Crashes, what can be done?

Page 30 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
If death is the only criteria. Then you ought to admit safety isn't taken seriously. Lets focus on more sensible things. Like we did with joint mobility. And found a solution that doesn't obstruct joint mobility.
Head injuries in general - not just the fatal once - are more important than collarbones. My point is that just because broken collarbones are the most frequently occuring injury, it doesn't mean it's the worst, or the one that needs most attention.
 
@SHAD0W93

Technically there is no real difference. It can work on both just fine. As for the debate about "bouncing" on the road. Due to the airbag. I agree with you to drop such debates ASAP. It's just silly. I thought i made that clear above.
No, these current systems are not tFrom a technological standpoint there is a big difference in how they’re deployed, where the sensor is at, and the functionality of motor bike racing, professional bike racing, and recreational bike riding. The same system for motorbikes can’t be used in cycling as there would be false deployments. Just like the two sites you posted doesn’t work for professional cycling like it does recreational. With those same systems we would get false deployments that could lead to an actual crash. Just like one of the sites doesn’t protect the collarbone like you desire.

Go outside, hold a ball, fall down, and tell us what happens and if it doesn’t end with saying you bounced you’re lying. I would even bet you bounced forward more often than not. It’s not silly, like has been said multiple times the head can be injured more or when it wouldn’t have been initially. Do you know how easy it is to damage the brain? Do you know how long it could take to rehab a brain injury? Do you know how much more you can lose due to a brain injury vs a broken collarbone? You can transplant a heart, lung, kidney, and liver and you can even live without any or all of those working. You can even mend the your fracture in the collarbone. But you can’t transplant a brain and if it goes, what’s left of you.

We try dropping the debates but then get @ weeks to months later. @‘d without our initial posts your responding to attached which could be pages back. It is silly, but you’ve been the only one this focused on the collarbone issue and ignoring what has been said. It’s good to have a passion but you still have to hear critic. Could one day riders have something like this? Yes, but it would be after all the major organs to the body are protected.

Unfortunately @CyclistAbi, your posts aren’t always clear. Cheers, Merry Christmas, happy holidays, and be safe.
 
@SHAD0W93

A risk of brain injury from crash. When cycling. This is always a possibility indeed. But saying that because of possible brain injury you won't wear sunscreen nor sunscreen has to be made available as a possibility. For things like protecting your skin and to lower the chance of premature skin ageing and cancer. That makes little sense. There are all sort of possible issues involved and possible ways to lower the risk. Personally i will insist on lowering the number of collarbone injuries. And hopefully in a couple of years we will see a drop in statistics. Due to airbag technology or something else. At least now we can say things like changing the color of jerseys to a more bright color. That likely won't reduce the number of collarbone injuries. We can always look in the statistics. Introduction of airbag technology likely would. Just like it did that in all other areas it was introduced. And no you wouldn't be bouncing all over the road like a ball because of it. If that would be possible. To inflate a whole ball around you. To bounce. The reality is that would not be such a bad outcome. Cyclist would likely occasionally crash for fun, though. I would wear that. But lets keep it real. Inflatable pocket on demand in collarbone area (spine, shoulder, chest, upper leg ...) is a nice start. A couple of months won't do. Said that in the next couple of years this needs to happen.

Happy holidays to you to.
 
A risk of brain injury from crash. When cycling. This is always a possibility indeed. But saying that because of possible brain injury you won't wear sunscreen nor sunscreen has to be made available as a possibility.
Sunscreen is available, and doesn't make riding a bike more difficult. A method for protecting collarbones - especially one that wouldn't make riding a bike more difficult - simply doesn't exist. So, as has been pointed out by several of us repeatedly it would be a waste of resourches to focus so much on preventing a minor injury.
 
Reactions: SHAD0W93
@RedheadDane

So now you are going back on claiming a solution that offers protection and doesn't reduce joint mobility doesn't exist?

Ignorance is a bliss.

Anyway. As you can see it indeed won't be easy. There will be a lot of resistance involved. Like always (including sunscreen). Still in the end we will more or less all wear it. That is the outcome will be comparable to helmets and disk brakes. The fact that a whole lot of commuters are going electric. That should help to. For elderly on electric bikes it will likely become a law eventually. To wear an airbag.
 
So now you are going back on claiming a solution that offers protection and doesn't reduce joint mobility doesn't exist?
Because it doesn't...
You can't compare a protective gear that needs to be worn on a body part that needs to be constantly in motion while riding your bike, with a helmet, that is worn on top of the head - in case you didn't know; the skull doesn't exactly move - or sunscreen, which is, in fact, not solid.
 
Reactions: SHAD0W93
@RedheadDane

Lets give it time. This discussion is a bit ahead of its time anyway. It will sort itself out over time. Then you can decide for yourself if you will wear it or not.

We will push from time to time. When that will feel appropriate. Like lets say when somebody will say we changed the jersey color. To improve rider safety. A normal response to that can now be. What about introducing an airbag instead. And imagine it would be of a bright color.

Quick calculation returns an investment of about 30 to 50 millions over the next 3 to 5 years would be needed to speed things up. If that won't happen. Eventually somebody will still do it.

Merry Christmas.
 
The problem is, as has been pointed out multiple times, most collarbone injuries are not created by a direct blow to the clavicle but because it's a point of weakness when breaking a fall with either the arm or shoulder, which is the most frequent type of crash in professional cycling as riders will usually tumble over sideways or bail out that way to prevent a more dangerous over-the-handlebars accident. Protecting the collarbone directly therefore has very limited value in terms of reducing the injury, because it is not the collarbone itself that would need protecting, but the shoulders and upper arms, which are much harder to protect without bulky padding.

