The median age of injured conventional bicycle riders was 30 (IQR, 13-53) years vs 39 (IQR, 25-55) years for e-bicyclists (P < .001). Scooter riders had a median age of 11 (IQR, 7-24) years at the time of injury vs 30 (IQR, 20-45) years for e-scooter riders (P < .001) (Table 1 and Figure 3). As a group, those injured from EV accidents were significantly older than those injured from conventional vehicles (age, 31 vs 27 years; P < .001) (eTable 1 in Supplement 1).
e-Bicycles have lowered barriers to cycling for older adults, a group at risk for physical inactivity.9,10 Biking has clear-cut physical and cognitive health benefits for older adults, so this extension of biking accessibility to older e-bicyclists should be considered a boon of the new technology.22,23 However, as injured e-bicycle riders are older than conventional bicyclists, the unique safety considerations for older cyclists should be a focus of ongoing study.
There is a popular conception that ebikes are ridden recklessly on streets and sidewalks by youths, doing dangerous stunts, riding against traffic, not wearing helmets, and incurring serious injury to themselves and others as a result. This conception is often used to justify legislation to restrict or ban ebike use by minors. However, the data suggests quite the opposite, as it is older riders which are racking up injuries.
The data does not support restrictions on ebikes, but rather their wholesale adoption, especially for audiences which are at risk of inactivity or disadvantaged by a lack of transportation options. Ebikes are not at odds with conventional bicycles.
The California Bicycle Coalition offers this succinct summary:
“We think this backlash against e-bikes is the wrong direction for what we want for safer ways for people biking and sharing the road,” said Jared Sanchez, the policy director for the California Bicycle Coalition. “We don’t believe that adding restrictions for people riding e-bikes is the solution.”
They also have a page on how to fight against “bikelash”, aka naysayers of bicycles and bikes: https://www.calbike.org/talking-back-to-bikelash/
This is a good point about data availability, and is certainly a caveat with the study. That said, I personally think legislation needs to be data driven, and when there’s a lack of available data about a given topic, the absolute wrong answer is for politicians to gesticulate wildly and give into whatever moral panic happens to be sweeping through the constituency.
It’s for this reason that I find that bills limiting minors on ebikes to be particularly pernicious.
My biggest issue with the whole thing is how cars don’t have the same limitations. If both were given restrictions to speed and such I could see this as safety focused as opposed to shock at a new thing vs indifference with old thing.
I’d also add that, if after an accident you can “walk it off”, why should that even be relevant for policy decisions?
People “walk off” injuries that they should have treated all the time. You can ignore strains and sprains, but doing so may damage the body in permanent ways that come up years later.
If instead you can seen a doctor about that banged up wrist and they caught the issues you may have been able to rehab it before permanent damage was done.
Its one of the reasons “free” healthcare is so much cheaper to operate than for profit. People avoid paying for doctors visits as long as possible, which in aggregate means small, easy health problems grow into hard, expensive health problems.