Cycling is dangerous

In article said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

Life is dangerous. People gets killed in auto crashes, etc. Is your friend advocating avoiding autos
because of the danger?

Cycling is great exercise. If you don't exercise, you could die from heart disease, etc.

A couple off things:

I am a very dedicated rider ... to the tune of 10,000 to 13,000 miles per year. I could race if I
had the inclination. I train with plenty of folks who race at pretty high levels. Mostly I like to
do fast centuries. I don't have the wreckless abondon I see most good racers exhibit.

The point is I've spent many, many hours on the road in a suburban to rural environment. Five years
ago I was riding in a paceline when the lead rider fell going over some RR tracks. To avoid the
pileup I had to make an evasive move that caused me to hit the tracks at a very bad angle. I went
down, my knee and head went into the pavement. My kneecap was shattered into many little pieces. My
head was fine thanks to my helmet. We could debate all day if this could have been forseen or
avoided. It happened.

A year ago this very day I was finishing up a 50 mile ride. At 2:30 in the afternoon on a nice,
bright afternoon I was coming down a little hill through an intersection with a new traffic light. I
had a green light. A van passed me (going my direction) just as I was reaching the intersection. An
oncoming car driven by a teenager talking on a cell phone decided to make a left turn -- immediately
after the van passed. She hit me head on. I went off her windshield and, according to witnesses,
went about 20 feet straight up and landed squarely on my head. Witnesses thought sure I was dead. I
sustained a broken hip, broken pelvis, broken ankle, compression fracture of the spine and a major
laceration of the lower leg. My helmet was shattered. My head was fine. I recovered and had personal
best rides throughout most of this season (at age 47).

In my opinion, anyone who says cycling isn't potentially dangerous is in serious denial. 4,000 pound
hunks of metal are hurtling down the road next to you in the control of inattentive idiots. If you
aren't mindful of the potential dangers, you're asking for trouble. Also, I think anyone who does
anything to discourage another rider from wearing a helmet ought to be locked up.

Finally, there's a guy here in the states who had a well-known website dedicated to promoting the
relative safety of cycling. If you search, you'll probably not have any real trouble finding it. I
believe Sheldon Brown is keeping it up now. The guy who built and maintained the site was run over
and killed a few weeks back.

I love cycling and I'm willing to assume some of the risks. I'm not stupid enough to deny they're
there. I take precautions to try to insure that I'm seen and that I'm reasonably protected if
something were to happen. In both my major crashes, I might have been far more seriously hurt ... or
even killed ... were it not for my helmet.

Bob C.

"Garry Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

I am trying to answer an fairly active recreational cyclist who has made this claim in the Swedish
cycling newsgroup.

I don't think he is correct and I would like some facts and data that back up my thoughts about
this. The cyclist who posted this says he always wears his helmet, even when cycling to the local
store for some bananas. He is an active sky diver, but does not wear his helmet then because he
has time to protect his head with his hands if necessary when landing.

There are other posters than I am discussing things with who are in favour of the proposed
mandatory helmet law in Sweden.

Personly I think that cycling (with or without a helmet) is a safer long term activity than
playing computer games or watching TV, but now I want some feedback from others.

I also feel that a mandatory helmet law would be a dangerous thing because people would stop
cycling.

Garry Jones English Cyclist ResIDING in Sweden.

Quoted message said:

In article said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

Life is dangerous. People gets killed in auto crashes, etc. Is your friend advocating avoiding
autos because of the danger?

Cycling is great exercise. If you don't exercise, you could die from heart disease, etc.

Even if you exercise, you could die of heart disease. Exercise simply lowers the risk, but many
athletes have died of heart disease (a la Jim Fixx; see:
infoplease.comA0109183.htmlOpen ↗).

--
Bob M in CT Remove 'x.' to reply

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

...

Quoted message said:

In my opinion, anyone who says cycling isn't potentially dangerous is in serious denial. 4,000
pound hunks of metal are hurtling down the road next to you in the control of inattentive idiots.
If you aren't mindful of the potential dangers, you're asking for trouble. Also, I think anyone
who does anything to discourage another rider from wearing a helmet ought to be locked up.

I absolutely agree with you, but he said "dangerous", not "potentially dangerous", which are not
quite the same thing, so you are answering a different question from the one he asked...

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

The first step is to look up the statistics. Start here:

wonder.cdc.govwonder.cdc.govOpen ↗

You will find links to health statistics and death statistics. From there you can show the relative
risk of a sedentary lifestyle. You can also find the relative risk of getting killed while cycling.
You are going to find that being sedentary is a risky business and that driving a car is the thing
that is most likely to get you killed. Cycling is relatively safe.

