The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives

Re:The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives by Kim_Bruning on Saturday October 06, 2018 @07:20PM (#18157910)

I think there's some direction of causation issues here. The Netherlands has invested in road design that makes cycling safer;

Therefore ->

A) more people ride bikes.

B) Less people wear helmets.

A and B are correlated, but this is due to a 3rd external cause. They do not cause each other.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives by charliesome on Saturday October 06, 2018 @10:18PM (#18158521)

There's definitely a causative relationship between A and B, although it's not the only factor (of course, safer road design is probably a more significant factor)

When mandatory helmet laws were introduced across Australia we saw a sharp drop off in casual cycling rates which we're only recovering from now. If we never suffered that drop, perhaps we'd have a stronger cycling culture today.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives by danburbridge on Sunday October 07, 2018 @03:49AM (#18159352)

Mandatory helmets are one of the worst things that a county can do for cycling.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Dutch Reach: A No-Tech Way to Save Bicyclists’ Lives by Tharkun on Sunday October 07, 2018 @05:14AM (#18159617)

Mandatory helmet usage reduces ridership. The inverse is not necessarily true.

[ Parent | on HN ]