10 Cycling Myths That Are Total LIES
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 05. 2024
- 10 strange cycling myths, busted.
Some sources referenced in the video below:
Some great studies on base layers here: www.theproscloset.com/blogs/n...
Helmet study here: news.flinders.edu.au/blog/202...
Cade Media Podcast: podfollow.com/the-wild-ones/view
SUPPORT Francis Cade and Cade Media directly:
Via Patreon: / franciscade
Via our clothing brand WILD: wearethewildones.co.uk/collec...
AFFILIATE LINKS
GoPro GRILL Mount: www.prostandard.com/?ref=0Wo1...
GoPro Hero 11: prf.hn/l/ryjmwQn
Tiny Insta360: www.insta360.com/sal/go_2?ins...
Bigger Insta360: www.insta360.com/sal/one_x2?i…
Styrkr: 25% off your first order with FCADE25 bit.ly/36WrFyn
Silca: 13% off with code CADE13 silcavelo.eu/
Thanks to our CHANNEL SPONSORS:
Attacus Cycling
Fidlock
Garmin
Hutchinson Tyres
Parcours Wheels
Tailfin
Scott
Silca
Styrkr - Sport
As a person working in an ICU: most neuro-trauma (brain damage) patients we see are people who fell from a bicycle without a helmet. Don't spread the idea that somehow a helmet is more dangerous.
Bingo. I saw a cyclist somehow fall down between two parked vehicles and he was going at less than 15 kms/hr. He was on the ground bleeding from the ears.
I damaged 2 helmets in accidents, both my fault and neither involving cars. I shudder to think what would have happened to my head if I hadn;t been wearing a helmet.
Perfect! They assume the only risk for a cytlist is being hit by a car, which is not. And even if a cyclist do get hit by a car, using a helmet reduces the chance of serious head injury.
@@texugooooo Agree. You sometimes see a dent in the middle of the windshield caused by the head of someone who was hit by the car.
Absolutely agreed. Motorists demonizing cyclists because of a helmet or a highviz has nothing to so with helmet protecting your head and brains. Simply two very different facts. We had a guy die last year by just falling off the bike without a helmet. Very pointless and stupid way to die. And the price of that death? Even a cheap helmet for 50.- would have kept him alive. I will not ride with anyone without a helmet, absolute nonesense.
I’m sorry, but saying that bike helmets make you safer “is a myth” - based on just one study concerning drivers’ psychology in one particular part of the world and pertaining to just one aspect of safety (vehicle collision) - is just a bad thing to do. Especially considering this channel’s popularity and how this may affect people who don’t know better
I think that the study is more focused on psychology and perception of human beings on a bike than safety in general. That is what I understand.
@@Vixen1525 Which is why it's wrong to say that it's a myth that bike helmets are safer. They completely missed the point of the study.
Spot on. I would need to see it replicated, but even if it is, people crash for MANY reasons.
Lmao regardless of why the crash happened, you're going to be better off without a cracked skull.
Well said, and many of us don’t ride on roads, so it’s irrelevant to those.
NHS paramedic here, firmly disagree with the notion that helmets don't make you safer. In my experience, and I'm conscious that that's skewed towards the more severe end of the spectrum, is that a helmet probably won't save your life in an accident; if an impact is serious enough to kill you, a helmet probably won't be able to mitigate it enough to prevent it killing you. There are exceptions, but that's my general impression.
What helmets are fantastic for is reducing the severity of injuries suffered from an impact, since they absorb much of the energy that would otherwise be transmitted to your head, reducing the chances of a major traumatic brain injury. This is expecially true in children, who crash more frequently that adults, and ride at lower speed and are therefore less likely to experience the massive impacts that kill them outright. Additionaly children are often incapable of understanding the potential lifelong consequences of deciding not to wear a helmet, and so should be encouraged to wear them every time they ride their bike. Adults should be allowed to do what they want, but should ensure that they're aware of the risks before making a decision.
Helmets do make you safer, it's been empirically proven in crash tests and clinical studies. Clearly that's not the complete picture; if drivers see someone on a bicycle as less human because they're wearing a helmet then I'd suggest that needs addressing, but I think it's unwise to draw a conclusion that helmets don't make you safer because of it.
well perhaps people should avoid crash tests then, like having working brakes and knowing how to use them safely.
I’m a neurosurgeon who also a roadie and ride my bicycle to work. I’ve been promoting the use of helmets as a very important safety equipment, including educating a bike to work community in my country that uses that same research about helmet that this video mentioned.
Helmet helps absorb and softening the impact when you fall on your head, reducing the risk of a more severe head injury than when you don’t wear one.
Other road users that tend to have more aggressive behavior when they see helmet-wearing cyclists doesn’t mean helmets are not safe, that means we need to educate other road users to be aware of cyclists on the road and the importance of road safety.
@@Risayogi helmets can reduce not avoid serious head injury. Just the same as a hand.
@@mikewade777 exactly what i said. reducing the risk of a more serious head injury.
@@Risayogi Makes more sense to reduce risk of accident, a work colleague wasn't saved by his helmet.
Regarding helmets, you quoted a study about perception of cyclists, not the effects of crashing with a helmet vs no helmet. Spend some time in a pediatric trauma and rehab center and the importance of helmets becomes very apparent.
Totally agree @chiro75, I'm sure if I didn't have a helmet on, for one or two of my numerous tumbles I'd have had a concussion or 2. Perception is certainly not harder or softer than concrete or tarmac.
Totally agree
The move towards mandatory helmet laws in Australia was actually spearheaded by ER docs.
In the Netherlands, for over a decade, there has been a push for MHL from the same.
And, if one were to read the comments in FB groups with older cyclists it is OMG how many stories of "my bike helmet saved my life" you will hear.
@Chiro75 Agreed. Such a huge misunderstanding of the actual study and science.
I would also assume, that on average, those with helmets on are riding faster, more often, and further than those without helmets, increasing injury incidence in helmeted riders.
Regarding helmets, I've gone back and read some of the original articles, including the one mentioned by Jimmy. And there is a MAJOR weakness that is acknowledged by the authors of the study themselves. The design of the study requires something referred to as a "forced choice. And rather than write a lot about the problems of interpretation this presents, I will simply paste what the authors themselves have to say about it:
"We must also acknowledge the possibility that this study was assessing a selection preference other than dehumanisation. While each comparison asked the respondent to choose the image they felt looked less human, the forced choice approach may have led to the respondents making their selection based on some other consideration. The results are clear that the respondents were indicating a preference for the different attire types (we would observe a more random pattern in the results if this did not exist), but there is a possibility that the observed pattern in selections is a matter of more general aesthetics or some other aspect, rather than dehumanisation as asked."
Let me also add that the study found the same phenomenon when people were wearing ANY clothing that was a little out of the unusual, such as a highly colored visible vest. In other words, it wasn't just a helmet that made people choose that photo as the "less human" of a pair that was presented. And other control images should have been presented. I'm a scientist myself, and while I don't do work anything like this, I am trained to look at data and examine multiple explanations for the underlying pattern. Journalists who wrote about this study clearly don't have this instinct. They just jumped on helmets. I am utterly unconvinced. And let me just reiterate that there's a lot of different ways you can crash and suffer from a head injury that have nothing to do with cars.
This needs more likes.
The study is bullshit. You can reference a huge stack of studies from the motorbike side that confirm that helmets save lives and the more you stand out in terms of visibility the less likely you are to be hit by a car driver. Not a huge difference on the road between a cyclist and a motorcyclist, other than the speeds, and the cyclists tendency to ignore traffic laws (at least in the US).
