The Paceline Podcast #37

The Paceline Podcast #37

We have a few more thoughts on  our big “Out of the Closet” segment from show #36. Plenty of you provided feedback and we address your thoughts and concerns. This is a topic the guys are committed to so we thank you for listening and responding.

We also follow up with the UCI Worlds weather report from last show. Cycling’s governing body was getting ready for the heat and they got it. Time Trialists suffered big time in their skin suits and aero helmets.

Speaking of helmets, a study from down under has concluded that helmet laws are a pathway to fewer head injuries. Helmet legislation is a touchy subject, even in Australia, the country with the only mandatory helmet law for all riders.

A new one on the Paceline, we do the Dutch Reach. Follow along with us as we perform the move that could prevent a cyclist’s biggest fear: Dooring. This little idea is gaining momentum thanks to an east coast doctor.

Our Paceline Picks feature a dream bike and a polish bike path. Patrick’s pick was missed but not forgotten. Bike Monkey, the super group that puts on the best rides in Nor-Cal, has another event on calendar. The Hammer Road Rally!

 

 

Show Links

Support RKP

Overheating at Worlds

Helmet Study

Dutch Reach

Santa Rosa Pump Track

Poland’s Glow in the Dark Bike Path

Fatty’s Dream Bike Survey

 


Subscriber Options



If you’d like to learn more about our new subscription program, please read this.

, , , , , , , , ,

3 comments

  1. Jeff Dieffenbach

    The idea behind MIPS–reducing concussions in addition to other head injuries. Sadly, MIPS helmets cost more, which is a shame. Perhaps more to the point, though, is there any independent evidence that suggests that MIPS works?

    1. Padraig

      There hasn’t been much independent study, but there was this study:
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23770518

      The big thing to consider is that companies like Bell and Giro wouldn’t be investing in adding this technology if they didn’t sincerely believe that it had the ability to decrease the severity of injuries. If all they were looking for was a new source for smoke and mirrors, trust me, there are less expensive ways to achieve that.

      From the perspective of a helmet maker, anything they can do to make a helmet more effective is in their best interest.

      And we hope you’ll bear in mind that any new technology added to a product that isn’t smoke and mirrors but has genuine research behind it will increase the cost of that product. Safe ain’t free.

  2. Jon

    As I write this, a local (actually national) cycling legend is still in the hospital because he crashed and was not wearing a helmet the other day.

    I have several friends who would definitely be in worse shape had it not been for helmets. I always wear one, personally.

    That said, I don’t support helmet laws. And it has nothing to do with safety. Helmet laws discourage minorities from cycling. There is evidence that when they are enforced, enforcement is unequal, and is often used as a pretext for otherwise unconstitutional warrantless seizures. Here’s a good summary of some of the data:

    http://www.bicycling.com/culture/advocacy/do-helmet-laws-unfairly-target-minorities

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *