For Anyone Who Tells You Cycling is Too Dangerous in Today's Traffic

[Hitchington]

And there were FAR fewer vehicles in those days.

Does it say what are the deaths were contributed to, as that's a hell of a lot of mishaps?

It's obvious. In 1934 colour hadn't been invented yet so hi-viz jackets didn't work as well as they do today.

 

[Drago]

Of course! No cycle helmets in 1934.

 

[classic33]

Of course! No cycle helmets in 1934.

There were you know

 

[Hip Priest]

The main difference between 1934 and now is that medical care has improved by a gargantuan degree. Hundreds of cyclists who recovered from serious injuries in 2014 would've been pushing up daises in the 1930s.

 

[Rickshaw Phil]

So that would be exactly one more than any cyclist has to pass then ?

Not sure what you're trying to say here. From the meagre information I can find, in 1934 there were fewer than 2,000,000 cars registered in Britain but motoring accidents resulted in more than 7,000 deaths and 200,000 injuries on the roads which suggests that there was something of a problem with untested drivers. The government clearly thought so as it resulted in changes to the law that year.

Retesting - OK but cyclists are a minority unless you want some sort of testing for cyclists be carefull of what you wish for.

I don't recall saying I wished for retesting, I merely stated that it gets mentioned from time to time and wondered who would be brave enough to implement it. You seem to be reading more into it.

 

[Rickshaw Phil]

That would be one possible explanation. It may well have been a factor. There are others though, for instance in 1934 were all junctions even marked with lines and give way signs?

That I don't know. Give way signs, probably but no idea how widespread they would have been by that time. Lines probably not as I believe that was a later (around WW2) development.

 

[_aD]

The main difference between 1934 and now is that medical care has improved by a gargantuan degree. Hundreds of cyclists who recovered from serious injuries in 2014 would've been pushing up daises in the 1930s.

And once the antibiotic era passes, which will be sooner rather than later, the pretty graphs can go back up!

 

[Rickshaw Phil]

We clearly need to get a handle on what was causing all the deaths and the context in which they were occurring.

Agreed. There would have been other factors, for example; there was also no such thing as the national speed limit in 1934 (that only came in during the 1960s) and in the mid 1930's many rural minor roads would still have been unmetalled

Anyone got any links to more detailed info?

 

[growingvegetables]

A sidetrack - but caught my eye. http://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/i-want-to-ride-it-where-i-like

 

[ColinJ]

By your own admission then, by cycling you are only postponing the inevitable (if you are unfortunate enough to have heart disease in the first place) by about 2 years. So you are still going to become a "death from heart disease" statistic, but a couple of years down the line.
My family on my paternal side have pretty much all died through heart disease in their 60s/70s. My guess is that it could well lead to my demise too, although I am hoping that by cycling I might get another couple of years out of it (although that is NOT my #1 motivation for cycling).
Being brutally honest though - we all need to go at some time; and sudden heart failure is not the worst way to go, assuming you have reached a decent age (my father died from a massive heart attack while out playing his regular round of golf with his friends). Rather that than what I have seen other family members go through as a result of some of the extremely nasty diseases that are around, giving a prolonged and unpleasant end.

Both my parents got to their mid-80s but the last year or two of their lives were pretty unpleasant. I would happily go suddenly a few years younger. 60s or even 70s is too young though.

The other thing to consider apart from quantity of life is quality of life. My dad lived to 84 but he was almost disabled by illness for about his last 30 years. If I could cycle until (say) 79 years and 11 months but then die suddenly at 80, that would be fine!

 

[classic33]

Road markings as early as 1918, Road signs as early as 1903.

 

[anothersam]

More reading material. Some titbits:

The year 1934 was the high-water mark of British cycle infrastructure development.

See that the level of road deaths in the UK in 1934 was very comparable to that in the Netherlands in 1972, bearing in mind the UK then had about twice the population that the Netherlands had 40 years later.

Hore-Belisha rewrote the Highway Code and was responsible for the introduction of two innovations which led to a dramatic drop in road accidents: the driving test and the Belisha beacon, named after him by the public.

in 1906... the High Court had refused the CTC permission to rename as "The Touring Club" and admit all tourists, i.e. motorists, the judge in the case perceiving that these two modes of transport were so different that one organisation could not represent both.

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and the best way we could thank the Dutch for their demonstration of what is possible for cycling, and maybe even happiness, in our type of society would be, even after all these years, for us in Britain to imitate them again, and to pick up where we left off in 1934.

(As a vehicular cyclist, special infrastructure isn't personally compelling, but I know it's very compelling indeed to lots of other cyclists.)

 

[Smokin Joe]

Agreed. There would have been other factors, for example; there was also no such thing as the national speed limit in 1934 (that only came in during the 1960s) and in the mid 1930's many rural minor roads would still have been unmetalled

Anyone got any links to more detailed info?

The national speed limit that applies today would have been irrelevant in 1934 as few cars were capable of achieving 60mph or anywhere near it. Although we moan about the amount of cars on the road one factor is probably that very few vehicles means the drivers would not be as used to dealing with hazards as they are today and were less aware. The number of cyclists hit by vehicles in London is tiny compared to the amount of vehicles on the roads.

 

[Rickshaw Phil]

The national speed limit that applies today would have been irrelevant in 1934 as few cars were capable of achieving 60mph or anywhere near it.

Family saloons, yes. However a fairly modest sports car such as the MG Midget J2 would do 70+ when new, it had a number of rivals, and there were plenty of more powerful cars available at the time.

Why the nit-picking? You're the one who wanted to let us know how much more dangerous the roads were back then. I'm just offering possible explanations.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Family saloons, yes. However a fairly modest sports car such as the MG Midget J2 would do 70+ when new, it had a number of rivals, and there were plenty of more powerful cars available at the time.

Why the nit-picking? You're the one who wanted to let us know how much more dangerous the roads were back then. I'm just offering possible explanations.

Who's nit picking? I'm merely pointing out that most cars of the time would not reach today's National Speed Limit, though of course a few would have.