- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Airbag cycle helmet firm Hövding ties up with one of UK’s oldest bike courier businesses
Swedish company Hövding has announced a partnership with Absolutely, one of Britain’s oldest courier businesses, that will see it supply the London-based firm with its innovative airbag cycle ‘helmet’.
In a joint press release, the companies say that “many professional couriers shun helmets because they are uncomfortable to wear for long periods of time and are perceived to be ‘useless’ in the event of an accident.”
The tie-up between the firms seeks to address that perceived problem, enabling Absolutely “to further expand its safety measures for its push-bike couriers and increase their protection when delivering within the capital.”
The announcement coincides with the start of a three-month trial, with couriers wearing the airbag – which is stowed in a neck collar, with a gas cylinder deploying it when necessary – also sporting Absolutely x Hövding cycling jerseys.
While Absolutely sounds like – and indeed is – a 21st Century brand name, the business behind it can trace its heritage back more than 150 years, when it was founded as G. Thompson Ltd, using Welsh Cobs to transport people and goods around London by horse and cart.
It’s now owned by the fifth generation of the founder’s family, and managing director Jeremy Thompson said: “We pride ourselves on our knowledge, experience and heritage as well as the safety of our people.
“Hövding is a good example of deploying technology in our business for the benefit of our cycle couriers and leading the way in London.
“We very much hope to see this world leading technology being deployed not only within our business but also throughout the UK to reduce injuries and fatalities.
“According to TFL’s 2015 report released in June 2016, there were 387 serious cyclist injuries in London, of which nine were fatalities.”
Not all of those incidents would have resulted in the cyclist sustaining a head injury, and even where they did, it is debatable whether a helmet – airbag, or otherwise – might have prevented it.
Mr Thompson added: “Ensuring our couriers have adequate protection is of paramount importance to us and following our partnership with Hövding, we intend to lead the field.”
Hövding CEO Fredrik Carling said that his company “is always looking for opportunities to partner up with other forward-thinking companies that encourage and promote cycling safety.
“Absolutely is a tremendous ambassador for our product and we are proud to be a part of an initiative that will improve the safety of hard-working couriers.
“Additionally, we hope that by having a successful partnership we can effectively introduce our product and drastically reduce the number of road deaths in the UK,” he added.
Wearing a helmet while cycling is recommended under the Highway Code, but is not compulsory under UK law – although where someone rides a bike in the course of their employment, using one could be a condition imposed by their employer’s insurers.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Rendel Harris 22 min 59 sec ago
The organisers are Elite Event Management, a for-profit company. Do you not know this or are you just ignoring it?
- check12 5 hours 36 min ago
Surely please get down on your knees, rappers rap about gats not cats and foil isn't made from oil and can hold your all told
- David9694 6 hours 58 min ago
The news from Exeter traders is to good today: Justine must furious with all the drivers not carrying anything causing all this traffic:...
- David9694 7 hours 10 min ago
Elderly man sentenced following serious crash in Ringwood...
- Slartibartfast 9 hours 5 min ago
What I find most amazing is that they didn't use this an opportunity to encourage drivers to check their vision and get an eye test. I was waiting...
- kingleo 10 hours 46 min ago
Cyclists have been riding in Bister for about 150 years, and now all of a sudden they are a great danger to pedestrians.
- the little onion 11 hours 13 min ago
I didn't remove the sound because I didn't think that it mattered - quite clearly the swearing was in reaction to an act of frankly horrid...
- Nigel_2003 12 hours 20 sec ago
Know how the limiter screws on your derailleur work and use the right ones to keep chain on a manageable cog at the back and/or chainring at the...
- Freddy56 12 hours 23 min ago
Story one: "Here is all the deals at 50% off."...
Add new comment
75 comments
Double post.
Evidence suggests this is a phenomenon produced by not wearing a helmet fact...
enjoy riding chaps
Wow, I am interested in the facts, but people stuffing out figures as if they are facts about helmets just tosh. More crashes in bike races? how on earth do you link that to hats!
The article contains tosh, helmets uncomfortable over long periods? Really? not in my experience.
so facts (you know internet ones as in my own anecdotal ones just to ad yet more fluff to the debate)
i do find that wearing a helmet helps reduce sunburn for me, no need for a cap which makes me sweat too much.
when taken out such that I did a somersault into head plant I found my helmet destroyed (compression of the polystyrene) definitely protected me from scrapes, no idea if the concussion was less. Interestingly I was knocked out but as I ended up lying in a turn right box of the junction fortunately I did not delay the motorists - I could have been dead but they just drove by on both sides! Don't you love the British motorist.
the other crashes over the years I've kept my head off the deck and wished for better hip and elbow protection.
main reasons for wearing a helmet? It means my wife worries less and I'd sure be really annoyed if I came off with cranial scrapes not wearing one in the event of an off
but I do enjoy the occasional hat free ride
I lose track, but was this article even about the efficacy of helmets as a thing? I thought it was about a courier company signing up to tie airbags to all their riders' necks...