Now you're blending the purposes of protecting Joe Public on a bike ride and racing, and those are sometimes mutually exclusive; the number one thing that would reduce injuries to Joe Public in commuter or recreational bike rides is better education for motorists and cycling infrastructure. That's not applicable in bike races, because then the roads are closed and that same cycling infrastructure can beget a dangerously high level of road furniture, as anybody who's ever watched a bike race in the Netherlands can attest. In a race, it can be something as simple as better regulation of the approval of stage finishes in races where a group of 50+ riders is expected to come to the line together so we don't get nonsense like that Vuelta a Burgos sprint stage with speedbumps in the last kilometre, or just more selective parcours design that reduces the chances of large bunches coming to the line together by incentivising more aggressive racing and smaller groups.
 
@SHAD0W93

A risk of brain injury from crash. When cycling. This is always a possibility indeed. But saying that because of possible brain injury you won't wear sunscreen nor sunscreen has to be made available as a possibility. For things like protecting your skin and to lower the chance of premature skin ageing and cancer. That makes little sense. There are all sort of possible issues involved and possible ways to lower the risk. Personally i will insist on lowering the number of collarbone injuries. And hopefully in a couple of years we will see a drop in statistics. Due to airbag technology or something else. At least now we can say things like changing the color of jerseys to a more bright color. That likely won't reduce the number of collarbone injuries. We can always look in the statistics. Introduction of airbag technology likely would. Just like it did that in all other areas it was introduced. And no you wouldn't be bouncing all over the road like a ball because of it. If that would be possible. To inflate a whole ball around you. To bounce. The reality is that would not be such a bad outcome. Cyclist would likely occasionally crash for fun, though. I would wear that. But lets keep it real. Inflatable pocket on demand in collarbone area (spine, shoulder, chest, upper leg ...) is a nice start. A couple of months won't do. Said that in the next couple of years this needs to happen.

Happy holidays to you to.
Yes, it is always a possibility. So why do we want to increase the odds of that possibility while decreasing the odds of a less important body system.

Recreationally and motorbike, we will probably will see more of what you posted and variations to help protect the riders vital organs. Take when I was hit by a car last year I would have loved the first vest you posted to further protect my core even though nothing bad happened because it is better safe than sorry. Unfortunately for the many reasons listed by multiple posters it does not make sense for professional cycling at this time with the products available while you’re still avoiding other issues that were brought up with he mobility, heat, and weight.

You inflate a ball device with air + falling at high speeds + falling 3-4 ft = bouncing. Further, it only takes falling 4 ft to kill you. Even further while not comparable a 1 foot drop out of a hospital bed can cause serious injury to someone. Now while yes, their body is nothing like a professional athlete. You are underestimating how much damage a fall can do. You’re misinterpreting the ball analogy, just hold a medium sized ball in your arms in front of you and fall forward.

An inflatable safety device shaped like a ball around someone that bounces would be a terrible idea and death trap. Like come on, think about it.

Yes, you did mention it would take a couple years or years and we even agreed with you on having inflatable material of whatever the team kit is made of. That would be a smart way to do it when we have the technology available. Using something the cyclists wear currently, that doesn’t hamper their mobility, add extra weight to them making it harder to rider, increase the heat they have to deal with, and impair safety. But it would take years, and maybe not even in some of the lifetime of posters here to see an inflatable team kit be massed produced. All you’re trying to do is put a bandaid over an issue you are very passionate about.
 
Reactions: firefly3323
You are obviously very convinced that this will be a great success. So I am sure that you will invest every penny at your disposal into the product, and when it has made you a multiple millionaire, you can come back and laugh at us all, with our permanenty shattered clavicles as we will be the last luddites on the planet to hold out against buying this.
 
Last edited:
@Libertine Seguros

Collarbone is usually the first to go. Hence if an airbag would protect upper arm and shoulder. A substantial drop in collarbone injuries would be the outcome. I don't feel this is debatable. It's a fact. Just like in other sports airbag technology was already introduced. Statistics are painfully obvious.

@SHAD0W93

Exactly. Given the choice you would wear it. Just like sun cream. As for me avoiding. I am not avoiding anything. I said current generation tech is in the lines of a casual commuter. For pro peloton we are not there yet.

@Armchair cyclist

Nah. I had that phase already. Multiple times in my life. Proven something and came back laughing. It's a nice feeling and all but there is more to it in real life. Usually i enjoy more if i am laughing with the people around me that actually mean something to me. Then to laugh to some random people. As for investing pennies. That is unrealistic. Such product needs an investment of couple ten millions in a duration of couple years. This is rather normal hence best to do it like that.

@all

First pelvis and collarbone injury confirmed this season. Looking at Gesink crash image an airbag in upper leg area would likely prevent it.

All in all now when we know what can be done. Now people laughing must start to realize the joke is on them. To stop with the silliness. A push must be made in a direction where apparel will start to offer some protection. Compared to now when it's (overpriced) garbage.
 
I'm really not sure why I'm continuing to engage here, especially as Abi seems unable to recognise dismissive comments as such, but anyway...

Abi:
How soon do you believe that these might be a viable option in race circumstances?
How soon do you think it will be a requirement in racing?
How soon do you think you will first see a leisure cyclists using it?
How soon do you think they will be an ordinary part of equipment or leisure cyclists to use, as a helmet, sunblock or a cycling computer is now?

Assuming that any answer is not in the next few months, what do you think are the barriers causing delay?

Presumably, if there is a desire for safety and profit to be made from people seeking safety, numerous companies will be racing to get such products to us, and we will be very willing customers. Why is it not happening, do you imagine?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY