A blonde wig is safer than a helmet according to:

[wafflycat]

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Dennis Davis
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> In the referenced article, "lubaloo" <[email protected]> writes:
>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/5334208.stm
>>
>> or see the original press release at:
>>
>> http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/releases/overtaking110906.html
>
> Anyone got a link to the actual paper?
>

Here's a start

http://www.drianwalker.com/overtaking/overtakingprobrief.pdf

Cheers, helen s

 

[Mike Clark]

In message <[email protected]>
"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote:

>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > in message <[email protected]>, Dennis Davis
> > ('[email protected]') wrote:
> >
> >> In the referenced article, "lubaloo" <[email protected]> writes:
> >>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/5334208.stm
> >>
> >> or see the original press release at:
> >>
> >> http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/releases/overtaking110906.html
> >
> > Anyone got a link to the actual paper?
> >
>
> Here's a start
>
> http://www.drianwalker.com/overtaking/overtakingprobrief.pdf
>
> Cheers, helen s
>

What is interesting is to compare what the BBC have written based on the
Bath University press release and then following an interview with a
spokesperson from RoSPA. The BBC have inserted

"But the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said tests have
shown helmets protect against injuries."

and

"We wouldn't recommend that people stop wearing helmets because of this
research. Helmets have been shown to reduce the likelihood of head and
brain injuries in a crash."

--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"

 

[naked_draughtsman]

dkahn400 wrote:
> Once everyone has a BW though, the effect may disappear.

Plenty available on ebay - £37 though is comparable with a helmet!

peter

 

[Yet Another Graham]

"BigRab" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Note the poor fella was hit twice by overtaking vehicles during the
> course of the experiment. He must be extremely unlucky compared to me
> as I've only been hit once in excess of 200 000 miles!
>
> Will the trolls come out from under their rocks and start W*** wars
> now?
>

They probably drove closer 'cos they knew that even if they hit the cyclist
the helmet would ensure that they were uninjured.

Will that do?

 

[Just Visiting]

"lubaloo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/5334208.stm
>

Just an idea, but if we assume that if I wear a wig & don't ride a folder &
wear bright colours & sacrifice a fresh virgin every time I want to go out
for a ride that that will mean that the car drivers I come across won't
still be cretins who think 8.5cm that is acceptable clearance ... surely the
best plan would be to kill all of them.

Seriously... an average of 8.5cm? Average of what?

 

[POHB]

Just Visiting wrote:
>
> Seriously... an average of 8.5cm? Average of what?

"twice as likely to get close to the bicycle, at an average of 8.5cm"
makes no sense at all really. I think it means the drivers passed an
average of 8.5 cm closer when he was wearing a helmet than when he was
bare headed. But what does "twice as liley to get close" mean?

 

[Mike the unimaginative]

Tim Forcer <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On 11 Sep 2006 07:37 normanwisdom wrote:
>>
>> I always notice the difference between wearing a bright yellow top
>> compared to something dull such as a navy T shirt.
>
> Agree.
>
> Years ago, I had one of those reflector-on-an-arm things. It didn't
> increase the width of road I took up by more than an inch or so, but
> it did seem to make a significant difference to the clearance I was
> given. I attributed that to it being obvious and at around
> car-driver's eye-height.
>
I conducted a non-scientific sort-of-randomised trial of a reflector on
a stick, which I reported on URC, about 18 months ago. My observations
on a fairly busy suburban road was that the passing distance was not
affected significantly by the stick, if anything the reflector may have
caused / resulted in motor vehicles to pass slightly more dangerously /
closer. Follow up posters suggested that this may have been because
drivers had something to focus on, and caused a 'attraction' toward the
bicycle.
The main benefit of a reflector arms is the sense of security they give
the rider (he**ets anyone?). I also suspect they unreasonably aggravate
drivers.

Mike - Leicester

 

[Nobody Here]

Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nobody Here wrote:
>
>> Hmmm. Until I read the wig bit I was wondering if the difference was
>> at least in part to him adopting a different style of riding when
>> unhelmented, for example unconciously riding closer to the curb so as
>> to position himself further from the traffic flow.
>
> Distance from the kerb was another factor the research was looking at,
> so clearly considered in the experimental design.
>
>> I don't think it makes any
>> difference to me if they're helmeted or not
>
> Apparently not what Dr. Walker's research found though...