-Buck

"Garry Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

I am trying to answer an fairly active recreational cyclist who has made this claim in the Swedish
cycling newsgroup.

I don't think he is correct and I would like some facts and data that back up my thoughts about
this. The cyclist who posted this says he always wears his helmet, even when cycling to the local
store for some bananas. He is an active sky diver, but does not wear his helmet then because he
has time to protect his head with his hands if necessary when landing.

There are other posters than I am discussing things with who are in favour of the proposed
mandatory helmet law in Sweden.

Personly I think that cycling (with or without a helmet) is a safer long term activity than
playing computer games or watching TV, but now I want some feedback from others.

I also feel that a mandatory helmet law would be a dangerous thing because people would stop
cycling.

Garry Jones English Cyclist ResIDING in Sweden.

Garry Jones from Telenordia/Algonet said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

I am trying to answer an fairly active recreational cyclist who has made this claim in the Swedish
cycling newsgroup.

Everything is dangerous. You can drown in a teaspoon of water, so I have heard. Even breathing has
its hazards. There are relative amounts of danger. In that respect, cycling is relatively less
dangerous than many other activities, including driving an automobile. In a bit of tragic irony, the
late Ken Kifer had a page that addressed this very issue:
kenkifer.comrisks.htmOpen ↗ .

--
real e-mail addy: kevansmith23 at yahoo dot com I think I'd better go back to my DESK and toy with a
few common MISAPPREHENSIONS ...

"Robert Chambers" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

potential dangers, you're asking for trouble. Also, I think anyone who

does

Quoted message said:

anything to discourage another rider from wearing a helmet ought to be locked up.

It's this kind of hyperbole (and mandatory helmet laws in other jurisdictions) that make me wear my
helmet less than I would otherwise. Around here you can rarely mention the word "bike" without
someone getting fanatical that anyone on a bike must wear a helmet.

They never say anything about lights or blowing stoplights and other illegal, dangerous, manoeuvers.
They are astounded when I say I wear my helmet offroad where it's dangerous. If I raced I would wear
a helmet then too.

Why do the majority of riders ignoring stoplights wear helmets? Even riders crossing busy 4 lane
major arterials against the lights, they must be safe, they're wearing helmets.

Quoted message said:

Brown is keeping it up now. The guy who built and maintained the site was run over and killed a
few weeks back.

IIRC the car crossed the street to hit him head on. This is more an argument to stay away from all
roads no matter what vehicle you use.

IMHO helmets are the last thing that needs to be made mandatory. Kids need them when they are
learning to ride on the sidewalk (a very dangerous place to ride). People should wear them offroad
and racing (other dangerous places). A mandatory helmet law would address none of those high risk
occasions. It would continue to encourage this ubiquitous focus on helmets to the exclusion of
riskier behaviour.

Doug Toronto

"Garry Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

"Dangerous in relation to what?"

Proceed from there.

Pete

Garry Jones <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

How do you meet that remark in a constructive manner?

I am trying to answer an fairly active recreational cyclist who has made this claim in the Swedish
cycling newsgroup.

Try:

"Cycling is dangerous. However wearing a helmet is an added measure of safety."

Quoted message said:

I don't think he is correct and I would like some facts and data that back up my thoughts about
this. The cyclist who posted this says he always wears his helmet, even when cycling to the local
store for some bananas. He is an active sky diver, but does not wear his helmet then because he
has time to protect his head with his hands if necessary when landing.

Please point out to him that in many cases skydivers are spun around enough to cause them to black
out. Kind of hard to protect your head with your hands when unconsious.

<snip>

Sadly the most important factor in this whole equation is whether or not it will be enforced. Here
in the US the only cycling laws that are enforced are the ones that create a danger to other people.
ie. Riding on the sidewalk, going through red lights etc. If the law is not enforced then it will
have a small impact.

My $0.02 Andy

Claire Petersky said:

Here's a quote from another post I made on this topic.

So, apparently the compelling question is, how dangerous is cycling compared to other activities of
daily life? A 1999 study in Britain of emergency room incidents came up with these statistics:
While 172 cyclists were killed in 1999, 5,945 people were hospitalised after trouser-related
accidents and 13,132 from injuries inflicted by vegetables and 96,000 from accidents occurring
while they were

Were the injuries really inflicted by vegetables, or were they sustained while handling vegetables?
My gf constantly cuts herself while attempting to cut vegetables...

