slow hand clap for Boris

How does not wearing earphones make things safer for responsible cyclists?

For me, the more of my senses, and the more of my brain being focused on a task then the better I am at doing that task.
Others may get different results, but as I don’t then the responsible thing for me to do would be to not wear headphones.

On my motorbike, I always wear earplugs to reduce the chance of damaging my hearing. Combined with the noise of the engine, this means I have almost no sensory input from my ears of any use. Miraculously, I not just don’t crash, but am also able to maintain a continuous sense of where other traffic is in relation to my personal space- it’s called riding defensively.
When I’m on my bicycle, I have the added advantage of being even more maneuverable, being able to take to the pavement even- if my life depends on it.

Funnily enough, I can also drive my car which is bigger, faster and with more blind spots whilst listening simultaneously to ‘I’m sorry I haven’t a clue’, the wife and a sat nav.

The point I’m trying to make again, is that just because YOU can’t concentrate when listening to music or learning Spanish or whatever else you’re doing through your earbuds- doesn’t mean that banning them for EVERYONE will enhance cyclist safety.
All it means is that YOU shouldn’t wear them.

Blanket banning things to help one idiot avoid Darwinism in action is a slippery slope.

I personally think no laws are needed, just an adjustment of attitude and a removal of egos.
If we MUST have a new law, assumed driver responsibility would be a far better one,

Your car and motorbike have mirrors though don’t they.

And leave out the ‘miraculously’ and ‘funnily enough’, sarcasm just makes your post unpleasant.

And let’s clear one thing up to whoever it was back there.

I don’t RELY on my ears to ride, that’s blatantly ridiculous. I use sound AND vision together. More data is better in this case.

Maybe I’ve been doing all the wrong things in my 20 odd years of cycling, but I can’t see what not wearing headphones helps with.

Maybe you have, yes. Cos when I’ve ridden with headphones the difference in my own awareness is dramatic and startling. That’s why I don’t do it. Don’t assume this is just me making assumptions – I speak from experience.

8-10 sounds more reasonable

Yeah, I should’ve made that clearer in the original post – the three seconds is for motor vehicles. I meant the principle of regularly checking being a good idea – peripheral sight, sound and sometimes, when things like diesel spills are about, the sense of smell, too. But that’s like teaching grandma to suck eggs; I reckon we all do these things to lesser and greater degrees due to survival instinct.

I wasn’t posting @ you molgrips- just in general so don’t get too defensive 😉
I’m just fed up with people blanket banning things based on spurious claims.

Yes they have mirrors, but they also have whopping blind spots and on some of my motorbikes, the vibration rendered them useless anyway.

If you ride all the time with headphones, then your brain learns when it can enjoy the ‘choones and when it needs to ignore it- just like in the car.

Re the video link I posted.

First, if you thought Boris was a fool/insensitive/a reprobate, you might find this funny:
Boris Johnson’s cycle safety test [/url]
I haven’t decided if it’s a strawman or worrying insight in to his mind yet, but it’s quite funny.

Second, if you think Boris is being reasonable, sentimental etc – can I please have some of what you are smoking? He didn’t have any answers and resorted to a series of ad hominem. Seriously though, to be shrouded by his cuddly exterior still after watching that you must either be taking some heavy drugs or exclude your reading to the Daily Telegraph.

Boris fails to address the issue that cycling is not getting safer during his rise of fame and riches term of office as mayor, Jenny’s statistic clearly show this fact. He’s using the fact that less people having died under his term of office and ignoring the fact that notably more people have been seriously/critically injured/died under him. Instead he’s taken to (mostly outside of that questioning) blaming or implying blame upon various things – the cyclists themselves, HGV drivers, earphones etc. However the real issue is one of infrastructure – the notion of having HGVs sharing road space with cyclists is difficult at best, and fatal in reality. Here’s the issue, it would take a monumental amount of money to make the necessary infrastructural changes. And hey, guess what the Tories stopped all of when they got to office? Nigh on all transport infrastructure projects, as part of their crazed austerity (there’s different to fiscal consolidation, which is what we really needed to do).

