Would cyclists rather be injured than uncool?

[Mulger bill]

Is that you Dave?
Trucking that water about has sure given you a serious case of drivers arm there mate

Shaun

[damhooligan]

What's that orange thing?
is that the price tag ??

And why does the cyclist have to give the car 1 meter when overtaking
I'm confused...

[The 2nd Womble]

It's back to front you Spoon

[damhooligan]

It's back to front you Spoon

But that stil does not explain that orange smudge in her neck..


And p.s., I like the back to front idea better...

[trailgumby]

This entire thread is fatally flawed.

It seems there is an assumption that I have any hope of being cool.

Never gonna happen...

[The 2nd Womble]

It's back to front you Spoon

But that stil does not explain that orange smudge in her neck..


And p.s., I like the back to front idea better...

It is the tag DH

[damhooligan]

It's back to front you Spoon

But that stil does not explain that orange smudge in her neck..


And p.s., I like the back to front idea better...

It is the tag DH

A tag, like in facebook


(sorry, I promise that was the last one, for tonight...)

[The 2nd Womble]

*bangs head repeatedly on Coffee Table

No, not like FB

[ausrandoman]

wearing hi-vis does not make cycling safer.

To my surprise, I found this http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12076481 (See also http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/revstruc.htm) Money quote: "We found no trials assessing the effect of visibility aids on the occurrence of pedestrian and cyclist-motor vehicle collisions and injuries." This study is five years old: up to 2006, no-one has tested the epidemiology of hi-vis clothing and bicycle accidents.

The above review also says "Fluorescent materials in yellow, red and orange colours improve detection and recognition in the daytime." It would be very strange if improving the chances of being seen and recognised did not reduce the rate of accidents. Do you have access to more up-to-date information? I'd be very interested to read your evidence that high visibility clothing does not make cycling safer.

Sentenses like that make me laugh, as it is not proven it works, but it would be very strange if it didn't .

What do you think would be effect of reduced visibility ? Have you never, as a cyclist, motorist, runner or in any other activity come close to bumping into something because you didn't notice it until too late?

Being seen is absolutely not enough to reduce accidents....
To reduce accidents you need to do a lot more then 'just being seen' .

Agreed. What is the effect of being hard to see?

Firstly, I don't believe it actually works.
One of the reasosn why is I am not convinced hivis actually works, as I have not seen studies, or other forms of data, proven that it does.
Saying it 'has to work' is not proof
Would be happy to read some more info on if and how this is tested.
But lack of info of this does not make me think, it has to work.

I don't think it has to work. Risk compensation, as occurs in driving, skiing and sky-diving, might be a factor. See, for example, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8198 ... t=Abstract

Secondly , even if it did work, there is stil the other problem; motorists.
As this is based on my own experiences, wich I qualify as reality.
Hivis clothing does not change motorists behaviour, they stil overtake with not enough room.
They stil cut you off.
They still beep you.
They stil.... , and so on...

I wonder how many times a well-intentioned motorist has cut you off because they did not see you? I have come close to cutting off cyclists when I have been driving. My experience, both as a cyclist and as a driver, is that conspicuous clothing results in fewer near misses. Your experience is otherwise. This difference is one of many reasons why individual experience, while compelling to the individual, is a very poor guide to the big picture.

[damhooligan]

What do you think would be effect of reduced visibility ? Have you never, as a cyclist, motorist, runner or in any other activity come close to bumping into something because you didn't notice it until too late?

That is something completely different, hivis is intended to increase visibility.
Implying that not wearing hivis wil decrease visibility is nonsense.

I wonder how many times a well-intentioned motorist has cut you off because they did not see you? I have come close to cutting off cyclists when I have been driving. My experience, both as a cyclist and as a driver, is that conspicuous clothing results in fewer near misses. Your experience is otherwise. This difference is one of many reasons why individual experience, while compelling to the individual, is a very poor guide to the big picture.

Downside of personal opnion is emotions, and the effect that,' what you think you see is not what you actually see because you wanna believe you are wright' syndrome.
I am aware of that, but; the big picture is that cyclists are cut off.
A recent study has shown (no linky, sorry) that a high percentage of cycling accidents are from cyclist being cut off by motorist.
(based on video footage, and not hear say.)

The core thing about being cut off, that it is surprisingly enough done on porpouse,
meaning , I have been seen but they cut me off anyway. (classis : they overtake me, hit the brakes and turn left... )
Same with overtaking, and not being given enough room, thye know I am there, but yet ; not enough room is given.
Both of them are preventable, and presense of hivis is irrelevant, as I have been seen.

The problem is , there are not enough 'well-intentioned' drivers out there.
Hivis wil not change that.

[human909]

Because I believe that cycling should be an everyday activity that is accessible to all I'm not a big fan of hi-vis.

In regular clear day time conditions I am not convinced that it will make a significant difference. The issue with most cycling collisions or near misses is the motorist not even looking or expecting cyclist. Not to mention motorists who see the cyclist but still wont give them space. In low visibility conditions more reflectors and lights the better. A reflective vest and moving ankle reflecties makes you much more visible. Nights when its raining I wear a very bright high vis rain jacket or vest with reflective stripes.

But are the risks so great that I need to wear a high vis evey ride? No. Nor do I believe I need to wear a helmet every ride.

[GraemeL]

The core thing about being cut off, that it is surprisingly enough done on porpouse,
meaning , I have been seen but they cut me off anyway. (classis : they overtake me, hit the brakes and turn left... )
Same with overtaking, and not being given enough room, thye know I am there, but yet ; not enough room is given.
Both of them are preventable, and presense of hivis is irrelevant, as I have been seen.

The problem is , there are not enough 'well-intentioned' drivers out there.
Hivis wil not change that.

So what you are saying is that ALL drivers act like that? There are those drivers out there that don't give a rats and it wouldn't matter if you had a neon sign strapped to your back they will still cut you off.
What about the drivers that have seen a rider because of the high vis and haven't cut them off? Why is it that high vis works in bad weather and a lot of people use it , but they tend to think it's waste of time or it fails in bright sunshine? I would have thought there wasn't a difference in the effectivness.

Graeme

[whichway]

Well there you go.

I never said or implied that:

You need to wear a high vis vest. There are lots of high vis jerseys that are pretty much the same to wear as any other jersey except for the colour
If you wear high vis you would be entirely safe or that you still wouldn't need to take care on the road. We can all be wiped out by someone who is not even looking at the road.
Made any comment about riding at night in high vis

In order to reinforce arguements, many spurious issues have been raised (eg what am I going to do with my high vis vest when I get to work).

I still haven't seen any arguement that says that high vis clothing is actually more dangerous than the alternative (particularly flouro yellow, flouro green or white), and if people want to beleive that high vis makes absolutely no difference to being seen, then that is up to them.

So apart from looking a bit uncool, I still can't see any reason not to wear high vis.

As one of the posters said though, people have strong opinions and won't be swayed by discussion. Reading some of the posts it is interesting to see what some people will say to reinforce their positions.

[KenGS]

I agree totally that everyone should choose clothing according to their circumstances

[Livetoride]

On a dark or over cast day I think hi-vis works, I don't wear it though only because I don't like the look of it to be honest but thats my personnel choice. As for it saving your life or saves you from getting hit... not sure on that idea, I've been hit at night once (from behind), with two flashing bright red lights on the rear of babe and one on my helmet and one very bright one on the front. Have had a number of close calls too, if you can't see me with all that hi-res isn't going to make much more of a difference. Its a case of the motorists not looking for us, or not paying attention (not saying all drivers with that comment)

[jet-ski]

Well there you go.

I never said or implied that:

You need to wear a high vis vest. There are lots of high vis jerseys that are pretty much the same to wear as any other jersey except for the colour
If you wear high vis you would be entirely safe or that you still wouldn't need to take care on the road. We can all be wiped out by someone who is not even looking at the road.
Made any comment about riding at night in high vis

In order to reinforce arguements, many spurious issues have been raised (eg what am I going to do with my high vis vest when I get to work).

I still haven't seen any arguement that says that high vis clothing is actually more dangerous than the alternative (particularly flouro yellow, flouro green or white), and if people want to beleive that high vis makes absolutely no difference to being seen, then that is up to them.

So apart from looking a bit uncool, I still can't see any reason not to wear high vis.

As one of the posters said though, people have strong opinions and won't be swayed by discussion. Reading some of the posts it is interesting to see what some people will say to reinforce their positions.

There's your problem, right there. Not all of us wear jerseys! I wear everyday clothes for 90% of my riding. The only way to intro high vis is to wear a vest, but then what do I do with it when I arrive at my destination (NOT WORK - I have space under my desk etc to put stuff), but at pubs/art galleries/cinemas/theatres/restaurants etc.

