On 12/18/2014 8:32 PM, Phil W Lee wrote:


One serious problem with the statistics is that I don't know of
anywhere that has any requirement in the method of obtaining the data
which actually separates true "run down from behind" from "Struck by
overtaking motor vehicle", and requires different entries in the
statistics for them.
Sideswipes may be squeeze by, or they may be lane changes - nothing
tells us which.
Likewise "rear ended" can often be used to describe failed overtakes,
or might be direct impact with no attempt even being made to move
over.
We just can't tell from the statistics as they are, and if you try to
compare internationally, the situation is even worse, since different
categories are used in different places and at different times or by
different researchers.
All I can say with any certainty is that I've been treated far better
on the roads when I've taken the lane as necessary than when I've
squeezed over to the side - and I've yet to hear of anyone who has
/genuinely/ tried both methods who has a different experience to mine.


I agree with all the above.

And we'll probably never get the improvement in data collection and
analysis needed to settle forever the question of which is safer
(primary position or edge riding). For one thing, bicycling is so
damned safe that few people are motivated to really study it. For
another, there's no money to be made by settling this question.

Actually... I suppose there is money to be made by the companies that
promote, then design and build "cycletracks." If they could prove that
primary position definitely doesn't work, they'd have done it by now.

The only bicycling issue that triggered tons of studies was the helmet
issue. And of course, there were hundreds of millions of dollars to be
made by deluding people into thinking they absolutely needed a hat made
of styrofoam - so by gosh, lots of studies tried to claim that was true!

--
- Frank Krygowski