Well, no, he didn't measure *me*. Perhaps I should have added emphasis,
as in "I don't *think* it makes any difference to *me* if they're helmeted
or not ...", which was my introduction to a description of the things that
I *do* think make a difference to *me*.

It's all *me*, *me*, *me* ... ;-)

--
Nobby Anderson

 

[Brendan Halpin]

"POHB" <[email protected]> writes:

> But what does "twice as liley to get close" mean?

It means that the journalist can read but has difficulty with
maths/stats and spatial conceptualisation.


Brendan
--
Brendan Halpin, Department of Sociology, University of Limerick, Ireland
Tel: w +353-61-213147 f +353-61-202569 h +353-61-338562; Room F2-025 x 3147
mailto:[email protected] http://www.ul.ie/sociology/brendan.halpin.html

 

[Peter Clinch]

Nobody Here wrote:

> Well, no, he didn't measure *me*. Perhaps I should have added emphasis,
> as in "I don't *think* it makes any difference to *me* if they're helmeted
> or not ...", which was my introduction to a description of the things that
> I *do* think make a difference to *me*.

Fair point, but OTOH it could well be a bit like risk compensation
(which it is a strand of, of course, just somebody else taking the
risk!) where the subject is clearly not the best judge of their own
performance.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[normanwisdom]

Mike the unimaginative wrote:
> Tim Forcer <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > On 11 Sep 2006 07:37 normanwisdom wrote:
> >>
> >> I always notice the difference between wearing a bright yellow top
> >> compared to something dull such as a navy T shirt.
> >
> > Agree.
> >
> > Years ago, I had one of those reflector-on-an-arm things. It didn't
> > increase the width of road I took up by more than an inch or so, but
> > it did seem to make a significant difference to the clearance I was
> > given. I attributed that to it being obvious and at around
> > car-driver's eye-height.
> >
> I conducted a non-scientific sort-of-randomised trial of a reflector on
> a stick, which I reported on URC, about 18 months ago. My observations
> on a fairly busy suburban road was that the passing distance was not
> affected significantly by the stick, if anything the reflector may have
> caused / resulted in motor vehicles to pass slightly more dangerously /
> closer. Follow up posters suggested that this may have been because
> drivers had something to focus on, and caused a 'attraction' toward the
> bicycle.
> The main benefit of a reflector arms is the sense of security they give
> the rider (he**ets anyone?). I also suspect they unreasonably aggravate
> drivers.
>
> Mike - Leicester

Well yes my test of yellow tops is also non-scientific
sort-of-randomised, but has convinced me nevertheless. The reason why
it's effective is that bright yellow is firmly associated with road
workers, police, emergency services etc. So a not very attentive driver
on autopilot will automatically slow down and/or give room, even if the
bright yellow is on a cyclist, or anything else for that matter.
I think it is well worth testing scientifically and would prove to be
more important for safety than wearing h....ts!

cheers
Jacob

 

[Mark]

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 16:31:38 +0100, Tim Forcer <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 15:52, Colin McKenzie wrote:
>>
>> It is certainly true that a significant number of bus and
>> lorry drivers overtake in a way that assumes the cyclist
>> will move over or slow down once the overtaker has
>> his nose in front. Even if they are not trying to get past
>> before it gets too narrow.
>
>IME (which, I acknowledge, is substantially less than that of the
>majority of posters), most lorry drivers take great care to give
>reasonable clearance and to be properly ahead before moving in. A
>small minority just barge around, and shove all other road-users, no
>matter how many wheels they may have (ie they aren't specifically
>bike-haters, they hate everyone).
>
>IME, bus drivers either give bikes similar consideration, or do their
>best to make life difficult/dangerous. They seem to be more or less
>evenly divided between these two tendencies! Of course, "bus" lanes
>are treated by some bus drivers as being for the exclusive use of
>their bus, and they get incensed when they find a bike or motorbike or
>taxi (or even another bus) using it.

My limited experience is similar to yours: most lorry drivers give
plenty of room, car drivers are normally fairly bad at giving room and
bus drivers either give plently of room or run you off the road.
(There are no bus lanes where I ride).

