Why does cycling have a 'high' risk rating? or does it?

[dellzeqq]

I don't know how it is in other parts of the country, but cycling organisations in London, backed by the Times newspaper, are squeaking like stuck pigs about safety. According the LCC, the CEGBeebies and the Times, cycling is the next worst thing to Russian roulette. Which is odd, given the hundreds of thousands cycling to work every day in London.

 

[dellzeqq]

Only today I've had it suggested to me that my probability of being hit by a car is 35% and that is every day.

who by?

 

[albion]

Cycling can be very high risk.
I have one route I regularly avoid considering both the risk and the stress too high.

Evaluating and controlling risks is a learned skill so newer cyclists, especially in London get it tough.

 

[dellzeqq]

Cycling can be very high risk.
I have one route I regularly avoid considering both the risk and the stress too high.

Evaluating and controlling risks is a learned skill so newer cyclists, especially in London get it tough.

Quoi?!

 

[Hebe]

...
It is rather like the mums, and others, who campaign against mobile phone masts, on the school playing fields and elsewhere, who mobilise their campaign by having conversations on mobile phones held right against their heads.

Yet they never perceive a traffic jam of large cars/4x4s, parked right up by the school gates and on the pavement, with the engines running as potentially hazardous at all. Amazing.

Personally, I was nervous about cycling but some bikeability training really helped. I don't think non-cyclists always understand that the road can actually feel (and be) safer than obstructed pavements and poorly designed junctions where you either can't see the traffic (and it can't see you) or where the traffic streams never stop for long enough to let you cross safely.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Only today I've had it suggested to me that my probability of being hit by a car is 35% and that is every day.

is there a contract out on you?

 

[VamP]

Only today I've had it suggested to me that my probability of being hit by a car is 35% and that is every day.

He must be continually dumbfounded by your ability to defy such odds!

 

[smutchin]

Imagine being knocked off once every three days... It would probably put me off cycling.

Fortunately, I haven't even been knocked off as often as once every three years (my wife has had more car crashes than I've had cycling accidents, yet she still worries about me cycling more than I worry about her driving).

d.

 

[fossyant]

On the basis of injuries sustained requiring a trip to A&E/NHS intervention since I returned to cycling in 1995 the lovely Helen, my OH, should be pleading with me to

stop taking showers (broken ankle)
stop using stairs (one broken ankle, one dislocated ankle)
stop cutting bread (knife wound to right hand)
stop refereeing rugby union (broken knee - I have since retired)
stop exploring castles (lacerated head)

Blimey ! Clumsy ?

 

[steveindenmark]

It also depends on what country you are in and what type of cycling you are talking about.

Commuting in Denmark is a pretty safe activity.

Extreme mountainbiking anywhere is pretty dodgy

You need some type of perameters before you get some accurate feedback.

Steve

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Blimey ! Clumsy ?

Clumsy? Abso-bleedin'-lutely. Always have been, always will be.

and my ankles "go" at the drop of a hat and I was told last time they were x-rayed I have the ankles of an 80-year-old

 

[fossyant]

Clumsy? Abso-bleedin'-lutely. Always have been, always will be.

and my ankles "go" at the drop of a hat and I was told last time they were x-rayed I have the ankles of an 80-year-old

So riding a bike anywhere near you is dangerous, especially fixed

Back to the OP.

Better to burn out than to fade away !

 

[albion]

Is there any hope for policy change when even our road safety minister Mike Penning is using trickery to deflect/ignore the reality of risk?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3393902.ece

 

[musa]

Typical MP, a change needs to be done but where they fail is they only sample ideas on either rounded figures or small numbers.

extract from article

Mr Penning closed on a statement that caused an outcry among cyclists, when he claimed that the Netherlands – a country seen as a beacon worldwide on cycle safety – could learn from Britain about cycle safety, due to a lower death toll for cyclists in Britain.

Mr Penning said: “For instance, on the European table I have here, the Netherlands is fourth from the bottom, with 0.84 [deaths] per 100,000 population. Where we are, I think, seventh, with 0.71 [deaths per 100,000 population].”

But you said you had it here with you? Conflicting..But thats alright being in the top ten and having a figure slightly lower by 0.17. Ignorance at the loudest cry or what?

This disparity is due to a far greater number of cyclists in the Netherlands. On Dutch streets, there are around eight deaths for every 100 million km cycled. In Britain, the figure is more than three times higher, at around 25 deaths per 100 million km cycled.

 

[Hip Priest]

I don't find cycling 'high risk' at all. But then I'm scared of flying, which is an equally irrational fear.