Relative risk
 

New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...ans-young-male

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?

- Frank Krygowski

Relative risk
 

On Dec 6, 6:02 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...-risks-cycling...

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?


"The UCL team suggests that Government calculations of risk for
cycling would be more accurate if cycling were only compared to the
data for driving on general purpose roads - stripping out motorways...
"

"Another suggestion is that when it comes to risk, cyclists should be
compared to low mileage drivers whose risk factor is between 15 and
100 per cent higher than the average... "

"According to their research, those most at risk when travelling are
men aged between 17 and 20 for driving... " (Well, that explains "...
their most eye-catching findings is that cycling is a safer than
driving for young men between 17-20 years old.")

(These just upon a quick, partial persusal.)

That's all fine, though - looks like thoughtful, reasonable analysis.
(Surprise: Information derived from data can suck!) I for one have
never thought bicycling was inherently especially dangerous.

Relative risk
 

On 07/12/12 13:02, Frank Krygowski wrote:
New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...ans-young-male

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?


If you want to base your life decisions on someone else's data, fine.
Why would we care if you rode 180,000 km and had a 1:150 chance of fatal
injury or 1:15 or 1:1500.

Learning proper road riding technique is about not dying at all.

And above average cycle control, traffic observance, escape route
planning, Matrix Ninja crash avoidance skills and sporting prowess has
everything to do with not dying unnecessarily.

--
JS.

Relative risk
 

On 07/12/12 13:02, Frank Krygowski wrote:
New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...ans-young-male

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?


Funny that on that web page there is a link to "Cycling at night? View
our tips on an accident free journey."

http://www.cycleassist.co.uk/5-must-...time%2Bcycling

Which starts with;

"Cycling is becoming more and more dangerous and night time conditions
make riding even more difficult than usual."

Wow, Danger! Danger!

I wish they'd get their message clear.

--
JS.

Relative risk
 

On Dec 6, 6:42 pm, Dan O wrote:
On Dec 6, 6:02 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...-risks-cycling...

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?

"The UCL team suggests that Government calculations of risk for
cycling would be more accurate if cycling were only compared to the
data for driving on general purpose roads - stripping out motorways...
"

"Another suggestion is that when it comes to risk, cyclists should be
compared to low mileage drivers whose risk factor is between 15 and
100 per cent higher than the average... "

"According to their research, those most at risk when travelling are
men aged between 17 and 20 for driving... " (Well, that explains "...
their most eye-catching findings is that cycling is a safer than
driving for young men between 17-20 years old.")

(These just upon a quick, partial persusal.)

That's all fine, though - looks like thoughtful, reasonable analysis.
(Surprise: Information derived from data can suck!)

It does, however, seem to be leaning toward "we should be comparing
bicycling to something more dangerous; then the *same risk* doesn't
look so dangerous by comparison."

I for one have
never thought bicycling was inherently especially dangerous.

Relative risk
 

seems there's a continuing problem stating potential risk visavee probable risk.

The attitudes posted herein are not perspectives of the stats riders nor of the people trying to ameliorate conditions for low cost pollution free transport.

Relative risk
 

On Dec 6, 9:02*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...-risks-cycling...

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?

Statistics are meaningless to the individual.

The hazards of riding in traffic could not be more obvious.
-----

- gpsman

Relative risk
 

On Dec 6, 11:55*pm, datakoll wrote:
seems there's a continuing problem stating potential risk visavee probable risk.

I think that's a good way of putting it. Unfortunately, ISTM the
problem is confined to two very safe forms of transportation:
bicycling and airlines. Motoring and walking certainly don't get the
same scare treatment.

- Frank Krygowski

Relative risk
 

yes higly probable, contact is crippling thus the warnings. The potential for danger per se may be by the numbers tolerable for use age and therein lies the continuing explainations subbing for hard and very expensive statute....giving more than ride to the right.

I was going on abt sea kayaking( or mtn climbing hang gliding duh duh Hi Interface Sports)...riding in traffic is a Hi Interface Sport riding in youyr nab may not be...yet like yakking peopole doahn see what it is like that recent photo of the woman dead next to the concrete barrier in ? Santa Moinica ? a photo that said yawl doahn wanna vene drive next to this barrier.

In HS Jersey we had a state scare film where the HP would drag rubber bodies of the ground and from smoldering wrecks. whew ! like the HP would bounce them off the pave fpor effect !

yeah big deal..

Relative risk
 

On Dec 7, 10:34*am, gpsman wrote:
On Dec 6, 9:02*pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:

New paper out of Britain:

http://road.cc/content/news/71717-go...-risks-cycling...

The researchers claim the dangers of bicycling have been overstated.
How about that?

Statistics are meaningless to the individual.

I think that's what Steve Jobs said about cancer research, before he
tried to cure his by diet instead of science.

- Frank Krygowski