Journalism and Cycling 2: the difficult second album

CramCycle

There are a huge number of flaws in the paper, not limited to:
- A common mechanism for cycling injuries is a collision with a motor vehicle, but the mechanism of injury is unknown for the majority of collisions. So basically they don't have info on the majority of collisions resulting in hospitalisations and therefore are likely to be underestimating, how significantly cannot be postulated.
-They make the assumption in their highlights that all bicycle collisoins result in hospitalisations, I have had loads of accidents, very few have required hospitalisation, and I suspect a huge number of incidents go the same way. This leads to claims of dramatic injuries to represent a far higher percentage of overall incidents.
- 39 % of those who came in didn't record whether that had a helmet or not Helmet use was documented in 250 cases (61%). Of these, 160 (64.0%) were wearing a helmet. Of those who did not wear a helmet, 47/90 (52.2%) sustained a head injury compared with 44/160 (27.5%) in the group who were wearing a helmet. This is being skewed as being representative when over 1/3 of the data is missing. They also don't disparage between what accidents actually involved head collisions or minor collisions that might not have involved any head contact so it is hard to establish.
- Their data on moratality rates is the most interesting, like most medics they try and present facts as statistics and fail. There thankfully isn't enough data to get meaningful stats but if you take their way of looking at it, of the 11 who didn't make it to hospital, the split was almost even on helmet/non helmet use, although all had head injuries which proved fatal.
- There are huge jumps and the references are a mess and strike me like a 1st year college student who only read the abstract, one of the refrences "meta analysis" papers has been widely discredited.

I appreciate that they try to be fair but they have an inherent bias where they can't see the holes in their data as an issue, all in all, it doesn't really say anything one way or another.

If anyone wants a copy of the full paper, I can send it on, just drop me a PM

micar

Last time I came for the bike was due to a very deep pothole. It had been raining pretty heavily and there was a lot of surface water.

I was filtering between the kerb and cars stuck in traffic.

The front wheel hit the pothole and I went forward almost over the handle bars. Struck my shoulder off the wing mirror of a taxi damaging it.

Got his details and contacted Dublin City Council.

They sorted the taxi driver out in getting it replaced but did nothing about the pothole.

tomasrojo

CramCycle wrote: »

They make the assumption in their highlights that all bicycle collisoins result in hospitalisations,

:rolleyes:

Type 17

micar wrote: »

...They sorted the taxi driver out in getting it replaced but did nothing about the pothole.

Sums up DCC in many ways :rolleyes:

Seth Brundle

Had the unfortunate experience in the car just now of switching from CD to radio only to find Ray Darcy reading out listeners letters about the lack of bells on bicycles and how most bikes don't have a bell (and are sold without a bell) despite, as Darcy claims, a bell being a legal requirement under the Road Traffic Act.
I've no desire to listen to him for the rest of his show so don't know if anyone has corrected him.

magicbastarder

i'm fairly certain he's correct about a bike legally requiring a bell?

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0524/1051381-cycling/

juicer

magicbastarder wrote: »

i'm fairly certain he's correct about a bike legally requiring a bell?

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/0524/1051381-cycling/

I believe the law says they are required unless the bike is adapted for racing.

magicbastarder

'specially adapted for racing' i think is the phrase. would be a hard one to explain to a garda on a bike that's clearly not used for racing.

Chips Lovell

Law says any bike "other than a cycle constructed or adapted for use as a racing cycle". Basically any drop handle bar bike or mountain bike could be ruled out.

magicbastarder

it's so vague as to be meaningless. who decides what a racing cycle is?
'the witness for the prosecution claims no one in their right mind would race with mudguards on their bike', etc.

Harrybelafonte

Is the law not that they have to be sold with a bell.

Ye could try claiming that your training for the Dutch headwind championship, if you're on a single speed

Idleater

red_ken wrote: »

Ye could try claiming that your training for the Dutch headwind championship, if you're on a single speed

Or the Brompton championship.

Although they come with a bell as standard :-D

tomasrojo

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Is the law not that they have to be sold with a bell.

Think that's a UK law. Irish law says you have to have one -- apart from an ambigious "racing" exemption, mentioned above.