Read between the lines folks, he’s ducking and diving because the political ramifications of this are less than actually making a u-turn and actually dealing with the issue – he’s doing this, because he can.
As for Jenny Jones, what she was doing is called redress of grievance. That’s what she’s elected to. We need more people like her representing us, and less people who look hilarious in their tennis kit. Her comeback was better too.

Oh and those of you saying cyclists are to blame, well sometimes yes (I see some down right ridiculous riding daily), but the ‘literature’ and studies are saying that it’s the driver most of the time. Cyclists should probably have some form of training but it does need to remain accessible, so I believe it should become a part of the national curriculum, unfortunately that wouldn’t be happening any time soon – a four letter name that sounds like clove is (partially) the reason why.

Study by the Department for Transport:

With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.

As for banning headphones, would you ban car radios too, do people with hearing aids have to stay off their bike? You’re a little silly wearing them in urban areas, but cycling safely is so much more than being able to hear to your full ability.

Boris needs a chat show on channel 4, not a capital city to run.

So the only option as a cyclist, with the present poor road infrastructure for cyclists, is to be aware of them, and you get much better awareness by NOT wearing headphones

choosing whether or not to wear headphones is a personal thing, not using earphones is up there with helmet use and hi viz. ask me whether they are a good idea and personally I’ll probably say they are worth a shot.

what we are (or were) discussing here is a politician and mayor who wants to deflect criticism and is doing repeated bouts of victim blaming. The “establishments” position should be to focus on bad/illegal road use, dangerous infrastructure and maybe a bit of cycle promotion. Not telling the vulnerable road users to dodge the traffic a bit better. Having one set of rules for one user (car radios no special clothes or headgear – despite the fact helmets could save a lot of drivers) and a completely different set for the vulnerable ones (earphones, no hi viz or a helmet? You stupid idiot!) is a bit rich especially as the same people who want this are probably the ones shouting cyclists should follow the rules (that many drivers flout) before they should get any respect.

Given any road user will never be able to use the road safer than by using as much Available information and spatial awareness to judge ALL decisions any reduction in input (from your senses) will reduce the quality of your decision making and cannot increase it.
If as a cyclist you choose to reduce your hearings input to listen to music you are a kidding yourself that this can have no I’ll effect to your decision making.
This does not need to be compared to the cause of recent cyclist deaths nor likens to stupid suggestions that deaf cyclists should be banned.
A motorist upon shutting the door is largely cut off audibly from the outside world however they are equally unlikely to die as a result of not hearing another car about to rear end them.
A motorcyclist needs a helmet for their own protection due to higher speed impacts, the reduction in audible input still reduces quality of decision making but is viewed a tolerable risk given high chance of death due to h high speed impacts without a helmet being unacceptable.
Argue all you wish as to how you are unaffected by headphones but any reduction in input will always reduce quality of anyone’s decision making.

By being seen as not taking our own safety as important to ourselves we can never expect to be vowed by non cyclists (ie motorists as nothing more than nutjobs who expect the rest of society to bend to our way of life which will never happen).

Don’t ride in the gutter / pavement.
Get some lights.
Get reflective + put the reflectors back on your bike.
Play fair on the road, it’s not designed for strava.
Ride defensive & assume everyone has not seen/heard you.
Consider a helmet, it may help reduce injury from falling off and hitting the ground (yet I accept will not protect you from being run over by bus, is not wearing one a rational decision that you expect to be run down and not clipped by a car passing too close and simply fall off, seems odd logic).

IanMunro

For me, the more of my senses, and the more of my brain being focused on a task then the better I am at doing that task.
Others may get different results, but as I don’t then the responsible thing for me to do would be to not wear headphones.