The helmets are there for a reason and it makes sense so it cushion the impact, but the video addresses the issue of wearing a helmet and the problem with that is the other road users think unconsciously that the cyclist is more protected so they aren't as careful when for example overtaking and getting too close with their car, on the other hand cyclists can get a false sense of safety and ride in a more risky way that they wouldn't do if the helmet wasn't on their head, I think talking about these points is very important so that people know the perception of "false" safety (the safety is there of course when wearing the helmet, but if the risk increases the same amount then wearing a helmet is going it get the same risk score as not waring the helmet, I hope you get my point).
Either way, wear your helmets and ride as carefully as you're not wearing a helmet.
This quote reads as though this was a psychology study and not a real public health study
@@princedoge4586 Correct. And not a well designed psychology study.
Absolutely 110% disagree with the helmet deal. The aggressive twits aren't the problem as they seldom actually drive into you (although in South Africa I have actually been attacked) it's the inattentive idiots who are more interested in their phones than the traffic. All the accidents I've had (except for the attack) are the result of inattention or just plain stupidity. I have smashed a helmet into several pieces and was unconcious for a long time - PLEASE! NEVER sling your leg over a bike without a helmet on your head. The anticycle just hate bikes period - whether you are wearing a helmet or not makes no difference to them - they are just hateful evil "people". Thankfully they are a minority.
The helmets are there for a reason and it makes sense so it cushion the impact, but the video addresses the issue of wearing a helmet and the problem with that is the other road users think unconsciously that the cyclist is more protected so they aren't as careful when for example overtaking and getting too close with their car, on the other hand cyclists can get a false sense of safety and ride in a more risky way that they wouldn't do if the helmet wasn't on their head, I think talking about these points is very important so that people know the perception of "false" safety (the safety is there of course when wearing the helmet, but if the risk increases the same amount then wearing a helmet is going it get the same risk score as not waring the helmet, I hope you get my point).
Either way, wear your helmets and ride as carefully as you're not wearing a helmet.
Would a football player go into a game without his helmet on? Would a hockey player? Tell them it's irresponsible to make such a statement Greg.
As one who has been in a few crashes - one involving a car door. I don't care how people see me with a helmet on, or if its cool, or if people
don't want to wear one. I wear one to protect myself and any person on a bike who has any sense and knows the sorts of injuries you could sustain
without a helmet vs. the simple act of wearing one... It's clear to me that wearing a helmet is the way to go.
Wear a helmet, don’t ride in the door zone
I was hit by a car turning abruptly infront of me. Went over the the bonnet and smashed my fave up. Helmet very little visible damage. After that I was really considering riding my race bike in my fullface helmet to work.
@rob-c. Unfortunately, it's not that simple; no one can control the actions of others. I thought i was out of the door zone, couldn't get out of the way due to a rider boxing me in on the left and no one expects a young lady to suddenly throw her door open fully (all at once) into the roadway, either.
@@fennec13 It is that simple - you don’t ride in the door zone 🤷♂️
Not being able to know if someone is going to open a door, is the whole point
@@rob-c. I see, so you were there ? and know all the road conditions at the time ? You don't even know if i was on the street or in a bike lane lined on one side by cars. Spare the cute advice of "stay out of the way of doors" BS. Let's just agree that people SHOULD be wearing helmets because unforeseen sh!t does happen, even for you, boss ! That was MY point.
As an engineer, enforcing PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) is literally the last ditch measure to take in risk mitigation (because it is the least effective measure).
The order from most effective to least is as follows:
1. Eliminate the hazard (physically remove the hazard)
2. Replace the hazard (with something less dangerous)
3. Engineering controls (isolate people from the hazard)
4. Administrative controls (Change the way people interact with the hazard)
5. PPE (Protect the user with equipment)
The reason people in the Netherlands often ride without helmets is because a lot of the risks have been mitigated with the first four measures. Speeds are lower (due to more relaxed bike geometry and almost no elevation), cars are often physically separated from bicycles (mandatory from certain speeds on), driving license includes how to drive around lots of bicycles (The Dutch reach when exiting a car), and so on.
And yes, when you do crash, a helmet will keep you safer than no helmet. But you could also wear full motorcycle leathers and a full face helmet, that would lower the risk even further! The reality is that these situations always require a trade-off between the risks and the mitigating measures. For me as a Dutchman, I don't wear a helmet on my casual bike. I do on my racing bike.
I second that.
Furthermore, wearing a helmet is a trade-off of statistics: What are the chances hurting your head doing a specific activity or being in a specific environment? The numbers tell us that riding a bike per se is not riskier than walking or being at home (the latter two might in fact be a bit riskier than cycling). Driving a car statistically leads to more head injuries than riding a bike.
I understand everyone working in the health sector who is confronted with head damages of patients, that these folks advocate for wearing a helmet. But they have to understand: What they see (and studies thereof), leaves out the probability of the incidents itself. From a population point of view, it is way more important to get as many people cycling as you can than to wear PPE like a helmet or hi-viz clothes. Riding bikes prolongs lifes! Not riding bikes b/c of fear or not having a helmet at your disposal has in the worst case the opposite effect.
Note that I'm not against wearing a helmet (I own several myself). Wear whatever you want to get riding. But stop being all evangelistic about it.
The only completely reliable and well-explained opinion about wearing a safety helmet! Thanks!
Yes! Thank you for the voice of reason.
Thank you for a reasoned and non emotional argument. I agree with you completely.
This answer is the real solution to reducing cycling injury. Helmets don't protect against inattentive drivers or poorly designed infrastructure. I also hate to teach new riders that a cycle commute is a dangerous endeavor. The health costs to society from car pollution is a greater danger.
That study seems to be repeatedly used to claim bike helmets don't make you safer. My last time I came off a bike and smashed my head into a curb I was more worried about stopping the impact than how I was 'percieved'.
Yeah, it's also only a one off study, with questionable methods, and is being held as some kind of refutation to decades of repeated studies on the motorbike side. When it comes to safety, generally if it applies to a motorbike, it applies to a bicycle being ridden on the road as well.
What is with all you people and this dumb comebacks?
He didn't say that a helmet upon one's head doesn't minimise the injury for which it's designed; he said it doesn't make a person safer.
This is easy to prove; sit in your loungeroom without a helmet. How do you feel? Now put on a helmet? Is the risk of danger increased, decreased or the same?
That's right. The risk of danger didn't change, just because of the helmet.
What did change is the ability to protect oneself from head injury, or at least minimise the impact.
@petergibson7287 the problem is that the study went on to say that **DRIVERS** see cyclists that wear helmets differently than those that don't.
It's a perpetually misunderstood conclusion, or intentionally misstated on the part of these and various other content creators. Yes, the helmet does minimize injury, but that wasn't the basis or outcome of the study.
What generally happens is people that refuse to understand what they're reading take away from it is that "helmets don't make you safer so why wear one at all".
I've had a similar experience. I came off at speed (30kph plus) and my head hit the curb with some impact. My helmet cracked in half from the impact...but my head was fine. I happily wear a helmet now whenever I ride and encourage others to.
@@beesplaining1882but that ignores the point being made - the biggest danger to my safety on the road is cars and larger vehicles. Making the people driving the vehicles take more care around me will likely result in much better outcomes than having something to protect my head.
I think the helmet element of it obfuscates important parts of the discussion; why do we have drivers on the road who can see cyclists as potentially subhuman, why are people able to drive such large vehicles with little testing or training, and why is there so little infrastructure in place to keep these vehicles away from the vulnerable cyclists?
I say this as someone who had to replace their helmet after a driver hit me, and my wife had to too on a separate occasion. We wear our helmets at all times. The constant helmet debate is just such a distraction from real safety though
Suggesting that anyone opts out of wearing a helmet because some drivers are out of their minds is a wild and terrible take.
I once slipped pretty bad during a rainy ride.
Slipped 2 meters while rubbing my head against a curb.
Wearing helmet definitely made a difference that day.
Did the curb recognize your head as human?
