Hi viz doesn’t work if a driver isn’t looking & they don’t look

[ivykaty44]

twitter.com/anthonytilghman/status/1489814943859986438?s=21

Wide street, visibility good as from a distance the driver would see the hi viz, the child approaching

Yet none of this worked and the driver failed to stop in time

It’s drivers needing to pay attention as hiviz is just a stick to beat victims with if there not wearing it Aibu

If you are wearing black, no lights, at night, of course it's going to be hard to see you!

Sparklesocks there are plenty more and studies which conclude hi viz isn’t affective in preventing crashes

If it truly worked why aren’t cars all painted yellow or hi viz green?

Of course it doesn’t prevent crashes. But increasing your visibility makes it less likely you will be hit.

Just like you wouldn’t drive a car at night with no lights on

@ivykaty44

Sparklesocks there are plenty more and studies which conclude hi viz isn’t affective in preventing crashes

Well you haven’t linked those studies so from the post it seems as if you’re basing your argument solely on one video based in the US. I’m just not convinced it’s a complete waste of time to wear hi vis in every possible scenario. Sorry.

@ivykaty44

If it truly worked why aren’t cars all painted yellow or hi viz green?

They have large lights and are more visible due to their size. I put my lights for the slightest bit of dull weather or drop of rain, in fact in winter I pretty much always have them on.

images.app.goo.gl/vwUoPEgk2KG6Cqx79

Ever seen this image of a child in a dark coat vs a yellow coat?

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

images.app.goo.gl/vwUoPEgk2KG6Cqx79

Ever seen this image of a child in a dark coat vs a yellow coat?

Thank you I was just looking for that image.

They have large lights and are more visible due to their size.

Drivers still don't see them and crash into them, so why not a call for all cars to be bright hive colours

Sirzy

it was finally admitted the photo was fake, they altered the photograph

Of course it doesn’t prevent crashes. But increasing your visibility makes it less likely you will be hit.

not sure what the difference is between a crash and being ht by a car?

You seem really determined to get hit by a car...

You've mentioned there are studies that prove high vis isn't effective in preventing accidents but haven't linked to them. You're now claiming the photo is fake but haven't linked to proof of that either.

At the end of the day there are people far more experience and qualified than you whose whole job is to keep people safe. They recommend high vis. If they didn't, construction companies and emergency services wouldn't spend an absolute fortune kitting their employees out in high visibility clothes.

are you seriously argue that someone walking along the road dressed all in black is as safe as someone wearing hi vis?

Ok, OP... you clearly are the winner of the race to the bottom.

Op you are just being obtuse. Of course it is sensible to make yourself visible. Drivers should pay attention; contrary to your assertions there are campaigns aimed at drivers - for example the one telling drivers to watch out for motorbikes.
I live in a rural area where pedestrians, cyclists and animals can be hard to spot on the roads. Horses on a nearby common had reflective collars introduced a couple of years ago and none of them have been hit by vehicles to date (long may that continue) which would suggest that you are incorrect and improved visibility can have a positive effect.

It's worth being aware of the limitations of hi vis - in the dark you need reflective clothing and lights to be visible, and different colours of hi vis are more appropriate at different times of the year / different situations.

But you should still aim to wear the most visible combinations as much as possible on the roads because, while not perfect, it will definitely help.

irishcycle.com/2019/10/25/minister-ross-promotes-high-vis-with-deceptive-image-of-child-crossing-road-blacked-out/

www.eta.co.uk/2017/10/20/the-british-curse-of-high-vis/
Dr Ian Walker, Senior Lecturer in Psychology at Bath University

both riders wearing highviz @HotelCaliforniaOnRepeat not obtuse - just pointing out that high viz seems to have little effect on driver and actually we maybe safer using other means to keep people safe on the roads. Im not aware of the campaign you mention and you don't link to it?

Whilst it is abhorrent that Churchill tried to weasel out of paying compensation in that case, I'm not sure that article holds a lot of water.

Firstly, most trivially, regarding the studies they describe, if every one of those outfits was treated the same by drivers, that somewhat undermines the author's previous findings that "drivers leave less space when overtaking cyclists wearing helmets", as some of those outfits have helmets and others don't. Possibly this is controlled for in the actual study, possibly it isn't. As they haven't referenced the full study, assuming it is published, it's hard to know without doing further digging.

