Today’s Headlines

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Larry Littlefield

    How about a helmet for all vehicles?

    Since I bike more than I drive, I feel funny when I get in a car without one.

  • BridgeTroll

    Helmet article is bizarre red herring, but did he actually name his son Pendray Winkleman? Poor kid has bigger problems.

  • djx

    I found it bizarre for someone from Columbia’s School of Public Health to argue from anecdote about such a complex public health issue. But then I looked at his bio – he’s in healthcare marketing. Nothing wrong with that, but quite different from studying what policies and practices improve public health.

  • ohnonononono

    You can’t argue that deaths wouldn’t be prevented if all motorists wore helmets. It’s a fact.

  • Simon Phearson

    Considering that many pedestrian deaths caused by drivers arise due to their hitting their heads with force, arguably everyone, everywhere, should be wearing helmets whenever they are in any space where drivers might potentially be.

    Makes you wonder what the true source of risk is…

  • ohnonononono

    Not only anecdote, an intensely personal experience where emotion is bound to cloud a sound, objective perspective on the research on the subject. And an experience where we conveniently don’t know anything about the crash. Was there any evidence that he was hit by a vehicle, did he simply wipe out on the street, hit another bike, an obstruction in the road? Was he speeding recklessly through Central Park, puttering around Union Square? Context matters. There’s a reason professional cyclists wear helmets in the Tour de France, just like race car drivers wear helmets during races. That has little parallel to street biking at reasonable speeds taking proper procautions. I also assume his son was not on a Citi Bike, so his call for a law for Citi Bike users seems particularly misplaced with their low top speeds.

  • Kevin Love

    Far many car drivers and pedestrians suffer head injuries than cyclists. They all should be mandated by law to wear helmets at all times.

    Or we could go after the actual cause of the danger…

  • AMH

    My thoughts exactly. So many bizzarre statements–“cyclists weaving in and out of traffic, ignoring bike lanes” is self explanatory–how do you stay in the bike lane if you are boxed in by motor vehicles? And it’s unfortunately true that cyclists are risking their lives, which is why we need to make cycling safer, not “crack down” on cyclists.

  • BBnet3000

    Translations for windshield perspective bullshit:
    “Ignoring bike lanes” = avoiding getting doored
    “Weaving in and out of traffic” = going around double parked cars or filtering to the front when traffic backs up

  • Vooch

    Columbia health marketing prof is simply Channeling Robert Moses. Note the reference to his wife driving from Harriman at the speed of light. If truely cared about protecting cyclists, he’d be arguing for a extensive network of PBLs of 500 miles in 5 Boros

  • WalkingNPR

    Exactly–but from a marketing perspective, he’s got it right. Emotional anecdote is exactly what you lead with to communicate to the public. That’s the problem with us in public health–we lead with statistics and results of research trials because that’s what’s respected in the scientific fields. In communicating to the public, one story is more effective than endless trials. Too bad he’s either ignorant of or just plain ignoring the facts.

  • Larry Littlefield

    I’m surprised the Post didn’t include an advice column.

    “What to say if you run over a pedestrian or cyclist with the right of way, to get off the hook.”

    Of course one size fits all advice won’t cut it. Are they dead or not? Are there witnesses, and are they the type of people who can be trusted to say the right thing? And most important, are there cameras?

  • AMH

    Exactly–I noticed that too, and thank God she didn’t kill anyone.

  • WalkingNPR

    Agreed–that did not go unnoticed. For all we know, he could have been mountain biking, which is a situation in which it might actually make sense to wear a helmet, since the greatest risk probably is a high-speed tumble off the bike rather than being run over by a car. Much like the comment Vooch points out below, re: his wife “speeding” down to his son’s bedside, his windshield perspective was showing.

  • AMH

    That last DNA link just goes to the Streetsblog plaza article.

  • fixed

  • com63

    Dear MTA, please rename the Jamaica-Van Wyck stop a name that does not have “Jamaica” in it. Please rename Sutphin Blvd, Archer Ave to “Jamaica” so it shares the name with the LIRR and Airtrain stop at the same location. The status quo is needlessly confusing. I feel bad for the out of towners who have to take the E train to the airport, especially when the E runs on the F suddenly.

  • Nathan Rosenquist

    That dissonance made my hair bristle. Your son probably just got hit by a car and is in intensive care and so your wife is driving like a maniac to be at his side.

  • This was a good nugget:

    “My wife arrived, having driven at the speed of light down from Harriman State Park.”

    I get that it’s just a figure of speech, but speeding might be a tad more dangerous than not wearing a bike helmet.

  • AMH

    Simplification is a good idea, but the current station name tells you exactly where it’s located (intersection of Jamaica Av/Van Wyck Blvd), as do the names of the Sutphin-Archer and Parsons-Archer stations.

  • Susanmmcdaniels1

    ??? http://GoogleMoney1/GetPaid98$/h….???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????mk2????