I think that’s entirely fair enough – If you reckon headphones distract you, then that makes sense. Yours is one of the few to say “This works for me” rather than “this works for me, so everyone should do it”

Molgrips…

Maybe you have, yes. Cos when I’ve ridden with headphones the difference in my own awareness is dramatic and startling. That’s why I don’t do it. Don’t assume this is just me making assumptions – I speak from experience.

Molgrips – What does it make you more aware of? I’ve asked you this and some other questions before and you’ve just ignored them. So…

Do you think that hearing traffic behind you will enable you to dodge a car hitting you from the rear? Or stop a truck overtaking you and turning left right in front of you? What does it make you more aware of?

If you do lifesavers before undertaking a maneuver on the road, what does this awareness gain you?

IanMunro has, IMO made the most valid and reasoned point – Listening to music distracts him. I can’t take any issue with that – although I hope it means he’s canned listening to tunes in the car too! 😀

I’m not against you doing whatever you like on the bike, but going from “I don’t like it” to “therefore it’s dangerous” to “so they should be banned” is a leap too far.

Since witnessing a fatal accident I’ve always worn a helmet. I know the data around helmet use suggests that cycle ones aren’t a lot of use, but it makes me feel better. I’ve no issue with others doing the same with headphones, but I disagree with the conclusion that it’s dangerous when there are no facts to back that up.

I’ll bet you don’t really listen properly to one of those 😉

I’m just fed up with people blanket banning things based on spurious claims

There may be people who can ride with headphones on perfectly well, but there may be people whose perception is limited by them.

But people who start cycling might decide they need music whilst they ride, and put headphones on because they see other people doing it and think it’s normal. But with inexperience they might not realise what they’re missing out on by not being able to hear as well.

I didn’t catch half the stuff I do now when I started out.

The question is, how much? Would you care to quantify? If the answer is 1%, then it’s not even really worth a 4 page thread on STW, let alone banning them.

I note that in the study linked above, the error bars on reaction times overlapped for the cases with and without headphones.

I’m still not sure what a cyclist in rush hour London is going to hear that will save their life?

If it’s a distraction issue then the people in charge of many tons of dangerous metal should be banned too as should their sat navs and their hands-free phones.

I’m sorry for being so blatantly argumentative but I cannot comprehend any logic that says someone in charge of a motor vehicle is capable of steering it in amongst thousands of other moving objects at speed whilst their brain is overwhelmed with technology bombarding all of their senses with no ill effect
Yet Cafe del Mar coming out of my iPhone is making me incapable of controlling this machine that responds lightly to my merest body movement. Something so intertwined with my physical self that it feels like an extension of walking.

Like I say, if you personally can’t do it then I recommend not doing it but that is no reason to ban it- I would bet that in a scientific study, consistent use of earphones would result in no loss of spacial awareness. Occasional use would probably be more dangerous as your brain wouldn’t have adapted to shutting the music out at critical times?

Another example. As a teenager I used to drive tractors and trailers for my dad during harvest. Whether Just a Minute, Chris Moyles, Dave Pearce’s Dance anthems, or The Archers was blaring out of the tinny speakers at full volume it made no difference- I would never ‘hear’ anything that happened whilst reversing the 14ton trailer into the tiny ‘wet pit’ which had two upright RSJ’s with just 3″ of clearance each side. My brain needed full concentration and made sure it got it.

I’m not against you doing whatever you like on the bike, but going from “I don’t like it” to “therefore it’s dangerous” to “so they should be banned” is a leap too far.

probably in the nature of Internet forums, whenever anyone asks “what X should I buy?” everyone replies with “what I’ve got” or possibly “don’t get what I had”. You can sort of see their reasoning, people get into a routine of doing/buying stuff that works for them, if something doesn’t work you switch, if it does work why switch?

The problem I think stems from when people forget others might have more/better/different experience and start saying “you should do it my way, if not you are obviously just an idiot” pick any subject and someone on here will have done it differently and better than you and no doubt be condescending about your choices.

Anyway I’m getting a waaaaay OT, not only has Boris got us off the subject of crap cycle lanes and HGVs we’ve even forgotten about Boris.

I don’t think it was ever worth 4 pages of, yes I can, no you can’t 🙄

@Fasthaggis Yet you not just read it, but took the time to post an even more inane reply, well done 😉 😀

I’m sorry for being so blatantly argumentative but I cannot comprehend any logic that says someone in charge of a motor vehicle is capable of steering it in amongst thousands of other moving objects at speed whilst their brain is overwhelmed with technology bombarding all of their senses with no ill effect
Yet Cafe del Mar coming out of my iPhone is making me incapable of controlling this machine that responds lightly to my merest body movement.

But that’s not what we are saying. We’re not saying you’re incapable of controlling your bike.

Firstly – in a car, you probably shouldn’t have music blaring out or beon the phone much at all. I only put music on in less stressful situations, and I hardly ever answer my phone (with hands free). So being bombarded by music and technology is a pretty bad idea in say London. Maybe the drivers who wipe cyclists out are listening to loud music…

On a bike, you are pretty vulnerable, so not only do you need to be on the ball all the time in London, but you will be safer the more you know about what’s going on around you. I think it’s of benefit to be be hearing things AS WELL as seeing things.

you need to be on the ball all the time in London

Cycling in London is not the killing fields, you can wear headphones and you’ll be fine. (commuting into town for many years.)

Maybe the drivers who wipe cyclists out are listening to loud music…

So why are we wasting our time discussing banning headphones on bikes and ignoring the elephant?

On a bike, you are pretty vulnerable, so not only do you need to be on the ball all the time in London, but you will be safer the more you know about what’s going on around you. – See more at: http://www.bikeradar.com

How much safer will you be without headphones?

not sure how dangerous is bike radar?

Cycling in London is not the killing fields

Clearly, but it can be risky and you have to be responsible.

How much safer will you be without headphones?

About 0.4N

Thanks crosshair,I was commenting on aracer’s 4page ref ,and only moved to post after nwilco’s 50-50 nonsense. It’s always the same with these type of threads ,some people’s sweeping generalizations ,without imagining for a second how others could possibly cope with all that mountain of risk assessment. Sorry for the slow reply,I was sending my brother a long email to explain to him ,that as a person with reduced hearing,he should think about ditching his motorbike and cycling rides as it’s only going to end badly. Luv and kisses 🙂

poor comparison I only have one eye [ I have two but only one works I am not a cyclops ] but do you really think it wont impede you if you wear an eye patch?
you would look cool though I give you that

Yep

Maybe the drivers who wipe cyclists out are listening to loud music…
So why are we wasting our time discussing banning headphones on bikes and ignoring the elephant?

coz then you’d be waging war on the poor beleaguered motorist.

Molgrips…

but you will be safer the more you know about what’s going on around you. I think it’s of benefit to be be hearing things AS WELL as seeing things.

You keep ignoring the questions I’ve asked you in this regard, not sure why unless you don’t know the answer?

Do you think your hearing is sensitive enough locate to within a foot or so a vehicle (several feet wide emitting noise uniformly across it) approaching from behind you? And if you do hear the vehicle that’s intent on hitting you from the rear, do you think that it’ll be far enough away from you to allow you to get out of the way? Can you estimate a vehicles speed coming toward you and it’s distance from you? I doubt it. Or at least I doubt you can do it accurately.

People struggle to assess speed from visual cues, so I’m highly skeptical that hearing an engine behind you will offer you anything unless you’re in the habit of veering wildly across the road without looking. And if that’s the case I’d say there are bigger issues that wearing headphones at play! 🙂

In this regard too – punctures can seriously affect control of bicycles, should we all have solid rubber tyres? A weekly eye test? An MOT for bikes? A minimum fitness level test? A “driving test” for bikes?

Seriously the more I read STW forums the more I think there are some people who, basically, just want to remove every vestige of enjoyment from cycling and make it a drudge.