Did the same just at the side of a road. Was with some slower riders and was trying to have a little fun so I hopped onto the side and hit some loose gravel. Slid on my helmet for a good few metres. Grazed quite a few bit on myself and a bit of my face but my head was fine if a little dazed. The helmet saved me a much much worse injury.
Regarding #2, about the helmet, in my opinion that article or study which was also discussed by GCN is quite interesting in a way that if you are a presenter or influencer you should be very careful and more responsible in wording the information. This is because, sadly, not everyone is intelligent enough to understand the full meaning of it. Some may take it the wrong way and instead, in their minds, confirm that not wearing a helmet is the way to go.
A whole lot of people did just that.
Which is why they shouldn't have said that "helmets make you safer is a myth" in a 2 minute segment. Every medical professional that deals with traumatic brain injuries will tell you that wearing a helmet make a massive difference. If you get in a bad enough crash it won't save you and very few people think it will. It will however mitigate a lot of smaller crashes. I have had a number of falls from my bike, all whilst wearing a helmet and I would 100% have had some nasty injuries to my head without them.
The study deals with the psychology of helmet wear rather than the very basic thing that its designed to do; protect your brain. Its an interesting study but it isn't an argument against wearing a helmet when you are cycling on UK roads which is what most of us are doing.
@@dylan-5287 A whole lot of people in the cycling media looking to farm clicks, along with those dipshit urbanist vloggers who are obsessed with Dutch cycling culture and farming clicks, the Dutch don't wear helmets because they go out of their way to not look like a cyclist and generally have bike lanes and paths that keep them mostly away from car traffic.
It’s like the MTB channels that make a point of popping the reflectors off new bikes the moment they get them, because they’ll become trail trash, when most of the kids watching the video are just going to cruise around the neighborhood on their mountain bike.
The biggest myth, that spending $8,000 on a bicycle will make you, in any way, resemble Eddy Merckx.
Cars don't particularly love cyclists without helmets either. The anti-helmet brigade love that research you quoted. They also love to point out that a helmet won't do much in a head on collision with a vehicle, which is also true. What a helmet will do though, is protect your head when it hits the ground which is the ultimate end to almost any accident. If you don't like helmets then don't wear them but, don't discourage others from doing so with nonsense about how human you are.
I think I'll keep wearing my helmet.
Fortunately I've never been hit by a car. But I have crashed a few times and on one occasion i damaged my helmet enough to need a replacement.
I hate to think what would have happened if I wasn't wearing one.
Helmets are incredibly dangerous and drivers won't embrace your human connection if you wear one. Of those who wear helmets, 100% of them will die one day. It's science.
I also doesn't helmet parroting nonsense about'' how helmets saved my life''
@@mikewade777 Yes, not dying is "nonsense".
@@mikewade777 Comments like this make me think that it would be in the best interest of society if some people don't use a helmet...
Please, stop telling people this moronic interpretation of the study about helmets. There is a difference between the proven protection in case of a crash that a helmet provides and the statistical attitude towards cyclists who do or do not wear helmets. The interpretation that has been pushed many times (hello GCN!) is that not wearing a helmet will reduce a cyclist's overall risk because of more moderate driving around them. There is no proof that this is actually true. There is also no proof that it would be so significant that it would be more beneficial than the proven safety improvement of a helmet. Accidents can just as well happen because of poor visibility, distractions, very densely frequented streets and so on. The fraction of incidents caused by motorists simply not caring enough about cyclists' safety is probably relatively small.
Additionally, this interpretation basically means that cyclists should adapt to irrational and dangerously driving motorist instead of the other way around. You cannot be serious...
REALLY DISAPPOINTED that you all are promoting not wearing a helmet. Perception of drivers has nothing to do with whether or not your head is protected when you crash. FFS.
Agree 100% I drove an ambulance and believe me I wear my helmet every ride because of what I got to see
Any cyclist who's ever fallen and cracked a helmet - which I assume is alot of us - knows how important helmets are. Busting Myth #1 was just stupid guys.
Our cycling clubs (MTB) rule number one was and always will be BRING A HELMET. No helmet, you are not with us. Nobody needs a drama when someone definitely falls off and needs an ambulance with a smashed head. For rougher riding kneepads mandatory as well, seen plenty of torn and blood gushing knees that could have been avoided by a 50 dollar kneepad kit…
One of my mtb friends never wore a helmet. Smacked his head after screwing up a jump and I sacrificed a shirt to stop the bleeding. It's so dumb.
Sounds like your club does rides that are too dangerous for me.
@@dylan-5287 A couple years ago I watched a dude scorpion down the landing of a jump and he was out cold for like 3 minutes, he was wearing a full face. He would've been dead without a helmet and probably had a much worse TBI had he been in a half helmet.
Yeah knee pads are your friend for MTB. As are full finger gloves. In addition to the helmet of course. Only time I'll leave the knee pads in the truck is if it's a really easy XC ride on a trail I know really well, still will wear helmet and gloves though.
@@totallynotraging no problem, there is plenty of clubs in a 500k city. Also not all our rides are dangerous, sometimes we take out our gravel rigs, helmets are still required though…
That Aus/NZ study is so damaging. The findings that show that safety gear de-humanises people on bikes just re-enforces the driver centric approach to hating those on 2 wheels and even worse acts to convince newer/novice rider that maybe they dont need a helmet. Thanks Jimmi for clarifying that helmets are none the less a safer option to help protect our skulls regardless of driver perceptions. Great video as usual guys 👍
The takeaway point from the study is that it's important to reduce collisions between vehicles and vulnerable road users. Emphasizing safety equipment on cyclists, or pedestrians for that matter, puts the road user responsibility on the wrong group. Safety equipment is only so helpful when multi-ton vehicles run over humans
This might seem trite, but do auto drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians see the occupants of automobiles as humans? Or do we see a Merc, Audi, Harley-Davidson, lorrie?
@derosa1989 That still wouldn't make safety equipment inefficient. If you have it, why not use it? it would be as saying just because I know airbags will not do much when I drive at 250km/h, I can throw them out. Road user responsibility shouldn't be on one hand or the other. It's in both hands. Drivers and Bikers share the road, they share the responsibility.
@@derosa1989 the responsibility to keep yourself safe is on you. Regardless of what cars do, wear a helmet. These are two entirely different discussions.
@@ukestjohn Im not sure what your point is here. Certain brands attract certain people and people have a certain view towards those cars/drivers. That doesn't make them any less safe as a result though. If anything most people I know expect Audi/BMW drivers to act like knobs and give them a wide berth if they see them driving badly. The issue with cyclists is that drivers views towards them make a monumental difference to how safe it is to cycle.
I had an argument with a driver because he couldn't fathom how his overtake wasn't safe because he didn't hit me. Imagine that. It was safe because I didn't knock you off your bike. He wouldn't think to say "it was safe to driver at 60 in a 30 because I didn't hit anyone" but because I was a cyclist, that was his benchmark for safe driving around me.
I crashed my bike this year, broke my hand , ribs and had concussion for a week. I landed on my head off the side of a road at exactly 36.2 mph(thanks strava) then bounced down the hillside and the hospital said I would be dead if it not for the helmet,.. Yes other road users may dehumanise you if you wear a lid but when the shit hits the fan you are safer with one on.. Oh my crash did not involve any car .. I saw a crash in the corner of my eye on a -18% 90 degree bend road I was not familiar with as much as I thought ,and that split second had me locking up the brakes and going off the edge of the road into a steep bank covered in woodland.
Oh regarding the helmet after my crash.. initial inspection it looked perfect except for a minor dent and a bit of dirt from the hillside I gambolled down . However when I looked inside the foam inner shell was cracked and I imagine the mips had done its bit. POC omni MIPS Thanks!!. Still here to make comments on CZcams
I commented the study on the safety of bike helmets before.