Secondly, their study didn't seem to look at how likely those cyclists were to be involved in actual accidents, only how drivers treated them when they did see them. Presumably this is a consequence of their trial design - without seeing the full, published data, it's all a bit pointless. We don't even know the conditions they conducted their study in - in broad daylight hi vis will affect a driver's responses less than in poor visibility.

But it's pretty meaningless - drivers who saw them weren't very considerate. Nobody really thinks hi vis makes drivers more likely to give you space - they think it makes drivers more likely to see you and not hit you, even if in not hitting you they only give you 3 inches of space. To claim that hi vis has no effect, you'd need to collate data from actual accidents and work out how many were wearing hi vis, how many weren't, and, from there, work out whether hi vis has any effect on the relative risk of actually being hit by a car. Maybe someone's done this - if so, it would be more compelling evidence than the data referred to in that article.

@ivykaty44

It’s not an either or situation

But whilst we keep telling rd users to be visible, where are the measures to tell drivers to actually look? Where ir when is on the onus on the driver to pay attention

The film shown was broad daylight - yet pp talks about dark conditions making it hard to see, it’s always excuses for the drivers

we give victims half the burden surely we should shift and give perpetrators 100% of the burden and that would make roads safer

Of course there is onus on the drivers to pay attention. Driving without due care and attention is an actual thing, isn't it?

Its not either or.

Non of what you posted shows it has little impact.

Its shows that hi vis isn't guaranteed to keep you safe. No one has ever said it is.

It does increase visibility and reduces liklihood of being hit. It makes it safer not completely safe.

Unfortunately a man local to me who had no hi vis, no helmet or lights was killed a week ago. Cycling in the dark and thick fog on a road that's 60mph. The car that hit him was only doing 20 due to the conditions. If he had hi vis on he would have likey been seen. If the car driver wasnt paying attention of course or wouldn't help. Bit the vast majority of car users do pay attention.

He might have also survived if he had worn a helmet. He might not have, do you think that means helmets are pointless?

All road users need to pay attention and most do.

AlDanvers not seeing anything to back up what you’ve said?

I still stand by if a driver isn’t looking no amount of high viz clothing is going to prevent a driver crashing.

As for all road users need to pay attention, the two horse riders were paying attention as was the traffic lady, but the drivers poising the most danger weren’t, surely those posing the most danger need to be paying attention the most.

He might have also survived if he had worn a helmet. He might not have, do you think that means helmets are pointless?

He might have survived if he was wearing a helmet, helmets are tested to 15mph and the driver was traveling at 20mph so how have you got to the conclusion he may have survived wearing a helmet?

It’s not a case of helmets being pointless, but they are limited in their protection

You can easily Google it but if you need a link www.gov.uk/government/news/motorcycle-safety-campaign-aim-to-make-drivers-think

I can't believe you think you are creating a rationale argument. If a driver is not looking there's not much anyone can do. The more visible you make yourself the lower your risk of going unseen in most circumstances.
Road safety is attempting to cover all risks. Visibility is decreased by shadows, bright sunlight, darkness, fog and more. The campaign to be visible is to combat that.
You are picking on a single viewpoint quite bizarrely.

If a driver is not looking there's not much anyone can do.

Whilst you accept this statement above and tell me I’m bizarre and that my argument isn’t rational

Why not stop them driving, retrain these drivers not paying attention or driving without looking and preventing them from operating dangerous machines until they do look?

Nobody really thinks hi vis makes drivers more likely to give you space - they think it makes drivers more likely to see you and not hit you, even if in not hitting you they only give you 3 inches of space.

It’s required and has been for many years that drivers give 1.5 meters in U.K. or they can be prosecuted, therefore a driver would face prosecution for being 3inches away - a law abiding driver would see you and give you the required space

@ivykaty44

If a driver is not looking there's not much anyone can do.

Whilst you accept this statement above and tell me I’m bizarre and that my argument isn’t rational

Why not stop them driving, retrain these drivers not paying attention or driving without looking and preventing them from operating dangerous machines until they do look?

That's a different argument than you've been making. You have been basically saying hi-viz is pointless as drivers don't look. Drivers are prosecuted and potentially banned for driving without due care & attention or driving dangerously but that has no bearing on road users being as visible as possible.