Keep up the good work Megan. It is too bad leaders don't realize how much these improvements mean to the students and their parents. More people need to be heard and students need to be safe.
Class 2 e-bikes are cheaper than peddle assist because the manufacturers who make really cheap bikes want to make massive numbers of identical bikes and sell them to as many people as possible. More people who buy really cheap e-bikes demand a throttle than demand pure peddle assist, so the manufacturers standardize on class 2. It can still be ridden pedal-assist if you want. I only use the throttle on hills and when starting in heavy traffic.
The US might want to look in to the widespread usage of helmets when cycling. In The Netherlands normal cyclists never wear helmets, they asre only used by recreational cyclists who run more risks because of the higher speeds. While research shows that wearing a helmet does reduce the chance of head injuries in some cases, in The Netherlands the believe is that potential advantages are severly outmatched by the downsides. The main argument against helmets is that it creates the illusion that cycling is an inherently dangerous activity, which it isnt, at least compared to other forms of transportation most notably of course the car. Secondly, its just a bit of a hassle. You have to bring the thing everywhere, to school, to friends, when you quickly pop in to the supermarket for your groceries etc, and when you cycle as much as the Dutch do, it would just be uncomfortable to have to wear it all the time, taking it off, putting it on again and all that. These factors would presumably lead to reduced cycling amongst the population, and probably a rise in car usage, making roads unsafer in general and therefore completely negating any positive effects helmets might have. The is also a medical argument because some research shows that while helmets do protect your head in case of a fall, the shock would now be absorbed a lot more by your neck, another very sensitive part of the body, leading to more injuries there. Lastly, helmets would provide a false sense of security leading to unsafer behaviour in general. Its just better to cycle safely so that you dont fall at all, and at lower speeds, like maximun 15 km/h so that when you are about to fall, you have time to hit the brakes making the speed of impact so low that its just very unlikely this would lead to any form of serious head trauma. I know that getting rid of helmets in the US is simply not an option right now, because the cycling infrastructure and culture isnt in place to make cycling as safe as in The Netherlands, but just something here to consider I suppose.
I always say that I am working toward a safe city where helmets are un-necessary. Unfortunately, helmet laws are VERY hard to repeal because no leaders wants to lead that charge.
@@meganramey2025The problem is obviously that its very easy to point out the indivudial cases of head injuries caused by not wearing a helmet. It is much harder to convincingly make the argument for not wearing helmets in the context of general road safety, so I get why this is a tough one. It really requires the commitment of society as a whole to make cycling as accesible and easy as possible, in order to eventually reap the benefits. However, Id say that even in a country like the US with its car culture, its a matter of when rather than if. Cycling is without a doubt simply the most effecient mode of transportation in an urban enviroment, period.
Cities will often say, "Oh, you want bicycle infrastructure? You'll need to find a grant." Do the cities say the same things to developers about car lanes?
Yep, and along these lines, there will be endless community meetings to discuss and perseverate about every bike lane, multi-use trail, and pedestrian crossing for months and years on end, whereas adding more car lanes are simply rubber stamped “approved” build as fast as possible.
Keep up the good work Megan. It is too bad leaders don't realize how much these improvements mean to the students and their parents. More people need to be heard and students need to be safe.
Agree 💯
What a fabulous way to close out 2023. Megan Ramey is amazing. Good stuff!
Yes, indeed and she sure is. 😀
Megan, you've taught your daughter how to fly. What a wonderful Urban Arrow pilot you've tutored.
Indeed! 🙌❤️
lived near Cambridge before the bike lane went in, then came back a couple years later and was amazed to see the upgrade!
It will be truly amazing when the entire is built out. Thanks so much for watching. Cheers! John
Class 2 e-bikes are cheaper than peddle assist because the manufacturers who make really cheap bikes want to make massive numbers of identical bikes and sell them to as many people as possible.
More people who buy really cheap e-bikes demand a throttle than demand pure peddle assist, so the manufacturers standardize on class 2. It can still be ridden pedal-assist if you want. I only use the throttle on hills and when starting in heavy traffic.
Thanks, Claude
Yes but for kids it should be off limit. Only pedal assist. So it should be dissmantled in the bikeshop by law.
The US might want to look in to the widespread usage of helmets when cycling. In The Netherlands normal cyclists never wear helmets, they asre only used by recreational cyclists who run more risks because of the higher speeds. While research shows that wearing a helmet does reduce the chance of head injuries in some cases, in The Netherlands the believe is that potential advantages are severly outmatched by the downsides. The main argument against helmets is that it creates the illusion that cycling is an inherently dangerous activity, which it isnt, at least compared to other forms of transportation most notably of course the car. Secondly, its just a bit of a hassle. You have to bring the thing everywhere, to school, to friends, when you quickly pop in to the supermarket for your groceries etc, and when you cycle as much as the Dutch do, it would just be uncomfortable to have to wear it all the time, taking it off, putting it on again and all that.
These factors would presumably lead to reduced cycling amongst the population, and probably a rise in car usage, making roads unsafer in general and therefore completely negating any positive effects helmets might have. The is also a medical argument because some research shows that while helmets do protect your head in case of a fall, the shock would now be absorbed a lot more by your neck, another very sensitive part of the body, leading to more injuries there. Lastly, helmets would provide a false sense of security leading to unsafer behaviour in general. Its just better to cycle safely so that you dont fall at all, and at lower speeds, like maximun 15 km/h so that when you are about to fall, you have time to hit the brakes making the speed of impact so low that its just very unlikely this would lead to any form of serious head trauma. I know that getting rid of helmets in the US is simply not an option right now, because the cycling infrastructure and culture isnt in place to make cycling as safe as in The Netherlands, but just something here to consider I suppose.
Yep.
I always say that I am working toward a safe city where helmets are un-necessary.
Unfortunately, helmet laws are VERY hard to repeal because no leaders wants to lead that charge.
@@meganramey2025The problem is obviously that its very easy to point out the indivudial cases of head injuries caused by not wearing a helmet. It is much harder to convincingly make the argument for not wearing helmets in the context of general road safety, so I get why this is a tough one. It really requires the commitment of society as a whole to make cycling as accesible and easy as possible, in order to eventually reap the benefits. However, Id say that even in a country like the US with its car culture, its a matter of when rather than if. Cycling is without a doubt simply the most effecient mode of transportation in an urban enviroment, period.
Cities will often say, "Oh, you want bicycle infrastructure? You'll need to find a grant." Do the cities say the same things to developers about car lanes?
Yep, and along these lines, there will be endless community meetings to discuss and perseverate about every bike lane, multi-use trail, and pedestrian crossing for months and years on end, whereas adding more car lanes are simply rubber stamped “approved” build as fast as possible.