[GraemeL]

There's your problem, right there. Not all of us wear jerseys! I wear everyday clothes for 90% of my riding. The only way to intro high vis is to wear a vest, but then what do I do with it when I arrive at my destination (NOT WORK - I have space under my desk etc to put stuff), but at pubs/art galleries/cinemas/theatres/restaurants etc.

if you have a bag roll it up and put it into that, if you don't then simply run your lock through the arm hole and lock it to the bike or roll it up an put it inside your helmet.
They aren't all that big and roll up quite small.

Graeme

[rkelsen]

We can all be wiped out by someone who is not even looking at the road.

Exactly.

I suspect that it's the way your question is framed that made people respond negatively to you.

While you mightn't have meant it this way, you come across as though you're saying that people who don't wear hi-vis are asking to be hit by a car.

[jet-ski]

There's your problem, right there. Not all of us wear jerseys! I wear everyday clothes for 90% of my riding. The only way to intro high vis is to wear a vest, but then what do I do with it when I arrive at my destination (NOT WORK - I have space under my desk etc to put stuff), but at pubs/art galleries/cinemas/theatres/restaurants etc.

if you have a bag roll it up and put it into that, if you don't then simply run your lock through the arm hole and lock it to the bike or roll it up an put it inside your helmet.
They aren't all that big and roll up quite small.

Graeme

No bag. No coat either. It's Perth in Summer! geez

[damhooligan]

The core thing about being cut off, that it is surprisingly enough done on porpouse,
meaning , I have been seen but they cut me off anyway. (classis : they overtake me, hit the brakes and turn left... )
Same with overtaking, and not being given enough room, thye know I am there, but yet ; not enough room is given.
Both of them are preventable, and presense of hivis is irrelevant, as I have been seen.

The problem is , there are not enough 'well-intentioned' drivers out there.
Hivis wil not change that.

So what you are saying is that ALL drivers act like that? There are those drivers out there that don't give a rats and it wouldn't matter if you had a neon sign strapped to your back they will still cut you off.
What about the drivers that have seen a rider because of the high vis and haven't cut them off? Why is it that high vis works in bad weather and a lot of people use it , but they tend to think it's waste of time or it fails in bright sunshine? I would have thought there wasn't a difference in the effectivness.Graeme

Nooo, I am not saying that all drivers act like that.
But saying that those who do act like that are not persuaded to act differently because of hivis accessories.

And just because many people use it , doesn't mean it works.

Feel free to explain to me how highvis works, as I don't see it.
And when using it in in bad weather , do you also use other accesories?
Like bike lights??.

[ausrandoman]

Here is some research for those who are interested in data and who think that measurement is more useful than anger and bitterness.

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/29579/1/29579.pdf

http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/research/ ... arc263.pdf

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content ... 1.abstract

http://www.acrs.org.au/srcfiles/ACRSVol21-3-WebLR.pdf

http://btawa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/ ... esults.pdf

[GraemeL]

No bag. No coat either. It's Perth in Summer! geez

Do you wear cleated shoes? If so then what do you so with them when you go to the pub, movies etc?


Graeme

[Mulger bill]

I agree totally that everyone should choose clothing according to their circumstances

Nomination for the Kissinger award methinks...

[human909]

Do you wear cleated shoes? If so then what do you so with them when you go to the pub, movies etc?

Why the hell would I wear cleated shoes to the pub or the to the movies? Most drivers don't wear driving shoes, driving hats or driving goggle yet they all used to exist. If I am walking to the pub then I don't wear my racing spikes!

The question could equally be asked would pedestrians be injured rather than uncool? Or even would motorists rather be injured than uncool.

[GraemeL]

Do you wear cleated shoes? If so then what do you so with them when you go to the pub, movies etc?

Why the hell would I wear cleated shoes to the pub or the to the movies? Most drivers don't wear driving shoes, driving hats or driving goggle yet they all used to exist. If I am walking to the pub then I don't wear my racing spikes!

The question could equally be asked would pedestrians be injured rather than uncool? Or even would motorists rather be injured than uncool.

Geez take a breath and climb back down!
It was a simple question, the reason I asked was because I wondered if you rode a road bike and if you did, you probably have cleatss. I was going to suggest you put the vest with the shoes if you changed them one when you arrived.

Graeme