If you don’t like wearing headphones, that’s fine. Don’t wear them, but the leap to “headphones are dangerous” is just another step in forcing culpability onto cyclists for accidents that aren’t their fault. A trick that Boris has managed twice now spectacularly well.

All evidence suggests that risks are, in the vast majority, present at road junctions where cars turn into cycles or cars pull out on cycles. The lack of any citing of ‘lack of hearing’ in *any* study, suggests that it’s not a contributor to accidents, but is a contributor to yet another negative viewpoint of cyclists. “bloody bikers, get what’s coming to them” etc etc etc…. By advocating the banning of headphones with ZERO data to suggest it’s a risk, you’re contributing to the view that innocent victims are somehow to blame for accidents caused by others.

People struggle to assess speed from visual cues, so I’m highly skeptical that hearing an engine behind you will offer you anything unless you’re in the habit of veering wildly across the road without looking. And if that’s the case I’d say there are bigger issues that wearing headphones at play!

Irrelevant – hearing the vehicles around you allows you to judge a myriad of things that are going on around you – is that bus about to pull out (hear the engine rev) or slow down (engine tone and brakes, plus the ping that someone has asked to stop) – it allows you to judge better whether that car to your right is going to stop at the lights or not, it allows you to hear anything from a pedestrian crossing activating to an approaching siren from a fire engine that is about to go through the lights

All these audible warnings allow your brain to form a context for what your eyes are seeing and assist you to process the information, giving you much needed advance warning of things that are going on out of your line of sight – its not just about the car behind you.

Overtook another cyclist who was wearing earphones t’other day. Judging by the jump and loud “fark” he wasn’t expecting me. Made me chuckle 🙂

p8ddy you are using extreme examples to prove a point.
The counter extreme retort is that if we were all deaf we would not be under any more danger- the fact we developed hearing counters this somewhat

It allows me to hear a car revving high so i know its about to overtake, the sound lets me know its rough speed and if its a bus or a truck, how its driven etc

All of this is imperfect for sure but you dont have it.
i have more information than you as i can hear things and you cannot
Will this save my life?
Not sure but I have once done a life saver on a roundabout to avoid a car going into aj unction at 60 that would have splattered me across its bonnet
Would i have looked without the sound – not sure tbh but the sound was what I noticed first.

Do as you please I dont actually care but i am not sure how you can argue removing a sense doe snot hinder you tbh – how big this is i accept we can debate but not whether it does.

i was trying to opt out of this.

Overtook another cyclist who was wearing earphones t’other day. Judging by the jump and loud “fark” he wasn’t expecting me.

Though unless your bike is squeaky as hell he almost certainly wouldn’t have heard you if he wasn’t wearing headphones. That you caused him to jump suggests you might not have given him enough space.

Would i have looked without the sound – not sure tbh but the sound was what I noticed first.

Assumes that your headphones block out all sound. You can get fully isolating headphones or run them at a volume to block out everything but doesn’t mean everyone does. I wore mine in today and stopped for a conversation with a builder without turning them off.

An article has just been posted on new scientist on this subject.

As for how accidents occur, of the 456 cyclists seriously injured on London’s streets in 2010, the most common causes were an oncoming vehicle turning right across the cyclist’s path or the cyclist hitting, or swerving to avoid hitting a car door.

Many motorists complain about cyclists running red lights, but this accounted for just 3 per cent of serious injuries. Also, more than three-quarters of injuries occurred during daylight hours.

When came to deaths, the most common causes were the cyclist and another vehicle turning left at the same time; a vehicle changing lane across the path of the cyclist; and the cyclist riding off the pavement and into the path of a vehicle.
link

No mention of headphones here.

Lots of room Simons. Sorry for pulling you in.

Junkyard…

p8ddy you are using extreme examples to prove a point.

The “extreme” examples I’m using are among the most common types of accident for cyclists/cars.