There are two points :
1 - A helmet does not make you safer. They give you a saver feeling so you can take (a little) more risk. The change to get involved in a one sided accident is slightly higher.
2 - On the other hand, the helmet does protect you against severe head damage very well. As head injuries are the worst injuries when cyclists are involved, the protection prevents a lot of really bad or even lethal injuries. While the extra change of being involved in an accident is somewhere near 5%, the helmet protects you in at least 30% of the accidents against severe head injuries.
In some countries where cycling is not very common (that is where the study refers to) there is a third point:
3 - The recognition of a cyclist as being human. I don't know in how many cases a cyclists without a helmet is recognized as human compared to cyclist who do wear a helmet.
Only that third point is researched in the study you refer to.
My sons girlfriend is an excellent example of the point one and two. She was racing on her bike and hit a little pole in the road (the pole should prevent cars to use that road). She smacked against the ground, landing on her head. Her helmet nearly split in two. She was found unconscious some time later by someone who passed. She was taken to hospital and send home the next day with a severe concussion. Three weeks laters she was back training, and an other week later she rode her first course again. Without the helmet her scull would have been cracked and she had not survived that crash!
So people please take the small extra risk to be involved in an accident, and wear a helmet. It may prevent you from severe head injuries with lifetime impact or even dying way to young.
Yes exactly... there are 2 components to being safer... risk and consequence. The object is to improve at least one for a better overall outcome. A helmet reduces consequence, it doesn't change likelihood... on the other end, lights reduce likelihood, doesn't change consequence.
My response to the anti-helmet brigade is always the same:
I don't wear a helmet to protect me from cars, I wear one because gravity exists and the1000's of other reasons I might find the ground suddenly rushing towards my head.
@@markjthomson Agreed. There's always risk when you get on a bike, and even more risk when you ride it near cars. You can never get rid of that risk, but you can always manage the consequences.
Disappointed not to see the vital existential question of whether shaving our legs makes us faster.
A friend suffered a minor impact by a car as a pedestrian. The fall cracked her skull open. 😬 Two rounds of brain surgery later, I wouldn’t argue against helmets for us cyclists.
Sounds like you just made a case for mandatory helmets for pedestrians. How do you think that would go over?
@@rangersmith4652 A misreading.
@@VictorElGreco But she was not riding a bike when she was injured. She was walking. You made a case not for helmets on bike riders, but for helmets on people who are at risk of getting hit by a car. Not your intention, I know, but it's there.
@@rangersmith4652Does that interpretation somehow make it an argument against helmets for cyclists?
@@CanItAlready No, it simply points out the potential for helmet wearing to reach the point of absurdity. I have no problem with people wearing a bike helmet, but I do believe making it mandatory for everyone under any and all conditions would be a gross folly. If one wants to make an argument for wearing a helmet while riding a bike but wants to avoid extending that argument to wearing a helmet while walking, one must find a reason other than the danger of mixing with cars.
You have grossly overinterpreted the study on drivers "dehumanizing" people wearing helmets because you assume that getting hit by a car is the only significant risk. However, the vast majority of bicycle crashes have nothing to do with cars. Odds are that both of you have crashed many times, and that neither of you have ever had an accident with a moving car. Head injuries that cause brain damage are really bad because the brain has an extremely limited capacity to repair itself. And if your head hits concrete or tarmac??? You see my point.. I'm a cyclist, and I have a PhD in neuroscience and I teach at a medical school. I wouldn't want to ride more than 25 meters without a helmet).
Agreed. As a lifelong cyclist and hockey player, I wouldn't undertake either activity without wearing an appropriate helmet.
@connyconiglione They are not foolproof for sure. Also part of the brain injury comes from the very rapid deceleration as your brain actually strikes the inside of your skull, and a helmet will only minimally affect that. But they still provide a layer of protection.
If what you're saying is true, then why is it, in places like the Netherlands, Denmark and Japan (and I suppose formerly China too), that the number of injuries and fatalities per km cycled are low, and in places like the United States, where there are Mandatory Helmet Laws, they have the highest levels of cycling fatalities per km cycled?
The problem here isn't whether or not a helmet may protect you from brain injury, but rather whether we're legally enforcing a blame culture on cyclists getting turned to pulp by a distracted driver.
Where I live, most cycling fatalities occur when a HGV just crushes a person to death, or a car driver decides to plow into a cyclist at 90 mph because the driver has some kind of psychological hatred of bicycles. A helmet won't save your life in those scenarios.
I have Dutch friends. They look at me like I'm some kind of crazed maniac when I explain to them that sort of helmet I wear when cycling. Of course, they get less concerned when I explain I have downhill descents at 50 km/h, but for most Dutch, they just can't comprehend going faster than 15 km/h, and fewer can comprehend needing any sort of dedicated cycling safety or clothing, for what is ostensibly something not much culturally different to just walking somewhere.
@@vaska00762 You missed my point completely.
@@vaska00762legally enforcing a blame culture on cyclists lmao, you must realize how wacky that sounds right? Some maniac intentionally running you over is incredibly rare and they would absolutely be blamed. I didn't even know we had mandatory helmet laws in the US, motorcycles yes but not for cyclists. It's also possible cyclists in the US have more accidents because they make dumb decisions. A helmet is not affecting how drivers see you, most are just trying to get on with their days like everyone else and couldn't care less what you're doing.
I often prefer to ride on the road compared to the bike lane due to all the mopeds, tuktuks and pedestrians blocking the path. It's much easier to be aware of and avoid a 2 tonne car than a pedestrian stepping into the road from behind a parked car while looking at their phone
The base layer isn’t a myth. I believe it’s for those who overheat and sweat a lot. If I ride with just a jersey the sweat just accumulates and I either get too hot or too cold (depending on temp) because I’m it’s not drying. I have friends that do not need it but I certainly benefit from it. Not all base layers are created equal either, some don’t dry which does defeat the purpose.
I never had a base layer until 10 months ago. It's a nice addition when the temps are cooler.
Glad I had a helmet on when I broadsided a car doing 20+mph on the race bike. The helmet split in 3 locations and the carbon/aluminum bike totaled. The bill for the ambulance and ER was over $77,000.
Always wear a helmet!!! Cyclists should not sacrifice safety because a group of people found us de-human. That mis-perception is on the public, not the cyclist to address. It's clear more safe bike lanes are needed but even more education for the general public is needed.
I don't wear a helmet. I protect my brain by humanising with the drivers going past. We all share a wonderful bond in humanity as fellow humans.
💀
Exactly. This is why I never wear a seatbelt. Without it I can enjoy a human connection with momentum and in the worst case scenario I'll be protected. It's called science.
I do feel that's ironic, so kudos for your sense of humour ;)
don't forget survivorship bias.
nobody who died wearing a seatbelt talks about them, you just hear biased takes from people who lived because of a seatbelt. @@dylan-5287
The move towards mandatory helmet laws in Australia was actually spearheaded by ER docs.
In the Netherlands, for over a decade, there has been a push for MHL from the same.
And, if one were to read the comments in FB groups with older cyclists it is OMG how many stories of "my bike helmet saved my life" you will hear.
Survivorship bias. You don't hear from people run down and killed by drivers who see helmeted cyclists are less than human.
ER docs do great work, and genuinely care for the patients that end up in their wards. However, their medical training does not make them experts in transport policy, or well placed to evaluate how helmet laws might act as a barrier to entry to cycling, and potentially cause more deaths through heart attacks and other 'lifestyle diseases'.
For the record, I wear a helmet every time I ride - it's the MANDATORY nature of MHL's I oppose.
It's helpful if you fall off your bike and no cars are near you! But if you're hit by a car, it's not gonna change anything. I get that ER docs are thinking of preventing concussions (and it's genuinely worth worrying about!) but in traffic, that's the least of your worries. Helmets aren't necessary for commuters. Infrastructure that allows cyclists to commute safely, as well as laws to protect cyclists are necessary.