Mark

 

[Tony Raven]

Nobody Here wrote on 12/09/2006 09:09 +0100:
>
> Well, no, he didn't measure *me*. Perhaps I should have added emphasis,
> as in "I don't *think* it makes any difference to *me* if they're helmeted
> or not ...", which was my introduction to a description of the things that
> I *do* think make a difference to *me*.
>
> It's all *me*, *me*, *me* ... ;-)
>

And there are plenty of people who think that research evidence on the
risks of smoking won't apply to *them* but unfortunately events tend to
prove them wrong although there will always be the odd anecdote of a
heavy smoker living to 100 that people will cling to.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

 

[Tim Forcer]

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 07:39, Mike the unimaginative wrote:
>
> Tim Forcer wrote:
>>
>> Years ago, I had one of those reflector-on-an-arm things. It didn't
>> increase the width of road I took up by more than an inch or so, but
>> it did seem to make a significant difference to the clearance I was
>> given. I attributed that to it being obvious and at around
>> car-driver's eye-height.
>
> I conducted a non-scientific sort-of-randomised trial of a reflector on
> a stick, which I reported on URC, about 18 months ago.

Can't find it on Google groups. Any chance of thread title or date or
summat?

> My observations on a fairly busy suburban road was that the
> passing distance was not affected significantly by the stick, if
> anything the reflector may have caused / resulted in motor
> vehicles to pass slightly more dangerously / closer. Follow
> up posters suggested that this may have been because
> drivers had something to focus on, and caused a 'attraction'
> toward the bicycle.

That different experience could well reflect a gradual change in
driving styles over the intervening decades. I certainly feel the
"attractor" argument has substance - like the (apocryphal?) tree in
the middle of Australia which is always being run into, as it's the
only clearly visible feature in hundreds of miles of road. Or maybe
in the 1980s, the gadget gave out the subliminal message "KID - keep
clear", whereas now it's "NERD - reduce the gene pool"?

OTOH, I find car drivers give offside kerbs a much wider berth than
nearside, despite having a much better view of the former. There's a
central traffic light island on my daily route, where the road allows
one lane in one direction, two in the other. The two lanes are wide
enough for cars to be alongside one another, but most of those in the
outside lane tend to shear to the left a bit as they pass the island
to give it a wide berth. Nearside kerbs, particularly on left-hand
bends, are (as all cyclists see all the time?) frequently clipped or
nearly so - whether or not there's a cyclist around. Another
middle-of-the-road traffic light island on my commute causes a similar
effect, with cars reluctant to get anything like as close to the
island as they will to vehicles queuing to turn right ahead of that
island.
</digress>

--
Tim Forcer [email protected]
The University of Southampton, UK

The University is not responsible for my opinions

 

[Tim Forcer]

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:27 patrick j wrote:
>
> I've a sneaking suspicion it's a man wearing a blonde wig that the drivers
> don't want to get too close to.
>
> It has occurred to me that to ride completely in drag might ensure being
> given even more space by other road users

Just where would one apply the pancake powder, bright red lipstick and
balloon boobs to be visible as "completely in drag" to a driver
approaching from (ahem) the rear?

I s'pose one solution would be to have plenty of clearly-visible body
hair, and cycle in just a bra and thong?

If anyone is proposing scientifically-controlled tests along these
lines, I'd love to be an observer!

--
Tim Forcer [email protected]
The University of Southampton, UK

The University is not responsible for my opinions

 

[Tim Forcer]

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:25, Nick Kew > wrote:
>
> Anecdotal factoid: I find the drivers come *much* closer to me
> on the folder than on a "normal" bike. I don't know why.

Interesting. Having taken my usual ages to get round to doing
something that I could put off (in this case buying a replacement for
the bike wrecked by white van man last year), I'd been riding my
folder (Fold-It - not in the Brompton class, but still more a "folder"
than anything else) before returning to a drop-handled tourer. If
anything, I find the clearance less with the tourer. I attributed
that to the folder being red, while the tourer is a sort of dark grey.
I can't remember what the official name of the colour is, probably
something like "spring charcoal" or "organic anthracite", but in
searching for it I discovered an absolute bargain:
<http://www.fatbirds.co.uk/DawesUltraGalaxyMailOrderPrice1999.99.htm>
Roll up! Roll up! Mail order prices you won't believe!

