A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Relative risk



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 7th 12, 03:02 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default 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
Ads
  #2  
Old December 7th 12, 03:42 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default 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.
  #3  
Old December 7th 12, 04:49 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,153
Default 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.
  #4  
Old December 7th 12, 04:58 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,153
Default 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.
  #5  
Old December 7th 12, 05:04 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default 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.



  #6  
Old December 7th 12, 04:34 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
gpsman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default 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
  #7  
Old December 7th 12, 07:43 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default 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
  #8  
Old December 9th 12, 09:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
James[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,153
Default Relative risk

On 8/12/2012 5:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
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.


Like some people, certain cancers are incurable using science, or herbs.

--
JS

  #9  
Old December 9th 12, 10:37 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Frank Krygowski[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,511
Default Relative risk

On Dec 9, 3:37*pm, James wrote:
On 8/12/2012 5:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

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.


Like some people, certain cancers are incurable using science, or herbs.


What I've read is that Jobs had an unusual type of pancreatic cancer
that actually was quite curable. But he ignored doctors' advice and
sought to treat it organically, so to speak, by modifying his diet.
He should have gone with medical science instead.

- Frank Krygowski

  #10  
Old December 9th 12, 10:59 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,rec.bicycles.misc
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Relative risk

On Dec 9, 1:37 pm, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Dec 9, 3:37 pm, James wrote:



On 8/12/2012 5:43 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:


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.


Like some people, certain cancers are incurable using science, or herbs.


What I've read is that Jobs had an unusual type of pancreatic cancer
that actually was quite curable. But he ignored doctors' advice and
sought to treat it organically, so to speak, by modifying his diet.
He should have gone with medical science instead.


http://daphne.palomar.edu/jtagg/should.htm


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TdF 'relative' time gaps [email protected] Racing 1 July 24th 07 03:39 PM
Relative soup UK 2 May 11th 05 09:50 AM
Is she Tammy T's Relative? B. Lafferty Racing 24 August 26th 04 02:59 PM
It's all relative... JJuggle Unicycling 3 June 29th 04 09:08 PM
Difficulty is all relative Sofa Unicycling 4 April 13th 04 11:20 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.