I've literally never seen anyone in the Netherlands who wasn't riding a road bike ever wear a cycling helmet.
In the Netherlands, cycling helmets are deeply associated with the road bike (Racefiets) and the road cyclist (Wielrenner). The Dutch consider a "Fietser" to be a everyday commuter who rides a Dutch bike, which has a coaster brake and a single gear - these things rarely can go above 10 km/h unless you were pedaling at an insane cadence.
Mandatory Helmet Laws are not good for cycling and active travel, and in my opinion, are more likely to actually make commuters decide to take the car, instead of cycling.
I've cycled in the Netherlands and Germany on city bikes, and I didn't have a helmet with me, but that wasn't a consideration for anyone, except for people training hard going 35+ km/h on a road bike.
I've also used bike sharing services in the UK, and of course, you don't get a helmet with your bicycle, so there's not much you can do there. Yet I've never felt unsafe while issuing a slow, heavy city bike with 38mm tyres.
@@andrewmcalister3462they see helmeted cyclists as less than human? Wtf dude. 99% of car drivers are not homicidal lmao. Vast majority are because someone's looking at their phone, not because they're out to hurt you. Roads will inherently be dangerous. It's like saying the rocks are out to get you when you go mountain biking.
@@dylan-5287 I actually see motorbike helmets as a storm trooper; disciplined look. It does give a less than human, surgical look about them. I'm assuming bike helmet, especially the aero ones has this to a lesser degree. Cycling can get too serious and clinical about it. The safest options might be to have cartoons on helmets like done on some kiddies helmets, but then it's all about looking professional and the high prices associated with it. Being safer by looking silly; probably won't sell expensive fancy helmets.
In my area (NJ, USA) the only e-bikes that I could identify so far are with riders that don't pedal, or pedal only to a negligible degree. Which then makes me doubt their usefulness for fitness and environment
Yep - tons of people in Seattle just using their thumb to accelerate without pedals. Riding too fast on a multi-use trail.
#1 rule of road cycling safety: they're trying to hit you, so ride accordingly
#2 rule of road cycling safety: they're trying to hit you, so ride accordingly
I find it extremely disrespectful towards the researchers that everyone seems ok with twisting their conclusions and misusing their study to make absurd points about safety.
I blame the researchers for conducting a dubious study with dubious conclusions and improperly educating the world at large about their results.
90rpm cadence came from Lance Armstrong. But there were other factors influencing his ride
I really love your channel, but that bit about helmets is a very narrow point of view on the topic and doesn't fully define the safety of helmets. It's only one aspect of that. The same as helmets is a very small part of general road safety for cyclists. I'd appreciate if there were less arguing about helmets and more holistic conversation on road safety.
Just wear a helmet. You'll be better off without cracking your skull open lol.
I was cycling with my friend on my gravel bike 10 days ago, some guy didn’t want to move out of the way, while i was trying to move pass him i’ve hit with my front wheel on rebound fence, went over the bar, smashed heavily and while on air i’ve hit the fence with my head. Long story short i had huge cut on my helmet, like some1 took knife and just made a huge deep cut on it ( above my ears ) so if i wasnt wearing helmet, i’ll let Australians imagine what would my head look after that crash. Bottom of the story, don’t be stupid and wear a helmet. Because there are people who fell/crashed on the bike, and there are people who will.
I enjoy these myth-buster-type videos because they get you thinking, but most of them sacrifice accuracy for dramatic effect. For example, should you ride on the hoods or drops when climbing a steep hill? Sure, all other things being equal, it is better to be more aerodynamic, but when you are on the hoods you open your diagram more and breathing is easier. So not all things are equal and the question is which is better for climbing that hill and at what speed and other factors will the gains from decreased wind resistance outweigh the gains from breathing more efficiently...
Yea Jimmi go and crash on 60kph with out helmet and see how safe you are.
I don't believe there has ever been a decrease in injury or death after helmets became mandated that wasn't attributable to reduced riding. Part of the problem is that when people perceive themselves as safer so they 'consume the safety' by riding in more dangerous ways.
You have presented misleading and potentially dangerous information regarding helmets. The study you linked has not offered any evidence suggesting that helmets will increase the incidence of crashes and injuries. You’re sending a message that helmets are unsafe and some people may interpret that as a sign to ditch a helmet.
I miss the good old days when you rode bikes. I assume videos of you riding bikes don't perfom well on youtube and you do have to earn a living making videos (which I totally get). Additionally, pre-produced videos enable you to take well-deserved breaks from making new videos every day. It's just that ride videos motivated me to go out and ride a bike. Product reviews or "10 cycling myths..." don't. Maybe you can throw in the odd vlog-style-riding-with-mates video from time to time?
I haven't read the helmet safety study done in Queensland, but is it possible the findings don't necessarily reflect attitudes outside Australia? Or, have they looked at data from all over the world? There could be very real cultural differences that determine whether or not the findings are universally true.
In France helmets are not mandatory for adults since the French authorities don't want the suggestion cycling is unsafe. True story. Mandatory for kids though. Some people wear them, lots don't. Did not ride a helmet there myself and did not die once. However back home (in Queensland no less) had a big spill in a bunch at over 40km/h. Helmet smashed to bits and head OK. I always wear a lid when out on the bike here, even before it was mandatory.
Forgot my helmet a couple of years back going to an hour away start for a ride, and I was really surprised that cars gave me *more* room than I'd ever had on that particular road. It was truly bizarre. Still wear the helmet all the time, but now I just ride on my cyclocross most of the time so when I get pushed off the road by cars zooming too close I can actually not crash on the gravelly/dirt roadside 🤣😭🤔
I think instead of focusing on the safety of bike helmets, we should be advocating for more use of bike lights and reflectors. Many times I’ve almost been hit by cars during the day bc my tail lights were off, and then on one cloudy day I got hit by a scooter behind me. A bike helmet will protect you from riding but won’t make you safer, lights and reflectors will.
The main issue is drivers are inattentive and the amount of attention they give is dictated by looking out for 2m by 4m metal boxes rather than cyclists. I run flashing front and rear lights a still have far too many people do stupid things like turn across me.
@@mctrials23 in my experience drivers are making very close dangerous passes from behind when I tend to hug the sides close to parked cars. Bc I’m smaller on a bike I blend in, and drivers are moving way faster they have less time to react. Lights and reflectors help make me more visible but also more dedicated bike lanes would be even greater help
@@gritynity Yeah, I wouldn’t ride without my lights even in the middle of the day. I wouldn’t ride without my varia if I can avoid it too. I cycle in the country mainly though so it has more value there I think.
Ultimately infrastructure and driver training are the 2 biggest determiners of cyclist safety and both are pretty awful right now.
@@mctrials23 I just got a Varia for my bike as well! Great light so far felt really safe riding on the road. Cars were making very wide passes so I felt very visible
My most serious accident occurred with a car emerging from the right who didn't see me cycling along the cycle path from their left because they were looking to join the traffic from their right. I use lights but they didn't help me in this case. Things are sometimes unavoidable and that's when helmets are useful.
Helmets: they make you safer if you fall off. You know, their actual JOB.
a white jersey is going to be better for heat than bare skin
Agreed on the bike helmet! When I wear full kit and helmet cars pass me SOOO close and I've been hit twice. Now when I ride a couple loops that are thru town, I wear gym shorts over my tights, a baggy t-shirt or jacket, and no helmet... cars give me a much wider berth. But other cyclist give me shit constantly.
The helmet/no helmet debate is stupid. Wear a helmet. Sooner or later you will fall off, be knocked off or just straight up have an unavoidable accident. I'd rather write off a helmet than write off my skull. I also don't care if I look like a twat as long as drivers actually see me and are aware of my presence. And if they don't see me and turn left in front of me, when I hit the side of the car and then hit the floor, there's a much better chance my brains won't spill out through a crack in my head.
