Radio 4 - PM - Cyclists and headphones

[toestrap]

Story on 'cyclist contibuted to own death' by wearing headphones. I'm too livid to be coherent atm, partly because i'd just come in from a 70 mile ride, complete with the usual close passses, two of which were dangerously close and at speed.

[Kim]

Seems reasonable, assuming that the use of car windows and radios are also treated as contributory negligence.

[toontra]

I wear headphones on some long rides to stave off boredom.  To compensate I do far more shoulder checks, particularly when making a manoeuvre.

If I'm going to be wiped out from behind (the most likely sort of incident that loss of some hearing could possibly contribute to) there's very little I would be able to do about it anyway.  Hearing an HGV bearing down gives no indication of whether it's about to overtake safely or not, so is of no real help to my safety.

[Dibdib]

I don't like wearing headphones while I cycle because I don't feel safe doing it, but I'll be damned if people are going to tell me I mustn't wear them unless they can prove to me that it actually isn't safe.

[Veloman]

I believe the incident took place at an island and the driver involved was completely exonerated of any blame, which in itself gives an indication as to the Coroner's line of thought.

I don't like wearing headphones while I cycle because I don't feel safe doing it, but I'll be damned if people are going to tell me I mustn't wear them unless they can prove to me that it actually isn't safe.

Isn't there law regarding the use of headphones/buds when cycling in France? I know we are not France, but I'm sure quite a few folk would support making it illegal for drivers of vehicles and cyclists to use such kit. I suppose it causes a distraction in the same manner as using a phone (including hands-free) does, and I believe studies have shown that to be true.

[hellymedic]

Anti-cyclist Facebook fiend posted this Torygraph link and posted typical opinion.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/05/cycling-headphones-kills-mother-coroner-says-caused-death/

Seems to me that failure to LOOK was at least as much to blame as failure to hear.

If cyclist is in a world of their own, the problem is inattention, not headphones.

Blaming the headphones just paints the hapless victim in a negative light.

Which is typical of the anti-cycling massive.

[toestrap]

I wonder what the Coroner would have said if she had had hearing difficulties.

I read the article (thanks for finding) and whatever the facts of this particular case, I can accept that anyone can be distracted/inattentive and the fault isn't always related to the driver. As you say it is how that is positioned.

[yoav]

How on earth is not wearing headphones going to stop a car ploughing into you from behind?

[hellymedic]

How on earth is not wearing headphones going to stop a car ploughing into you from behind?

It isn't.
The victim in this case seems to have entered an occupied roundabout.
Inattention kills, not headphones.

Personally, I have never worn headphones while cycling.
Which is irrelevant.

[trekker12]

This was on R5 Live at the moment my clock radio woke me up this morning so I've been mulling it over the whole of my bike commute in.

The radio phone in consisted of nothing but victim blaming as expected. I heard - headphones may have contributed to the death. Not Cyclist caused own death.

Once again failing to see the bigger picture that the benefits outweigh the risks of cycling. I don't wear headphones (which is irrelevant) but in a free society we have the choice and it's apparently not a radio phone in or newspaper headline to state cycling is cheap, carbon neutral and healthy.

[Jock Stewart]

It's the talk show on 5Live now. It's better balanced.

[sg37409]

I don't like wearing headphones while I cycle because I don't feel safe doing it, but I'll be damned if people are going to tell me I mustn't wear them unless they can prove to me that it actually isn't safe.

Similar here, though tbh, I only think I'd feel less safe. I've never tried it.

[Gattopardo]

Ride a motorbike, then you can have earplugs in so does sound make a difference?

Oh and deaf people....

[Kim]

It (if there's even a thing, which seems debatable) should be about distraction, rather than ability to hear.  I don't use headphones on a bike out of habit rather than any particular safety concern, but since I stopped driving regularly, I don't use the radio in a car either.  My brain's got enough bit-bashing to do there without additional load.

Of course absence of distraction isn't the same as attention...

[Dibdib]

Yup, that's part of why I won't get on a motorbike without earplugs, because that's an even bigger world of horribly distracting noise (IME). Earplugs on a motorcycle help me hear the traffic better, not worse.

I also think framing it as a binary good/bad issue is an unhelpful straw man, too. There's a world of difference between blasting happy hardcore at eardrum-perforating volume (whether in a car or on a bike) and some unintrusive reasonable-volume background music I can easily ignore. Similarly, there are some topics which are suitable for in-car conversation, and some things which are too distracting to discuss and drive at the same time.

[citoyen]

It (if there's even a thing, which seems debatable) should be about distraction, rather than ability to hear.