The counter extreme retort is that if we were all deaf we would not be under any more danger- the fact we developed hearing counters this somewhat

I don’t understand your point. If it’s an evolutionary one, which I think it is (and I’m not being facetious) then I would suggest that Human/artificial methods of movement are way to early in the evolutionary process for this to make any odds to out hearing. If that’s *not* your point, I apologise, but I don’t get it.

It allows me to hear a car revving high so i know its about to overtake, the sound lets me know its rough speed and if its a bus or a truck, how its driven etc

So you hear a car overtaking. What good does that do? If your road positioning is poor, I’d suggest judgement is a more serious issue than headphones. Otherwise, what does it add to the mix? If the cars going at speed, by the time you’re heard it, it’s too late, what’s going to happen will happen. Also, If you’re cycling to close to these vehicles that you can hear this, I’d say again there’s a bigger safety issue.

All of this is imperfect for sure but you dont have it.
i have more information than you as i can hear things and you cannot
Will this save my life?

It’s not only that I don’t have it – it’s that I don’t need it. It adds nothing to the mix.

Causes of car/Bike collisions:
Drive Out at Controlled Intersection 12.20%
Motorist Overtaking 11.90%
Motorist Opens Door in front of Bicyclist 11.90%
Motorist Left Turn – Facing Bicyclist 10.70%
Motorist Right Turn – Other 9.60%
Motorist Right Turn at Red Light 7.70%
Drive Out from Lane or Driveway 7.70%
Ride Out At Controlled Intersection 3.10%
Wrong Way Bicyclist 2.50%

My “extreme” example of a motorist overtaking – I don’t believe we have hearing sufficient to hear from a good enough distance or to place a cars position/distance anywhere near accurately enough to make any odds.

“The headphones are dangerous” myth, is exactly that, a myth.

In the accidents attributing cause to cyclists, or where cyclists were at least partly to blame the causes were listed as follows:

Loss of Control (including mechanicals/blowouts etc)
Traveling too fast for conditions
Careless, reckless or in a hurry
Impaired by alcohol

The above accounted for 100% of Cyclist to blame/contributry accidents.

Not one single mention of “Didn’t hear the car”, not one single mention of headphones contributing to accidents. I’ve looked at research from the DfT and from as far afield as Canada. Not one single study has referenced headphones. Not one. Why is that? Does the STW hive mind know better (I mean, who needs fact, you can prove *anything* with facts)?

Not sure but I have once done a life saver on a roundabout to avoid a car going into aj unction at 60 that would have splattered me across its bonnet
Would i have looked without the sound – not sure tbh but the sound was what I noticed first.

Clearly, I’m glad you didn’t get hit. That’s good news. The truth is though we’ll never know what might have happened, so it’s maybe a reason for you to forgo earphones, but not an indicator they’re unsafe.

Do as you please I dont actually care but i am not sure how you can argue removing a sense doe snot hinder you tbh – how big this is i accept we can debate but not whether it does.

We’re in agreement – Neither of us care who wears headphones or not. My issue is with the statements that A. Headphones are dangerous, when it’s opinion not supported by any empirical evidence or fact. B. The notion headphones should be banned and C. that wearing headphones is “removal of a sense”. At worst it’s removing part of a sense. It doesn’t remove the balance component. Nor do headphones stop you hearing outside noise.

I believe in live and live. I take my safety seriously and don’t believe I’m compromising it – but there are people on here who basically would remove every vestige of fun from cycling.

And like I say, seeing as “loss of control” is a major factor in accident causation for cyclists, there’s a far far better case for solid rubber tyres and bike MOTs than there is for banning headphones. Don’t tell Boris that though, it’ll just be used as another weapon of mass distraction. 😉

Another interesting link (for anyone that’s not lost the will to live)

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/pedal-cyclist-collisions-and-casualities-in-greater-london-sep-2011.pdf

Again, not a single contributory instance of headphone usage.

Headphone/mobile phone use does get mentioned with regard to pedestrians in accident reports. But for the reason that IanMunro mentioned – ie They stop paying attention to their surroundings, stop looking where they are going!