I really like you guys and I think I have watched literally every episode of your Content, Francis. And its even more fun with you two together. But please correct that helmet thing. Its simply not true, so many "normal" crashes lead to very bad injuries without a helmet. I guess if you would look for one, youd also find a study for that. But you have such a high impact with your channel - dont tell people that its a myth that helmets are safer.
I live in a climate that gets to 40c pretty regularly.
Base layer is great. Keeps you dry, protects you from the sun, keeps those crappy but expensive castelli bib shorts from scratching my nipples...
Agree with most of the comments above. Had accident on my commute. Went into back of a stationary car. Unconscious for at least 30 minutes with retrograde amnesia. Broken nose and un displaced cheek fracture. Wearing a helmet. If not wearing a helmet likely a lot worse. Nothing to do with over confidence. Who thinks wearing a helmet makes a cyclist think they are invincible. I think this video brings the channel into disrepute and as much as the content can be tongue in cheek this did not seem to be the case here. Jimmy and Francis should reconsider this video. Very poor.
Omfg I hate when someone says "there is a ONE studyyyyyy doneee" most of the studies are flawed, we can look into them but we should not trust them 100% !!! WEAR A HELMET!!!
Also the study was about the perception of people and how they see cyclists, not about what happens when you crash. No one is going to drive into you at full speed because you have a helmet
I'll keep wearing my helmet mostly because the hair on top of my head is allmost gone so the main function of the helmet is to keep my head warm. I found this out by selfexperiments
woolly hat is also good for that.
Missed the mark about the helmet. The study didn't evaluate safety outcomes of helmets it evaluated perception of cyclists.
It's extremely dangerous and misleading to suggest that cyclists are less safe with helmets.
You should also never make a generalisation about a specific issue based on one study.
I've been living in Florida for over 20 years mate and all the outdoor workers wear multi layers to keep them cool. Sweat under a few layers will help keep the body cool. When shirtless, all your sweat evaporates making you sweat more until dehydrated. You get burned too. Load of rubbish what you're saying fella, is it April 1st?
yea the whole "we cycled shirtless through death valley" quip.
My first thought is "that was insanely stupid, protect yourself from the sun". Shit will tire you out moreso than being a bit hot.
The job of base layers is not to keep you warmer or cooler it's to help you control your temperature. In fact it's very important that you don't gain or lose too much heat when you're cycling. If it's cool outside you want to prevent your body from working too hard to warm you up so you layer up to control your heat loss. If it's warm outside your body's not going to work as hard to warm you up except that your body's going to be actively losing a lot of heat through sweat all over your skin and through the top of your head. I don't wear a base layer on my body during the summer but I do wear long sleeves and I also always wear a bandana under my helmet every day of the year.
Regarding the base layers, I found the sweat wicking property to be particularly useful in spring/autumn, when you climb a lot and then have descents. You will "dry out" much faster with one, and have less of a windchill effect on descends.
The e-bike comments are spot on. When I ride my e-bike to work, I add 28 miles (45km) and approximately 2.5 hours to my weekly Zone 2 training.
A helmet saved my sister's life.
We were riding at 30-35kph along a street in Melbourne (Australia) that had tram tracks... You guessed it:
She had to avoid a pedestrian and did a head check before moving across, which distracted her and her tyres got stuck in the tram track. Her momentum flung her around and she landed on her back and her head whipped backwards onto the road.
The back left quarter of her helmet was cracked open and you could see the metal frame inside the helmet.
She was very dizzy and I was very worried about a possible concussion, but she turned out fine after 30 minutes or so.
Bicycle helmets save lives. The confusion is that everyone immediately thinks any bicycle accident is with a vehicle, which is not always the case.
If you fall and land on your head without a helmet on it’s gonna hurt. I’ve come off twice and slammed my helmet into the tarmac, without a helmet I’d have been in trouble. Helmets make it safer.
In the event of a crash, helmets can be a life saver.
"In our study, 563 participants were shown a series of photographs of models holding a bicycle. The models wore different attire in each photo, including: no headwear, a cap, a helmet, and a bright orange safety vest. Participants were asked to select the person in each pair who looked “less human”." What a cheap headline study. Presumably money was involved because any serious scientific researcher should not attach there name to this study without a payoff.
Please don't quote any significance from the study. Such a load of nonsense says nothing about whether a helmet makes you more likely to get a hit by a car. And it clearly makes no sense to even remotely suggest this has an effect on the majority of crashes which don't involve a car. Nor do helmets make a rider go faster and somehow be more crash prone. Its mandatory here to use a helmet and everyone is very aware helmet or not that it hurts to fall off a bike.
I have a feeling australian drivers don't humanize kangaroos (well they are bipedal, maybe I should go with NA drivers and deer), but they sure as fuck don't want to hit one for not being human.
Myth: shouty James is the only bike fitter worth listening to.
He isn't.
The flaw in quoting the study that "Wearing helmets makes you less safe as a cyclist" is the assumption that motorists equate "That person is less human" with "I want to hurt that person." There is a huge jump in behaviour from "I think that person is less human" to "I want to hurt that person", and the study does not address that. There are LOTS of other controls that reduce the desire to harm other road users, like being arrested and convicted. Also consider, motorists see dogs, cats, deer, kangaroo, etc. (all non-human) frequently on the road, but motorists don't say "Look, there's a non-human thing on the road, I want to harm it."
Of course a motorist can perform aggressive harassment (shouting, rude gesture, etc), which are never welcome, but do not result in physical harm.
Another flaw can be found in the survey methodology. The survey was an anonymous internet survey therefore there are no consequences for the respondent to give outrageous, provocative answers. There are no consequences in responding to an anonymous online survey with "This image is less human than that image", but there may be social consequences in stating to your friends or family that "Cyclists that wear protective clothing are less human."
The survey was only completed by 563 Australian respondents, of which 30% (169 respondents) were considered to have made the "less human" responses. The survey included questions about the respondents actual aggressive interactions with cyclists in the detailed Science Direct article (linked to from the link provided above), but I cannot find the results for what actual interactions were taken by the respondents.
I'm not reducing my cycling safety just because 169 anonymous Australians think it makes me "less human" and I encourage other riders to do the same.
I haven’t “thumbed down” a video before but I’m sorry guys this one about the helmets warranted it. Think before you speak and understand what you’re saying. Helmets keep heads from cracking, including those hit by idiot drivers.
What an absolute stupid statement on this study. I don’t care what psychology effect a helmet has on other people or my mindset. Helmet safes life. Period.
Nobody wants to crash but other people do stupid things or are inattentive on the road and that is completely out of your control. And for that incidents u need protection.
If the simple existents of an reflective piece on a jacket iterates you or makes you aggressive u shouldn’t be driving.
1. 100% agree on base layers. Outside of cold rides I have always found them too warm/warmer than jersey alone. I have, however, worn JUST a sleeveless base layer as my only top while MTBing in Moab. That worked well. 2. I had my carbon Yeti repaired after an unfortunate rack failure. It was very reasonable price-wise and has held up well.
