helmets increase danger
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Proposed Motion of No Confidence in URCM Moderation
Next: Ok cyclists - is this reasonable behaviour?
From: Adrian on 18 May 2010 15:22 "DavidR" <curedham(a)4bidden.org.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>>> Simple question for you: >>>> >>>> Do you think that a cycle helmet is more likely to reduce the risk of >>>> injury in a cycle accident than it will increase the risk of injury? >>>A biased question. There is a third option. >> Sorry - or will it make absolutely no difference one way or the other. > Well done. It is always frustrating to be given multiple choice surveys > which don't provide suitable choices. Indeed it is. I'll go for... d - It depends. Sometimes it will reduce the risk, sometimes it will increase it.
From: Nick Finnigan on 18 May 2010 17:43 JMS wrote: > On Mon, 17 May 2010 22:08:09 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> > wrote: > >> JMS wrote: >>> Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion >>> passenger kilometers: >>> >>> Killed or seriously injured: >>> Pedal Cyclists : 527 >>> Pedestrians 371 >>> >>> All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 >>> Pedestrians : 1631 >> That's 2006 I suspect; 2008 is: 3814 vs 1666, 541 vs 382 and 32 vs 36. > > > My maths is not very good. > > Is the only significant change the fact that Pedal Cyclist casualties > went up by 9% whereas pedestrian casualties only went up 2% The only significant change is that your figures are not the most recent. > If so - it certainly looks like cycling cf walking as a form of > transport is becoming more dangerous - would you not agree? No.
From: Derek C on 18 May 2010 18:45 On 18 May, 22:43, Nick Finnigan <n...(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: > JMS wrote: > > On Mon, 17 May 2010 22:08:09 +0100, Nick Finnigan <n...(a)genie.co.uk> > > wrote: > > >> JMS wrote: > >>> Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion > >>> passenger kilometers: > > >>> Killed or seriously injured: > >>> Pedal Cyclists : 527 > >>> Pedestrians 371 > > >>> All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 > >>> Pedestrians : 1631 > >> That's 2006 I suspect; 2008 is: 3814 vs 1666, 541 vs 382 and 32 vs 36. > > > My maths is not very good. > > > Is the only significant change the fact that Pedal Cyclist casualties > > went up by 9% whereas pedestrian casualties only went up 2% > > The only significant change is that your figures are not the most recent. > > > If so - it certainly looks like cycling cf walking as a form of > > transport is becoming more dangerous - would you not agree? > > No.- There has been a sharp rise in the number of cycling casualties recently, probably because of born again bicyclists using their bikes for commuting again, due to the economic downturn and the ever increasing costs of motoring and public transport. See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/nov/05/cycling-deaths-department-of-transport Derek C
From: Tony Raven on 19 May 2010 01:54 Tom Crispin wrote: > > 1% of 60,000 is 600. True. Late night brain fade! -- Tony " I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong." Bertrand Russell
From: JMS jmsmith2010 on 19 May 2010 07:48
On Tue, 18 May 2010 22:43:25 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote: >JMS wrote: >> On Mon, 17 May 2010 22:08:09 +0100, Nick Finnigan <nix(a)genie.co.uk> >> wrote: >> >>> JMS wrote: >>>> Latest DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates by mode Per billion >>>> passenger kilometers: >>>> >>>> Killed or seriously injured: >>>> Pedal Cyclists : 527 >>>> Pedestrians 371 >>>> >>>> All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3494 >>>> Pedestrians : 1631 >>> That's 2006 I suspect; 2008 is: 3814 vs 1666, 541 vs 382 and 32 vs 36. >> >> >> My maths is not very good. >> >> Is the only significant change the fact that Pedal Cyclist casualties >> went up by 9% whereas pedestrian casualties only went up 2% > > The only significant change is that your figures are not the most recent. > >> If so - it certainly looks like cycling cf walking as a form of >> transport is becoming more dangerous - would you not agree? > > No. Ah yes - the single "no" - so informative. No doubt you will now be able to explain how you arrive at that answer. -- 2008 DfT Figures: Passenger casualty rates Per billion passenger kilometers: Killed or seriously injured: Pedal Cyclists : 541 Pedestrians 382 All casualties: Pedal Cyclists : 3814 Pedestrians : 1666 (Pedal cyclist casualties up 9% - pedestrians up 2%: Cycling is becoming more dangerous each year when compard to walking as a means of transport) |