[Orestes Munn]

@rcannon100 98203 wrote:

Now I get to play the role of Dasgeh. Oooooooooooooooh this sounds like victim blaming.

Of all the really bad things that have happened to cyclists in our area, I have never not once read or heard this as a factor.

I would also seriously question the methodology. Exactly how was the blood alcohol level tested on the dead body lying on the pavement?

And then this????????

I am sorry, that pretty much seals that this is BS. If you died bc of a traffic accident, your helmet probably would not have save your life. I do not want to enter the helmet wars. I wear a helmet ever single ride. But I am under NO ILLUSION. A helmet give you a little bit of protection. And I am the type of person who is willing to do something that gains a little bit more protection (use lights, high viz, choose safe routes, make sure my brakes work). But those who attack helmets are right – the amount of protection a helmet provides is much less than purported. It’s going to protect you from a nasty head laceration. Its not going to protect you from a concussion. And if you get hit by a truck, its going to do almost nothing.

Uummm. Can I recommend that you try hanging out with different men 30-49? As the modernists taught, perception depends a lot on perspective.

Anyone found dead on the street, bike or no bike will be at least referred to the medical examiner who will likely test for alcohol and drugs. Those data can be of considerable legal importance. An appreciable number of those found down will die in hospital, where tox screening is routine.

Agree that helmets have no role in preventing concussion, but they do help prevent skull fractures, which increase the likelihood of death from head injury.

[Orestes Munn]

Anyone found dead, bike or no bike will be at least referred to the medical examiner and they will likely get blood for alcohol and drugs, which data can be of considerable legal importance. An appreciable number of those found down will die in hospital, where tox screening is routine.

Agree that helmets have no role in preventing concussion, but they do prevent skull fractures, which increase the likelihood of death from head injury.

[Orestes Munn]

@chris_s 97168 wrote:

I can vouch for this as well.

I have been relying on this for three decades, during a couple of which I commuted 11 mi each way and practiced clinical medicine half time. I got no complaints, but plenty of looks askance when people asked where I showered. I do, absolutely, have to wash my face, though.

[Orestes Munn]

@mstone 97825 wrote:

Meh. If you’re biking to look cool, you’re probably confused.

I don’t bike to look cool, but cycling looks cool when I do it.

[Orestes Munn]

@mstone 97819 wrote:

The vis360 is 130g for the front & back lights and the battery. Unless you spent serious money on your helmet, it’s not all that noticeable and slides off easily when not needed.

Might have to fall back on “they’re just too geeky”.

[Orestes Munn]

I think helmet mounts are ridiculous and I can’t stand feeling of a weight on my head, but I recognize that many people love them. So let me say that one can learn to use them without being obnoxious.

I have spent a lot of time on sail boats at night, where everyone has a headlamp, most of which are powerful enough light up the top of the sails for trimming. They also have low and red settings. The first night or two each newbie manages to blind some dark adapted crewmate who is trying to do something important like steer the boat by the compass or find tiny lights far away. By the end of the race, this doesn’t happen any more, because people have learned to use the damn things properly. Of course, learning requires feedback in the form of outraged cursing and the occasional thrown object, but I guess you can get that on the trail, too.

[Orestes Munn]

It might be helpful to consider a case or two. The parallel has some problems, but a few decades ago, the general society was quite uninterested in fair treatment of racial minorities as a social good and, in many cases, defended its “right” to discriminate in savage ways. While things are far from perfect today, the situation has changed radically. Overt racial discrimination is not something reasonable people do or admit to in public. Arguably, this came about because majority individuals’ developed the capacity better to identify with members of minority groups. Was the evolution in the perception of minorities causative or reflective of legislative and behavioral changes? Clearly, policies such as anti-discrimination laws are “outcomes-driven”, but would they have been possible without a change in perception?

[Orestes Munn]

@Crickey7 97699 wrote:

I think the issue in the early 1980’s was that manufacturers were desperately trying to reduce weight, but the technology and materials they had available to them were not really up to the task. You may recall a brief obsession with drilling components. Then, of course, we saw the creation of the oversized aluminum frame with its astonishing lightness but incredibly harsh ride qualities.

The bikes we have today are truly wonderful. Light, fast, reliable and comfortable. Nostalgia is fine, but I’d ride a 2015 Roubaix frame with 105 components over any bike made before 2000.

I just put new old-stock Dura Ace 7800 and Ksyrium Elites on my 1983 Peter Mooney. I take a Burkean, incrementalist, approach to updating bike gear.

[Orestes Munn]

@Crickey7 97695 wrote:

I remember biking in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. If you may recall, the saying in buying bikes and bke parts for a long time was “Cheap, light or strong: pick two.” The bikes from that era allowed you to pick one. The friction shift derailleurs on my 12-speed Peugeot were made out of cast aluminum, possibly the worst material ever used for bike parts.

I picked 1975 (might have been 76) because I was in my second year of college, got the racing bug and was introduced to the outer-suburban roads of Southeastern PA, after having grown up riding around the streets of Manhattan. I had never been assaulted simply for the act of riding a bicycle before.

As to gear, that year I got a nice little used Coppi frame with a Campy group and tubulars. I loved that bike and rusted through two paint jobs from the sweat I generated on it. It was light and strong enough (except for the crevice-corroded crank arm, which nearly neutered me). I didn’t mind the friction levers.

As I remember, the bike boom had been in full flower for a few years, because we all had UO-8s, Fujis, and Atalas in high school and the coolest kids had PX-10s and Paramounts.

[Orestes Munn]

Oh yes. Biking is big. Legislators and planners differ only in degree of friendliness to cycling. The proliferation of bicycle shops in the last decade is staggering. Cycling appears in ads from every cheesy HMO, clothing manufacturer, and yogurt fermenter. (No auto maker or oil baron loses a penny when someone buys a bike.) Cycling has become more embedded in the culture than at any time since the 1890s.

…and yet, somehow, it sucks like 1975 out on the road and I’m 58 instead of 19 and living in a contributory negligence state.

[Orestes Munn]

@DismalScientist 97611 wrote:

Does segregated infrastructure really tell drivers that bikes belong or rather that bikes don’t belong in regular traffic lanes?

Drivers continually question why cyclists are on the road at all when such facilities exist in parallel or even elsewhere entirely. While segregated facilities are great, I still worry about their ultimate effect on my ability to use the road when I want to and without harassment by motorists.

[Orestes Munn]

@americancyclo 97559 wrote:

A morel diet? psilocybilicious

If that’s your idea of fun, Gus…

[Orestes Munn]

@Crickey7 97541 wrote:

I went on a moral diet and feel much better now.

That moral fiber’ll give you a good poop in the morning!

[Orestes Munn]

@Alcova cyclist 97473 wrote:

There also seems to be a bizarre (to me anyway) political aspect to cyclist-driver debates. As the left-right divide seems to grow more rancorous each year, even issues that seem non-partisan become polarized through the left-right lens. Since cycling in general, and cycle commuting in particular, is viewed as something people concerned about the environment do, it’s perceived as a “lefty” activity, and therefore fair game for abuse/trolling/invective from the RW fringe.

It may be bizarre, but it fits a tiresomely prevalent American political narrative fairly well: Cyclists are an undeserving and clamorous minority, protected and subsidized by the state in violation of the perceived rights of the majority and a common perception of their natural desserts; to wit, getting crushed for doing something manifestly stupid. Add to this that cyclists tend to be socioeconomically elite and are perceived, with some justification, to be smug about their ethical and health advantages over the rest of society, and it’s pretty rich political fare.

[Author]

Posts