People didn't wear helmets on bicycles for years in places like NZ until they became compulsory in the '90's. So obviously there's figures on deaths per head of population, and % of cyclists injured before the laws(and numbers aren't what you'd expect). I'm 50 now, and biked to school everyday(10km round trip over hills) and never took the bus (helmet laws came in when I was 20 while at uni). There were many more children and adults who used to bike to school or around generally. I used to bike around everywhere as none of us used to expected parents to drive us around. School bike sheds were absolutely massive and full to the brim with bikes. At home time kids would pile out of the school gates on bikes, by foot and of course to catch the bus etc. Helmet laws came in, but for a few yrs before they were official, many schools brought in rules making them compulsory. Many kids refused to bike to school overnight as helmets looked ridiculous back then. Parents perceived cycling as then dangerous because a helmet was required, so didn't let their kids bike to school anymore. As "obviously" too dangerous if you needed a helmet, so they preferred to drive their kids to school. A whole generation stopped cycling and now you're in a small minority if you bike to school. Now you have the "school pick up rush hour" as well as the usual ones. I love the school holidays as so many less car on the road at 9 and 3 (at least 30%), as I drive around a lot for work. So today we have a generations of drivers who aren't used to driving around cyclists as well, many of whom used to be young children. Which potentially contributes to unsafe driving around cyclists. Now cyclists are seen as a bit weird, and people get annoyed because these "weird" people get in "their" way on "their" roads. I've even seen cycling hate groups posting video's of cyclists getting purposely mown down on facebook and them laughing about it! I always wear a helmet etc, and of course if one gets a head impact, helmets will help to a large degree under certain force thresholds. But there are a multitude of factors to consider when assessing cycling safety, rather than just blunt force head trauma after a crash. How many more kids are sedentary, overweight and future heart attack victims because their parents drove them to school, and now basically everywhere for example, and so they never exercised? Again there are a multitude of factors as to why people are sedentary and overweight these days. But driving kids to school instead of having them cycle doesn't help societies overall health and obesity rates. Makes roads much more congested and even more unsafe. Cycling can be dangerous, but how dangerous actually is it? What surprised me is there have only been 3 cyclist deaths while riding in the TDF since it started, and one of those was from heart failure.
The helmet solution is super simple, and 100% achievable: proper, viable, segregated cycle paths to enable safe travel for all road users!
THIS
People are against e-bikes because all they see are the illegally modded Deliveroo riders doing 40mph without lights
I like thevidea of ebikes, mostly At some point, I'll get one. But at least where I ride I have seen E bike riders using them to go at a very high rate of speed on bike-pedestrian greenways, and where the riders don't have the handling skills to cope with the speeds at which they are riding. These people pretty dangerous.
I always defending ebikes a couple years ago when they were super hated on. But when you see some dude way less fit than you flying up a technical climb on the trails, there's definitely a feeling of "screw that dude". It's definitely very petty but I can see why more trails are banning them. Ebikes out on the roads or paths, zero issues. That seems like a good thing overall.
@@stuartdryer1352 proper e-bikes are pedal-assist. If it can go ‘a high rate of speed’ at the push of a button, it’s a motorcycle
@jamesetheridge6224 Except things like that are sold as Ebikes and I see them every day on one of my favorite routes clearly marked "no motor vehicles"
… on the sidewalk.
Cadence! So glad to hear that cleared up, I'm trying to improve my fitness this winter on Zwift and the program is always telling me to increase my RPM.
Yeah, for those of us with a natural 80rpm cadence, Zwift hates us. Do a road workout, it wants you at 85rpm minimum if it's a zone 2 workout, and 90rpm for anything else. Do a MTB workout and it wants you grinding away at 65rpm, and I'm like I don't sit and grind that slow going uphill on my MTB, I either drop into an easier gear and spin, or drop the saddle and stand up.
On a lot of the rural roads we have around here, the road surfaces are often chip seal, or a network of cracks. I don't know if they're slower, but skinny tires at high pressure are definitely very uncomfortable. One of the main reasons I'm looking for a new bike that can take wider tires than the 26mm max that my current rim brake bike will allow.
My new bike mounts 38 mm out-of-the-box. Not going back to skinny. 45 may be an option if the road requires it.
Twoo points where I disagree. First about helmet, they are protect my head. Period.
Secondly about aerodynamics. The drag is highly reduced in low speeds and many aerodynamic tricks make your power go down. So I should say if you are under about 15 mph (24 kph) uphil I should say power is more important than drag. And we are alot of people that are under that speed uphil.
Edit: to add up with that last remark, in 10 mph (16 kph) transmission loses, rolling resistance and aero is about the same _on a high-end racebike with high-end tiers and perfectly maintained_. If you have budget tier, an old bottom bracket, forget too pump your tiers, that affect the numbers. If the aeroposition affect your breathing that will slow you down and so on. The drag is more than six times lower in 16 kph than in 40, if we don't counting the wind.
Aero up hill matters a lot, people like you keep stuck to the wrong idea of BIKE speed while the one that matters is WIND speed.
If you climb at 10km/h with a head wind of 20km/h the wind speed you must cut it is 30km/h thus aero makes a big difference while weight makes no difference at all.
3kg difference in a 10km long 7%gradient makes a 3 seconds difference and aero vs lightweight bikeb is what, 400-800gr difference
1. I don't live close to mountains. Uphil for me is 1-2 min.
2. A very aero position can easily reduce my power with 200 Watt in situations like that. It need's alot of headwind before the drag is 200 Watt if you are cycling in ~10 kph.
Even in a longer uphil, let's say 3-4 min and you only loosing 100 Watt, stil 100 Watt is alot of headwind.
I don't mean weight is much more important. I mean experience is more important, and then experience with your bike, then abit more experience, then that you are feed and drink properly, then that you have warm up the muscles, then that your bike is properly maintained, then that you have stretch properly and then that you position yourself correctly (more straight when you need muscles, more crumpt in higher speeds/headwind)...
I have at least one uphil PR on Strava on my hybrid...
@@MarkusFolkesson if you lose 200 wats changing position you are doing something wrong,
It's normal to lose some but not that much. That being said that is irrelevant, I was talking about bike and equipment, not positioning which is very personal.
As a beginner I did what I was recommended climbing, hands in the cross upright simulating a flat bar, but I end discovering I can breathe and climb better in a more aero positioning for my personal morphology or whatever the reason is.
@@nemure Interesting about your experience!
Many versions of aeroposition will make you compress your chest aka your lungs. If your position affect your breathing of course your power will not be that great...
I prefer holding on the top of the breakleavers and stand over the saddle when I really need maximum power. But that is personal.
My experience is also that brittish bikechannels will overrated the gadgets and is shy to say how much physical condition and regular training actully matters. Like alot of middle management guys have start with cycling in my age (I am 40) and want to know how they can be fast without spend so much time excersice because their carrer is so important.
Wear a helmet 🪖
Here in Mexico it's also true the dehumanizing factor of helmets and high-vis jackets. I've heard some non-cycling people that when they see a cyclist with high-vis jacket they know it's either a super noob or a coky cyclist (their words not mine) so they decided to not wait at them because they're slow at taking decisions and might be erratic. The problem with that it's that noob cyclist will became more erratic and slow exactly because they're not used to traffic and having a car that just doesn't respect you or came to close just increase that fear. Also it is rare to find someone you trust to help you out in your cycling route so most of the time you have to be self-thaught or find videos of commute tips
Also here in Mexico, e-bikes are usually hated because most people that use it feel "better" than an usual cyclist and therefore don't respect the other cyclists and I've seen some of them causing accidents because (in their minds) they have more privilege than a common cyclist and you should be the one stopping or letting them pass rather than they checking their surroundings
You once told me 'the fastest people are the masters of going slow' that has stuck with me ever since.
Why would you repeat such rubbish about hi viz and helmets you people need to be more responsible there are people out there that actually believe this rubbish you say.
On my daily commute, for the last 25 years I have not been using a helmet, no need. (That is 540.000 km of commute without incident or crash...) Never had a situation where a helmet would have made it more safe than it already is. If I go out for actual (MTB) rides, I of course do wear a helmet, because that is where my fear comes in. A scared cyclist is a bad cyclist. I think it greatly depends on country and on mindset. Here in the Netherlands with a large percentage of traffic separation, I don't see the need for MHL. That MHL is being pushed now by an increase of E-bike accidents. Give people 300+ watts out of nowhere and they discover they lack the skill to handle the speeds and the weight. Who would have thought. :)
Crazy to think, if you had been wearing a helmet then you likely wouldn't be here today to even comment.