I'm a late convert to bells, I now like them, I find them useful in a very modest way.

But, honestly, who gives a sh1t if people don't have them.

tomasrojo

From the Legislation thread:

S.I. No. 190/1963 - Road Traffic (Construction, Equipment and Use of Vehicles) Regulations, 1963.
93. (1) Every pedal cycle (other than a cycle constructed or adapted for use as a racing cycle) while used in a public place shall be fitted with an audible warning device consisting of a bell capable of being heard at a reasonable distance, and no other type of audible warning instrument shall be fitted to a pedal cycle while used in a public place.

Hurrache

The only bikes I've bought that have come with bells are kids, neither road, hybrid or mountain have them.

Duckjob

Good to know that the Irish radio presenters as always have their fingers on the pulse of the main issues around road safety.

tomasrojo

Ultimately though I decided to tackle the bell removal, and after employing an exotic tool known as a "screwdriver" I eventually succeeded in doing so, but then there was a frightening stretch of time during which my bicycle had no bell at all which meant it was completely unrideable!

https://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2016/01/trials-and-tintinnabulations.html

fat bloke

TBH, I think if you're cycling anywhere within any kind of shared vicinity of people walking where you are approaching to pass them from behind, then you should have a bell. A close-pass is a close-pass whether it's a car on a bike or a bike on a walker, and Lord knows we know how unnerving they can be (though less potential for lethality in the latter case obviously).

I don't particularly like using a bell, having said that cos it smacks a bit of "Oi, gerrouddadefuppinwayyagimp" but equally on the rare rare occasion when I'm approaching pedestrians from behind I feel a bit silly with my tentative "emmm... hiya...sorry there...just ah..."

Whatever way you announce your approach, anyone who burns past a walker at speed from behind is just as much of a knob as any inconsiderate white-van-man.

Chips Lovell

If there's one thing I know about Irish radio it's that there's no subject too trivial for Ray Darcy to have a moan about.

Type 17

People complaining to Ray Darcy about bike not having bells is only one step along from "they don't even pay road tax, Joe" - the complainers just don't like people on bikes, and are finding anything they can to complain about...

Personally, I have bells on all my bikes (even the ones constructed for racing ) because they're handy on shared ped/cycle paths - on the road? 'fart in a hurricane' level of usefulness.

fat bloke

The obvious next question is:

Dura ace bell? Or will an ultegra do the job.

Chips Lovell

Well the Dura Ace bell is 2g lighter but its carbon fibre body means you don't get much of a "ding" more of a dull "thwack".

My eldest has learned early in life that some people really don't like having bells rung at them. Never fails to give me satisfaction when she rings her bell behind some one and they turn ready to give it socks only to realise it's a child.

Harrybelafonte

As someone who uses a bell on a pretty heavy “you don’t want me slamming into you in this” cargo bike I can confirm that bells are absolutely useless and ignored by pedestrians.

tomasrojo

They're handy enough for going around blind corners on two-way cycle tracks. At least the two people riding side-by-side towards you get to hear you coming.

Or when someone has parked a van on a cycle track and you have to squeeze by, and you know there's a fair chance they're going to wander out without looking from behind the van out onto the track to get something.

But they're not essential. Just useful in a very modest way.

eeeee

I've never had a bell on any of my bikes.
I do have a good set of lungs though!

Grassey

FF fluff document on how great cycling is and how we need immediate action to capitalise on it.

Car free Dublin every Sunday,
More segregation, more law enforcement, more everythijg


https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/63507271/mobility-cycling-in-dublin-post-covid-19

magicbastarder

New 128km Irish greenway through three counties just given green light
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/irish-greenway-through-three-counties-gets-green-light/

Duckjob

Grassey wrote: »

FF fluff document on how great cycling is and how we need immediate action to capitalise on it.

Car free Dublin every Sunday,
More segregation, more law enforcement, more everythijg


https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/63507271/mobility-cycling-in-dublin-post-covid-19

Both FF and FG are great at talking the talk about supporting cycling when it suits them but their actions on cycling (or in this case, lack of them) when they had the chance speaks much louder than their words.