View Single Post
  #168  
Old May 29th 19, 11:06 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default HOW DANGEROUS IS CYCLING? DEPENDS ON WHICH NUMBERS YOU EMPHASISE.

On 5/29/2019 4:58 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, May 29, 2019 at 9:15:16 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:

Injuries to cyclists and damage to their equipment is so rare that it is normally covered under your home and auto insurance without question.


Exactly. It's the same problem you've covered several times in this thread: Not enough data, universe too small or uneconomic for specific purpose-directed research, etc. Result: actuaries lump the cost in with something else with better numbers. That leaves the field wide open for erroneous interpretations of the data.

It is also the reason we talk about bicycling fatalities more than their number really justifies (at least in Krygowski's cramped view of the value of human life), that deaths are at least particularised hard numbers, certified by the Census Bureau or the bureaucracy of a large city, in a recurring case on this newsgroup New York. There aren't all that many legitimate alternative sources.

Andre Jute
Frustration with inadequate data is part of any decision-making job description -- Peter Drucker


thanks for that I never tire of Druckerisms.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home