[tentboy]

This is a terrible argument it is not a one to one comparison.

If you are shunted in the rear on the way to work in your car you might have a inconvenient morning and an insurance claim. If the same thing happens on your bike you could quite literally die from a head injury.

I skated for a long time and didn't wear a helmet because of comfort/looks. I've become a bit more wise since and won't share the road with cars without my helmet when I'm cycling

[Lio]

If you get “shunted” from behind by an SUV, 3cm of expanded polystyrene foam is going to make FA difference to the outcome.

Bike helmets are designed for low speed crashes NOT involving vehicles.

Now I still wear one myself but I don’t fool myself that doing so brings me any protection from someone driving an SUV who thinks they’ll be late getting to a 24 supermarket if don’t just squeeze by me.

It’s like putting an oven glove on an egg and hitting it with a hammer.

[Lio]

Just incase anyone wonders why I wear a helmet when I think they’re as useless as “anti-volcano spray”, it’s because they make my head a more aerodynamic shape.

A quick look a Strava’s stats will show you that even weak club cyclists like me, living somewhere pretty flattish, can already cruise about at over 20mph pretty easily.

Pedal assist ebikes just expand that ability to a wider number of people.

Just look at the number of people who regularly crash in amateur crit races.

We generally survive non-vehicle related crashes at these speeds pretty well and people on ebikes will too.

[jdavis703]

In my personal experience the top dangers on a bike come from the side. These are the things that happen to me at least once a week:

- Driver mergers in to me too soon

- Passenger or driver opens door in to my path

- Driver making turn cuts me off and I have to swerve or brake suddenly

- Driver does a right-hand hook across bike lane to make a right turn.

In almost all these cases I’m going to be crushed by a moving vehicle. A helmet won’t save me.

As for being rear ended... I’ve personally never felt like I had a “rear end” close call on a bike.

[asjw]

Ironically these are the same dangers bike poses to pedestrians

And with the boom of food delivery,mostly done by bike, the situation got a lot worse

Just two hours ago a guy working for glovo merged on the sidewalk while I was trying to cross on the zebra walks and almost hit me.

He was using one hand, wasn't looking, with the other hand was speaking at the phone and didn't stop at the red light

No need to specify they are not allowed on sidewalks, but who's gonna fine them?

It happens constantly, but bikers usually think that cars are to blame, when cars usually let me cross when the light is green, they usually stop at the red light and they usually don't ride on the sidewalk

Give people bikes that can go at 30km/h and you have the recipe for a disaster

We already have regular and e-mopeds but at least they are heavy regulated and need a mandatory insurance (at least in Italy)

[jdavis703]

I regularly call out bikes who don’t give the right of way to pedestrians in the crosswalk.

That said, unless someone is already frail being hit by a bike is nothing like being hit by a car. I’ve had two red-light running bicyclists crash in to me (once while biking, once while skateboarding). I’ve also been in three separate cars that got rear-ended (none of those times was I driving). The level of pain is an order of magnitude different.

[chinesempire]

> being hit by a bike is nothing like being hit by a car

You're completely right!

Cars are engineered to reduce the damages of a direct impact.

Bikes are not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_safety_through_vehi...

Studies agree that the damages are mostly caused by speed

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24435732

E-bikes can go at very high speeds (30km/h is more than enough to be deadly) and can do it effortlessly, which means the even bikers that aren't expert can go at such high speeds, increasing the risk of hurting someone else or themselves.

Add to that the fact that a car can break or avoid obstacles in a much more efficient way than a bike could ever do (think about heavy breaking with a bike at 25 km/h under heavy rain on the pavet and then think about it on a car).

I'm not a supporter of cars, I've been car free for a few years now, but I don't think bikes are less dangerous for pedestrians.

There are simply less of them around.

> The level of pain is an order of magnitude different

The maximum level of pain I suffered was because of my bad teeth

I was in a very bad car accident (a tire detached from my car while driving on the highway and I lost control), the pain was a joke compared to that.

Pain is not a strong indicator of dangerous physical damage.

For example internal bleeding is usually painless.

[Grue3]

And yet how many people die from being hit by bikes? It's barely even an issue. Even in European cities where you can step on the wrong side of a sidewalk and instantly get smashed into. It's an imaginary problem.

>Add to that the fact that a car can break or avoid obstacles in a much more efficient way than a bike could ever do

That's obviously false. Just consider the stuff that BMX bikes can do in terms of maneuvering. Or even normal bikes. Try driving on a car through a busy pedestrian street. On a bike it's a piece of cake, and you won't have to stop even once.

[chinesempire]

> And yet how many people die from being hit by bikes? It's barely even an issue

First of all, it's all in the news, I'm not making things up

https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped...

Or you can look at this, specifically the chapters "Cyclist Deaths and Impairment", "Cyclist Helmets Statistics" and "Staying Safe while Cycling"

https://bayareabicyclelaw.com/safety-laws/bike-stats/

and we don't have enough data (AKA it's not been collected until few years ago) to say that "it's barely even an issue"

Secondly, bikers most of all kill themselves.

"One in five people injured on Australian roads and paths is a cyclist, according to a new Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report"

https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/injury/pedal-cyclist-injury-...

Is it because of the road conditions, the presence of cars or other vehicles?

Or is it because cyclists underestimate the risks?

According to the same study, motorcyclists only account for 2.7% of the hospitalizations.

They share the road with cars as well, they go faster than bikes on the same roads.

What could be different?

Could it be that the safety measures engineered in motorbikes and the safety measures motorbikers take to protect themselves are actually useful to reduce physical damages?

Even Netherlands has a big problem with bikers dying more than ever because of underestimating risks.

https://www.iamexpat.nl/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/death-toll-...

> That's obviously false. Just consider the stuff that BMX bikes can do in terms of maneuvering

An expert biker on a BMX you mean!

If I give a BMX to my mother, 71 years old, she couldn't even ride it.

It's like saying "now look what this rally pilot can do on terrain with their fine tuned 4wd monster car"