Absolutely this. And this is why any ban on cyclists using headphones should come with a corollary ban on car radios.

The usefulness of hearing while cycling is a flawed premise anyway. I'm amazed that people believe they can rely on their ears to avoid getting killed when cycling, and strongly doubt it's a claim that would stand up to proper scrutiny. Even if you have good hearing, human ears are not exactly batlike when it comes to judging direction or distance (yes, I understand how binaural hearing works but it ain't sonar). Add to that the interference caused by wind noise, and if you're riding in an urban environment, the reflection of sound off buildings - not to mention the general cacophony... Personally, I don't even slightly trust my hearing when on the bike, it's entirely unreliable as a source of information about what's going on around me. YMMV, but I'd like to see some evidence.

To be honest, the biggest problem I have when wearing headphones while cycling is being able to hear what I'm listening to without it being drowned out by ambient noise.

Not that I use headphones very often when cycling. Probably the only time I wear them on the bike is if I've just got off the train (headphones are absolutely essential on the train).

[spindrift]

[Kim]

There's a world of difference between blasting happy hardcore at eardrum-perforating volume (whether in a car or on a bike) and some unintrusive reasonable-volume background music I can easily ignore.

I was thinking more in terms of the difference between some familiar music and, say, a radio phone-in about BloodyCyclists.

[Kim]

The usefulness of hearing while cycling is a flawed premise anyway. I'm amazed that people believe they can rely on their ears to avoid getting killed when cycling, and strongly doubt it's a claim that would stand up to proper scrutiny. Even if you have good hearing, human ears are not exactly batlike when it comes to judging direction or distance (yes, I understand how binaural hearing works but it ain't sonar).

See threads passim in which cyclists fail to use their binaural hearing to pinpoint the source of various squeaks on their own bike.

The only thing my ears seem to be really useful for in traffic is classifying the engine type of the vehicle immediately behind.  Which isn't particularly useful unless it happens to be a motorcycle, though it is a good way to spot electric cars (currently averaging about 1 per hour).

[toestrap]

Love the picture.

Am I alone in thinking that I can sense when I'm just about to get a close pass? i.e. usual places such as:

• Approaching a bend
• Coming up to a blind summit
• Approaching a bend going down into a dip

All of these happened last week in a space of a mile and half (thankfully not a regular rate of incident or I'd give up and take up tiddlywinks). The land rover who tried to overtake realised he couldn't get past at the last moment. Cue sound of skidding tyres. Unfortunatley I wasn't wearing headphones and so could hear it getting closer thinking I was just about to get wiped out. Not a lot I could have done at that stage. The adrenalin rush got me home in no time......

The other two brought approaching cars to a virtual standstill before they could cut in.

[mrcharly-YHT]

My personal preference is not to wear earphones, for the lack of distraction and because I like the extra input. Not so much that I think my hearing always tells me about cars, but I hear changing engine notes etc. It's just extra info, extra input.

Since my head issues, I can't do 'quick' glances behind anymore, it has to be slow head rotations. So I always check at some spots, but I rely more on my hearing than I used to. Yes, I can hear bikes coming up behind me. Yeah, I'm Matt Murdock in disguise.

But it has to be down to personal preference. I think that they can be a distraction and if people are to use them, they need to be aware of that, just like using a radio in a car.

[hellymedic]

Changing (or unchanging) engine notes are helpful. I remember being out with my then seven-year-old brother on our bikes, coming to a road and saying to Sam.
"Better wait 'cos that car doesn't sound like it's stopping."

[Kim]

Yes, I can hear bikes coming up behind me.

I find that depends on the bike and the speed.  BSOs are usually reasonably noisy, for example, but well-maintained non-carbon road bikes can be quite stealthy unless a bling freewheel is deployed.

Changing (or unchanging) engine notes are helpful. I remember being out with my then seven-year-old brother on our bikes, coming to a road and saying to Sam.
"Better wait 'cos that car doesn't sound like it's stopping."

Indeed, but note the recent discussion about the current generation of learners not being taught to change down through the gears.  Also, it won't be long until an awful lot of cars won't have any gears.

Engine note can be a useful indication of potentially impatient drivers behind you, of course.  Deliberate revving is always a bad sign, and anything with a penis-substitute exhaust should be regarded with suspicion (though in good weather it might be a well-driven classic rather than a kevved-up hatchback).

Which reminds me, I got a slow-motion noisy overtake from a Reliant Robin yesterday.  I assume it was trying its best.

[caerau]

Were Batman and Robin driving it?

[Kim]

Were Batman and Robin driving it?

All I really saw was that the passenger appeared to be knitting a jumper.