On 17/05/2018 20:26, MrCheerful wrote:
On 17/05/2018 18:22, colwyn wrote:
On 17/05/2018 16:11, MrCheerful wrote:
On 17/05/2018 14:08, colwyn wrote:
On 17/05/2018 13:08, MrCheerful wrote:
On 17/05/2018 11:35, colwyn wrote:
Cyclists hurt seven times more often than figures show
Graeme Paton, Transport Correspondent
May 17 2018, 12:01am,
The Times
British cyclists are four times as likely to be killed as those in
the Netherlands
The number of cyclists being injured on British roads could be
almost seven times higher than previously thought.
Huge under-reporting of cycling injuries, often involving minor
collisions with cars and other vehicles, has been found by
researchers. About a third of incidents did “not involve anyone
else”, suggesting that they were linked to potholes in the road or
other obstacles such as bollards.
The report by Rachel Aldred, a reader in transport at Westminster
University, will fuel demands for an increase in the number of
segregated cycle lanes. She said that British cyclists were four
times as likely to be killed as those in the Netherlands, where
cycle lanes are far more common.
The study also unearthed great under-reporting in the number of
people injured while walking, with pedestrians three times more
likely to be hurt than official police accident figures show. It
revealed that people with disabilities and those from poorer
homes, who are less likely to be able to afford their own car or
public transport, were more likely to be injured than the national
average.
Dr Aldred analysed feedback from the National Travel Survey, an
annual poll of the transport habits of 147,000 people. She
compared this with road accident figures based on police reports,
which recorded 18,477 cycling casualties on roads in 2016,
including 14,978 slight injuries and 3,499 people who were killed
or seriously injured.
Analysis of the National Travel Survey showed that the risk of
cycling injuries was much higher, although most of these
additional injuries were likely to be slight, Dr Aldred said,
suggesting that the true scale of injuries could exceed 125,000.
Figures published by the Department for Transport at the start of
the year showed that the number of people cycling has flatlined
over the past decade as traffic has risen steeply. The average
adult made 15 journeys by bicycle in 2016, two fewer than ten
years earlier. The number has fluctuated between 14 and 18 trips
since the mid-1990s.
The government has launched a review of cycle safety to increase
the use of bicycles. It is likely to consider imposing mandatory
passing distances to prevent motorists overtaking too close to
cyclists on busy roads. It could also investigate the possibility
of fines for “car dooring”, when motorists or car passengers
negligently swing open doors and hit passing cyclists.
Cyclists do not use segregated cycle lanes in the UK
There are no figures to show how she has arrived at her conclusions.
Eh? This is a newspaper article analysing responses form 147,000
people!
18,477 cycling casualties in 2016 etc - I suggest you read the
article or why not contact Dr Aldred?
Cycling in the UK overall is actually declining.
And again, read the article. Here it is again:
"Figures published by the Department for Transport at the start of the
year showed that the number of people cycling has flatlined over the
past decade as traffic has risen steeply. The average adult made 15
journeys by bicycle in 2016, two fewer than ten years earlier. The
number has fluctuated between 14 and 18 trips since the mid-1990s."
If it is, then it is high time government does something something
about it!
So you agree, cycling is declining.
There is no link for me to follow, in order to read and analyse the
figures she gives.
Here you a* http://rachelaldred.org/
I am sure she'll be able to explain.
Nothing recent on there, where is the 4 times more likely to be killed bit?
Rachel Aldred... a rabid cyclist byh er own admission...
Exercise a *little* source criticism, for God's sake.
If you were quoting a sociologist you'd be prepared to discount their
"findings" to take acount of their predilections.
If Jeremy Clarkson came up with findings about transport, you'd pull
them to pieces before even thinking about them.
Be consistent be critical and be reasonable (clearly difficult for
cyclists, admittedly, but that's the way that academia is supposed to work).