Two-thirds of adults in England think cycling is dangerous!

[mustang1]

Well, as far as exercise goes, it seems more dagnerous compared to fast-walking, jogging/running, swimming, at-the-gym.

And as far as getting-somewhere goes, I guess it's more dangerous than public transport or cars/uber etc.

Then there are those statistics which show that the chances of getting hit on a bike are low compared to the amount of longevity you would get for you life of exercise on the bike. But that rounds back to point 1 where fast-walking/ jogging/running or gym is also healthy and less dangerous.

But I ride coz I enjoy riding. The exercise and getting-somewhere benefits are secondary side-effects.

 

[mjr]

Well, as far as exercise goes, it seems more dagnerous compared to fast-walking, jogging/running, swimming, at-the-gym.

And as far as getting-somewhere goes, I guess it's more dangerous than public transport or cars/uber etc.

1. It seems it, but is it really? That's been discussed long and hard whenever Reported Road Casualties of GB are updated and a little bit when the Active Lives Survey and its predecessors give us new estimates of how many people cycle.

2. Need it be? Need it feel like it is? Those are political questions, I guess.

Then there are those statistics which show that the chances of getting hit on a bike are low compared to the amount of longevity you would get for you life of exercise on the bike. But that rounds back to point 1 where fast-walking/ jogging/running or gym is also healthy and less dangerous.

It's easy to slip from "it seems more/less dangerous" to "is more/less dangerous", isn't it?

But I ride coz I enjoy riding. The exercise and getting-somewhere benefits are secondary side-effects.

How do we communicate that, though? Past attempts haven't really cut it.

 

[mustang1]

1. It seems it, but is it really? That's been discussed long and hard whenever Reported Road Casualties of GB are updated and a little bit when the Active Lives Survey and its predecessors give us new estimates of how many people cycle.

2. Need it be? Need it feel like it is? Those are political questions, I guess.


It's easy to slip from "it seems more/less dangerous" to "is more/less dangerous", isn't it?


How do we communicate that, though? Past attempts haven't really cut it.

This is what I feel, and I think probably most people do too: if i get hit by a car while i@m on the bike, I'll be far worse off.

But then again, statistically flying is the safest form of transport but in the event of a crash, you're more likely to die (hasn't stopped anyone flying though). I think a similar analogy could be used on bikes: if you're careful, ride sensibly, then you're unlikely to have a crash. But if you do, then you won't fare too well out of it.

And yes, looking to the future, the political questions should focus on properly segregating cyclists from those pesky drivers. Having said that, i know people who have started cycling during this covid lockdown who never did before and now, while driving, give incredible amounts of space to all other cyclists so good news right there. A lot more improvements required in drivers mindsets though.

 

[mjr]

This is what I feel, and I think probably most people do too: if i get hit by a car while i@m on the bike, I'll be far worse off.

But then again, statistically flying is the safest form of transport but in the event of a crash, you're more likely to die (hasn't stopped anyone flying though). I think a similar analogy could be used on bikes: if you're careful, ride sensibly, then you're unlikely to have a crash. But if you do, then you won't fare too well out of it.

I'm not sure even that's what happens. From personal experience and what I've seen riding with groups, I suspect the vast majority of cycle crashes are without much consequence and so go unreported (especially as cyclists have no motorist-style legal duty to report), giving a false impression from the stats. Even some crashes that worry our local campaign go unreported, such as people clipping evil narrow barriers, damaging their bike or themselves and sometimes giving up cycling as a result. Maybe it's better to say if you have a crash worth reporting, it's more likely to be bad for you... but does that tell anyone much anyway? Hmm...

Being hit by a car is a bit different, but I'm not sure that incompetent motorists care how careful or sensible the cyclist is but I agree in that good road designs can help careful cyclists see crap drivers coming and avoid them, such as by having junctions at right angles (or nearly) rather than fast V-shaped merges and forks.

And yes, looking to the future, the political questions should focus on properly segregating cyclists from those pesky drivers. Having said that, i know people who have started cycling during this covid lockdown who never did before and now, while driving, give incredible amounts of space to all other cyclists so good news right there. A lot more improvements required in drivers mindsets though.

If we are up to 40% of adults cycling, as some reports have claimed, then we might be close to reaching a critical mass of good drivers which might make the merely careless ones copy them, much as I suspect they previously copied close-passers - but that's a lot of "mights"s there!

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Leaving aside lobbying by organisations who claim to represent cyclists, is there any reliable data about the percentage of cyclists who actually want more segregation?

There might not be specific data but the past few months of Covid-related measures to install pop-up cycle lanes in across many cities, together with the reduced level of motorised traffic, has provided huge increases in levels of cycling up and down the country. This must mostly be coming from those who would otherwise not have considered cycling but have found those conditions to be sufficiently reassuring. And even if they forego the bike once roads return to normal, hopefully they'll be better at driving around cyclists they come across.

The general perception among non-riders is that cycling is dangerous when the truth is it's only bad driving and bad road design that make it so.

Give people safer routes and they'll cycle.

 

[mjr]

There might not be specific data but the past few months of Covid-related measures to install pop-up cycle lanes in across many cities, together with the reduced level of motorised traffic, has provided huge increases in levels of cycling up and down the country. This must mostly be coming from those who would otherwise not have considered cycling but have found those conditions to be sufficiently reassuring.

Must it? The Exercise or Die messages may have also motivated some people to overcome their fears, especially with gyms and swimming pools and so on closed.

I share your belief that the reduced motoring and increased design support probably helped, though, as well as your hopes that it makes people better drivers and encourages better routes in the longer term.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

When people in my office say to me, "I wouldn't cycle to work, it's too dangerous", I ask them where the danger comes from.
The answer is always: motorised transport.

We already know that over the past hundred years there's been precious little progress through educating drivers so it's a waste of time to rely on that. We need to reduce motor vehicle usage and provide safe, segregated routes for people from 8 to 80.

 

[mjr]

Useless anecdata: I've never been to hospital as a result of a cycling incident. However I did end up in A&E with concussion after slipping and falling at a swimming baths once.

And if we're on that theme, I've ended up visiting A&E twice due to falling while running and once due to eating fish badly. Never yet due to cycling.

 

[icowden]

I personally avoid cycling inside London zone 1 because I find it so stressful. Neither of those is entirely rational

Whereas I actually find that some of my safest cycling is in zone 1 because of back roads, slow traffic speeds, segregated cycle lanes and volume of cyclists. I'm much more wary in Surrey.

 

[mjr]

Relatedly, https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/gear-change.265671/ about a new "vision for cycling and walking" published by gov.uk

 

[Drago]

In the USA between 45,000 - 50,000 people a year require hospital treatment due to cycling injuries.

However, about 100,000 people a year seek hospital treatment for toothpick injuries. Maintaining good oral health is more dangerous than cycling, at least in the States.

 

[david k]

Danger of any activity is down to context
Cycling slowly on a trail isn't as dangerous as flying down a duel carriageway at night without lights

 

[Drago]

The dual carriageway if liable to be fairly quiet at night.

Look at the chumps that never have lights on their bikes at night - very few actually come a cropper. I would expect more trail riders have ended up in an air ambulance that lightless riders on public roads.

 

[Punkawallah]

Cycling may be dangerous, but if we stopped doing everything dangerous, we’d do nothing?

 

[Oldhippy]

Cycling is not dangerous unless you are exceeding what you are capable of!