Let me put it this way. I have literally zero interest in your statistics, or how to explain them. If you want to spend your days arguing on here why people shouldn't wear helmets, knock yourself out though.
Science versus myth. You have literally no interest in the facts because they contradict your belief. Please give my regards to everyone in the Flat Earth Society.
The irony.
Irony? What exactly is ironic about maintaining your unproven and unlikely belief in the face of all the reliable data? You believe something despite the evidence as if it was some kind of religion, just requiring faith for it to be true, and yet cannot dispute any of the facts.
That's not irony, that's just denial.
Zzzzzzzzzz
The irony.[/quote]
Irony? What exactly is ironic about maintaining your unproven and unlikely belief in the face of all the reliable data? You believe something despite the evidence as if it was some kind of religion, just requiring faith for it to be true, and yet cannot dispute any of the facts.
That's not irony, that's just denial.
[/quote] Zzzzzzzzzz[/quote]
Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of and can be cured by learning, but those who remain wilfully ignorant are to be pitied. Nowt so blind........
I wear a helmet, just to look pro
I wear a helmet, so I don't look like a tin foil hat wearing, recumbant bike riding, Engineering graduate Grundiad reading cardigan wearing bellend.
That's the only valid reason for wearing a helmet I've seen.
Oh, we've had some cracking arse-gravy though. I especially liked:
"All the long term, large scale, reliable scientific evidence done by disinterested researchers shows at best no benefit from helmet wearing, and at worst an increase in risk, but hey, who needs data when you've got some anecdotes?"
Which really is 24 carot, copper-bottomed, award winning, total and utter b0ll0cks of the very first order.
Thanks. You know you've won an argument when the people criticising you can't muster a single fact nor any logic to support their assertions, and are forced to resort to silly, stupid, pathetic insults. Perhaps when you've grown up a bit and have realised that the grownups use facts rather than insults, and are capable of constructing a fact based logical argument, you might consider posting again.
2p: Unless people grumbling about 'anecdotal evidence' are willing to smash their naked heads against concrete/tarmac/a rock/The Rock as a control group then we can't do the experiment that you require as definitive proof. You therefore demanding that proof is the scientific equivalent of a toddlers tantrum. But the idea that no helmet ever prevented injury is just delusional.
Tell me who said that, ever.
Your contribution is over-valued at 2p.
Hapenny Chew: Don't tell me you haven't heard exactly this claim before on this very website. The late great Superpython was a fan of claiming they caused torsional injuries without evidence. And would you like to try the 'a trunk ran over me, an me guts iz on the floowa, a helmet was useless mister' fallacy.
Please report back when you have completed my suggested control experiment.
Shit, I think we're getting into semantics, but surely burt's assertion relates to total gain, whereas your statement implies that 'a helmet has never prevented injury'...
That could also be misinterpretation on my part. If SP59/BTBS or burt has explicitly said 'no helmet has ever prevented injury' then that is nuts - but I still don't think they have...
They started it!
Oh good, another helmet debate
There is no debate to be had. The only sensible position is "make your own mind up". But for those who are going through that process, it's proably worth calling out the crap assertions consisiting of the usual tosh like "figures have proved" and "evidence incotravertably shoes" and 'it's long been unarguable" and "just coz your helmet was worn though when you slid down the road at 55mph, you don't know that your hair woulnd't have turned to Kevlar and prevented injury" etc.
The first tactic of those losing an argument is to grossly exaggerate what their opponents say, to the point of absurdity. Since no-one has actually said any of the things you assert, you merely look ridiculous.
Or science versus myth as I like to call it.
I wonder if Absolutely have made this a requirement for their riders, and if so, on what grounds? It can't be H&S as the H&S Executive have excluded cycle helmets from the designation PPE, and all the reliable evidence shows that they don't reduce risk.
Or perhaps they'll do what Royal Mail did, and demand that it is worn as part of the uniform, slightly undermined by their refusal to release the research on which they based their decision.
mmm, sweaty necks
This commercial hook up might blow up in their faces
"push-bike couriers"? - don't know about you people, but I pedal mine...
and do you do that by *pushing* down on the pedals?
Heh! You know, I'd never even considered that interpretation. I'd just assumed that people who called them "push bikes" were a bit dim...
The questions is....... they were so named before they had pedal power, for obvious reasons. But that was at a time long before the internal combustion engine, and hence, the motorbike. So why "pushbike", when "bike" would have done? Also presumably in the age before PR, else surely they would have called them "ride bikes" or somthing else to indicate the potential for flat/downhill use, rather then forcussing on the irksome manual propulsion issue...
Pages