be the first to require car drivers to cross the
central dividing line when overtaking." I could send you an image of figure 2 if you would like to inspect the data yourself.
Also, when the author put a wig on (it was not his apparel, just the length of his hair was changed), he was given even wider berth than when not wearing a helmet...so perhaps all male cyclists should consider a sex change or grow their hair long for optimal safety on the road.
Hi Jonquille,
I was not accusing. I was asking, hence my question mark. I assumed it was a typo, based on your point.
(I could not access the full article; only read multiple summaries of the study, including what you are sharing.)
"a rider is more likely to experience particularly tight passing events when wearing a helmet, and that this effect increases as riding position moves from the edge of the road towards the centre. The exception to this is the 1m point where the helmet effect was absent."
You are saying that, because there's no effect at the 1m point, the effect is nullified everywhere else?
I am sorry, but your conclusions are the ones that do not follow.
Sex change. Yeah, what I am saying is comparable to that hypebole.... Nice.
Post a Comment
Two things:
1) A lot of discussion about this site happens on facebook; so, I would recommend finding the site (link on the right sidebar) and me there.
2) I'm experimenting with non-sign-in commenting to encourage more discussion (the 2 minutes it takes to create a google/other account seems like too much trouble).
Being 'anonymous' is pretty lame, so at least make up a fake name to use.