--
Tim Forcer [email protected]
The University of Southampton, UK

The University is not responsible for my opinions

 

[Nick Kew]

Tim Forcer wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:25, Nick Kew > wrote:
>> Anecdotal factoid: I find the drivers come *much* closer to me
>> on the folder than on a "normal" bike. I don't know why.
>
> If
> anything, I find the clearance less with the tourer. I attributed
> that to the folder being red, while the tourer is a sort of dark grey.

Hmmm. Well, my colours are yours in reverse. Maybe you're on to
something

--
not me guv

 

[Paul B]

Thus spake normanwisdom:
> Blonde wrote:
>> Hmm not exactly scientific is it?!! I dont wear a helmet but I can't
>> say I've noticed that drivers treat me any differently to my male and
>> non-blonde mates... I do wear lycra though, so perhaps that's why!!!
>> ;- )
>
> I always notice the difference between wearing a bright yellow top
> compared to something dull such as a navy T shirt. So much so that
> I'll put the yellow top on whenever the traffic is busy/fast etc and
> the wider margin they give is obvious and feels safer. He should
> repeat his experiment with top colours and I am convinced he would
> find the same. Bright tops definitely contribute more to safety than
> helmets and so should be prioritised as a major safety measure.
>
> cheers
> Jacob

I bought a new helmet recently prompted by being hit in the side at a
junction & ending up sitting in the road thinking that the incident had a
strangely familiar throb to it (but not in the head on this occasion!) Nice
helmet though & great discount - Giro Xen but not in a macho matt black but
bright PINK. Vehicles slow down when passing to check my gender! Works like
a charm. Have ended sticking my fingers up a couple of times though &
turning a monologue into a dialogue.

As for this research(!?) I read about it in yesterday's Telegraph. Hardly
scientific as has been commented upon but conveniently leaves aside
accidents where the cyclist just ain't been seen which I suspect accounts
for as many or more than being squeezed in. Doesn't make much difference if
one wears one or not if the drive isn't looking.

I'm filing under bad research - a pity as my neck would thank me for
ditching my helmet & I feel more comfortable without one. This does make the
call for compulsion less convincing. The Telegraph article did also mention
that riding further into the road meant that many drivers compensated by
passing closer - my own experience doesn't contradict that suggestion.

--
Basically, I hate people who preface nearly every sentence with the word
'basically'!

 

[Rob Morley]

In article <[email protected]>
Paul B <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip>
> The Telegraph article did also mention
> that riding further into the road meant that many drivers compensated by
> passing closer - my own experience doesn't contradict that suggestion.
>
>
Mine does - I find that generally the more space you take, the more
space they give you. It could be "watch out for that idiot in the
middle of the road" syndrome, but it works for me.

 

[Paul B]

Thus spake Rob Morley:
> In article <[email protected]>
> Paul B <[email protected]> wrote:
> <snip>
>> The Telegraph article did also mention
>> that riding further into the road meant that many drivers
>> compensated by passing closer - my own experience doesn't contradict
>> that suggestion.
>>
>>
> Mine does - I find that generally the more space you take, the more
> space they give you. It could be "watch out for that idiot in the
> middle of the road" syndrome, but it works for me.

I do both. I tend to pull out further into the road approaching roundabouts
for instance or when I want to exercise some control over /when/ I get
overtaken. The closeness vehicles pass is influenced by visibility, road
width etc or whether or not on-coming traffic is approaching. My suspicion
is that many drivers pass at a fixed distance away from on-coming traffic &
therefore the clearance afforded on the driver's side.

There was some retarring being done on a particular stretch of road I
commute on during July. This tarring stopped half a meter away from the kerb
where there was a build-up of loose gravel. I decided to avoid this by
riding further out than I would normally & felt distinctly uncomfortable
doing so. I also feel more inclined to ride close to the verge if my tyres
are fat - less likely to p****ure - cars do have some uses such as picking
up glass etc - one reason I avoid unsegregated cycle lanes where possible.

--
Basically, I hate people who preface nearly every sentence with the word
'basically'!