The problem with accidents is that they happen. Even to skilled and experienced cyclists. You’re absolutely fine until you aren’t.
Here are some rules of cycling I thought of on my ride yesterday:
1. If you pedal hard enough, there is always a headwind.
2. Any day without a crash, rain, or a flat tire is a good day.
3. The Shittier the bike, the better the work out.
4. Bugs taste bad.
5. Truing a bike wheel is best left to the magicians.
6. A tailwind does not negate an earlier headwind.
7. I hate puddles.
8. "It doesn't get any easier, you just get a little bit faster. “Greg Lamont
9. Sunrises while cycling are 20% cooler.
TWICE, if I wasn't wearing a helmet, I would either be brain damaged or dead.
I'm celebrating a $32k stock portfolio today. I started this journey with $4000 have invested on time and also with the right tearn now have time for my family and the life ahead of me
please how, am still a newbie on investment trading
ever since i came across bitcoin trader Marie Brandon my life have totally changed. yours can also change it's just a matter of commitment and focus
I have heard a lot about investment with Marie Brandon and how good she is, please how safe are the profits?
I have also been trading with her, profits are secured and over a 100 percent return on investment. She's such an amazing woman with good skills keeps me happy all week knowing I earn $15,000 extra income trading with her.
My financial life has completely changed all thanks to Marie Brandon awesome trading strategies!!!
The helmet myth is garbage. One study in Australia? Not buying it….
My helmet saved my life once.
3 times for me
That "helmets don't make you safer" study is a one off that has not been peer reviewed or replicated. The entire point of protective gear is to protect against the unexpected. I'm not worried about "not being seen as human" by a driver, I'm more worried about the distracted driver who is too busy on their phone to even see you at all. That study also has the complete opposite findings of literally every study on motorbike safety, where they consistently find that protective gear saves lives and the more brightly colored your bike and kit are the more likely you are to be seen and not hit by drivers.
2 things: first, both my son and myself suffered traumatic brain injury and skull fracture, while wearing relatively new helmets, after being struck by an automobile whose driver simply never saw us due to distraction, and the fact I can even make this comment and that I still have a living child is down to the fact that we had helmets on; second, the tarmac in Hollywood (and in most of California, for that matter) is bloody terrible - if you really wanna go ride on awesome pavement go to Switzerland.
A flashing light can be a cyclist or many other things. What is more recognizable for a human is legs going up and down. Put reflector bands on your legs and a bit of reflector tape on shoes. I read this is some study.
regarding low speed aerodynamics, I have a story. Back when I had a seven year old child, we used to ride on a paved rail trail a few miles up to a park with playing fields and a sprinkler park. On the way down, we tried to see how little we could pedal. That was fun- the answer was not at all unless we had to stop somewhere- and then we started racing without pedaling. Turns out a little guy on a little mountain bike in a tuck position is faster than a 200 pound, 6'4" guy sitting up tall on 35c tires, and, remarkably, vice versa. Don't know the speed, but it must have been from a start around 4 mph and speeding up from there. As it sped up, the rate of separation grew, as you would predict.
Interesting, usually heavier riders are faster downhill because gravity likes us more. Though in actual DH racing, most of the racers are tall and skinny, except the current women's world champion who is short and decidedly thicc.
Myth: Most of my friends believe that you cannot ride on an empty stomach (so they chug down some mcdonalds breakfast sandwiches right before the ride). Myth: You cannot ride MTB without a dropper post.
I’m road cyclist for 35 years and have done hundreds of road races but my full sus mtb is an E bike because FUN. Love my E bike.
I bought a zwift trainer recently and I was eager to find out my 20min FTP. Doing this, I was required to pedal at 90RPM - 110RPM. I must say I have never felt more uncomfortable on the bike, especially when my normal cadence is around 80RPM.
Same. I'm a MTBer, my natural cadence is 80rpm. My FTP is almost certainly higher at that RPM vs 90rpm. Same thing with sprint tests, I literally can't spin my legs fast enough to put up great numbers on those stationary bikes they use for sprint testing, I literally find myself wanting even harder gearing for that (those bikes are set up to have comparable "gearing" to a single speed track bike, and track sprinters spin like rabid squirrels). I can put up better sprint power numbers in Zwift where I have better gearing vs those test bikes.
Cadence will even vary throughout the course of a ride. Sometimes, your gears limit you and at least in my case, it will drop with fatigue and vary with power demands, even without thinking about it. Not thinking about it is probably the key element.
What’s needed for safety on a bike: car drivers to stop being jerks. A helmet on the other hand protects your skull against crashes and a helmet with MIPS against crushes + concussions. Looking non-human and safety are two different things. Please do NOT interpret them as equals.
I love my trekking ebike. I did 4070km overall last year, some on a borrowed roadbike, some on my gravelbike I got in winter and most on my ebike. 1700km with switched off motor. I love the bike. Whenever I'm not in the mood for cycling I compare it to how long it would take me by car and then bike is almost as fast so I pick it and switch the support a bit higher. After a few minutes I'm glad I took the bike. Also as a heavier rider who transports groceries or other stuff in my paneers it makes hills less terrible. This year I want to ride 8000km and do my first bikepacking trips. I'm not way fitter and can enjoy a gravel. Without the ebike it would have been harder to get back to my old form (rode a lot of bike/roadbike as a teenager)
I still hate how this ONE study gets pulled as a case for not wearing an helmet....
Since this list was presented as Myths, I don't think the helmet one belonged. It's not a myth that helmets make you safer. I think a more nuanced separate video focused around the pros and cons of wearing a helmet would have been better.
If you're a skilled cyclist, with great awareness, and you never crash your bike from your own mistakes, and you're great at rotating and angling your body and tucking your head so your head never hits the ground, and you live in an area where drivers are more aggressive towards cyclists, and the helmet obstructs your veiw but also physically makes you feel less alert and aware, then wearing a helmet might pose increased risk of accidents with drivers, which are likely to be fatal whether you wear a helmet or not, in exchange for saving you from a collision with the curb that never happens. But even then, with all of the factors lining up as close as possible to a situation where a helmet has drawbacks, it's still debatable if not wearing a helmet would make you safer than wearing one. I think wearing a helmet is still definitely the way to go by default, because tons of people are killed or severely injured from not wearing a helmet, and that amount definitely exceeds the amount of people that were targeted by drivers or criminals due to wearing a helmet, though we don't have a way of accurately verifying that claim with stats and this is purely conjecture.
On the topic of bike helmets making you less safe: I would not even by surprised if their was a study claiming that there are more or worse injuries by people who wear helmets. But keep in mind - people who always wear helmets like RR-cyclist are also way faster than most which also increases risks of injury. So in that case it would be easy to read those statistics the wrong way.
I call BS on the helmet thing. Landed on my head following a crash and it saved me from a serious head injury. What a bunch of nonsense. Honestly, I’ve had more close calls with autos as a pedestrian than on my bike.
Helmets have saved me from traumatic head injury several times. What a motor vehicle driver thinks regarding my humaness is irrelevant.
1:28 - This feels a bit ropey to be honest, if your going to associate being seen as "less" human with safety ... erm so you have to really quantity what the relationship between "less" human and increase in safety is and compare with the risks associated with accidents with and without a helmet ... it's unclear to me the number of potential accidents I've avoided were due to being seen as less human with not being seen at all.
30 years past I watched from behind as my friend was struck by a car, went down to the pave, where he slid about 10 feet before cracking his helmet on the curb. It was ugly to see, but more horrifying was the sound of that cracking helmet. To hospital, where he was evaluated and released. Couple of days later he bought a new helmet. Please wear a helmet!