Anyway, it sounds to me like vegetarians are in grave danger. They should immediately switch to
eating cheeseburgers.

Quoted message said:

sleeping, relaxing, sitting or lying around.

<more humorous statistics snipped>

That doesn't tell you what the statistics are for bicycling; that tells you what the statistics are
for a whole population, most of which doesn't ride, most of the rest of which spends much more time
sleeping, relaxing, sitting or lying around than bicycling.

Without knowing how many hours were spent bicycling, you can't tell how dangerous bicycling is from
an injury tally. You need both pieces of data, and if you want to compare it to some other activity,
like vegetable-related activities, then you would need both pieces of data for vegetables too.

Quoted message said:

So, what are you going to do? Vaguely worry about the dangers of cycling while being stuck in some
malodorous steel box in an interminable line of cars, fuming at your sorry situation?

Or be on your bike, out on God's Green Earth and be free!

I'll do the second one, and I'll apply appropriate safety precautions such as careful riding, proper
equipment maintenance, and wearing safety equipment that I find comfortable (gloves, shoes, helmet,
clothes). I would, however, oppose a mandatory helmet law, which this thread began with...
--
Rick Onanian

Hunrobe said:

Quoted message said:

Garry Jones [email hidden]

wrote in part:

Quoted message said:

He is an active sky diver, but does not wear his helmet then because he has time to protect his
head with his hands if necessary when landing.

[...]

Quoted message said:

the landing. He thinks he can judge the moment of touchdown so precisely that he can safely remove
his hands from the risers at the instant of impact to protect his head and then find those risers
again to spill his chute and not get dragged? If that's true then he's obviously blessed with such
fantastic depth perception and lightening quick reflexes that he should have no problem doing the
exact same thing in a fall from a bike.

The depth perception issue while parachuting is *very* real! It's something most people don't really
think too much about.

In the realm of common experience, we can figure out when we're going to land only from familiar
heights, such as jumping off a table, off a [low] tree branch, or possibly a one story house roof.
The calculation is probably based more on air time than actual depth perception.

In fact, from higher "altitudes", predicting when you'll hit the ground is really, really tricky!! I
suppose it gets better with experience (my experience is a single jump only), but this problem was
far trickier than I would have thought.

SMH

In article said:

Poisoning??!!!

No refrigeration after the winter snows melt in August? Eating wild mushrooms? Draino cocktails? A
little arsenic by a not so loving wife?

What's going on up there in the Great White North?

Accidentally making methanol instead of potable ethanol, botulism, salmonella, bugs in the drinking
water, kids huffing gasoline, down-'n-outers huffing lysol, family restaurants, television, bad E at
raves, red tide oysters, and barbecuing indoors with no ventilation. An obsessive-compulsive dentist
who got his kicks by boiling mercury on the kitchen stove in his apartment, and one guy who thought
it would be a good idea to do that helium-voice party trick by inhaling straight from a helium tank
instead of from a little party balloon. Kids getting into household cleansers under the kitchen
sink, visually impaired people getting their pills mixed up, insecticides, pesticides and
herbicides. Rattlesnakes, black widows, and brown recluse spiders.

And auto emissions.

cheers, Tom

--
-- Powered by FreeBSD Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn
[point] bc [point] ca

Robert Chambers wrote, after about 50 lines of quoted text:

Quoted message said:

All I do in response to this is shake my head in a combination of disgust and amazement.

That's too bad. There are much more useful things one can do with a head.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.

Robert Chambers said:

Hey frank ... try reading the entire thread. I know plenty about cycling and its relative dangers.
I've experienced them first hand.

Well, I guess you're an expert then. I also presume you'll start wearing a helmet as a pedestrian
when I tell you anecdotes of my friends who have been hit by cars while out walking.

Quoted message said:

I can't stand enduring all the idiots out here who think they know something about it when they
spin a few miles a week and haven't had a life-threatening accident ... yet somehow they're
experts.

To whom are you referring here? Certainly not Frank.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.

Zoot Katz said:

Tue, 14 Oct 2003 23:57:52 -0400, <[email hidden]>, Frank Krygowski

Quoted message said:

For example, swimming is reckoned to be four times worse than cyling, in terms of deaths per
million hours activity; yet that doesn't make swimming dangerous in any absolute sense

Nope, swimming isn't dangerous. It's one's inability to swim that is a risky proposition.

Drowning is the third leading cause of unintentional death for Canadians under 60 years of age,
surpassed only by motor vehicle collisions and poisoning.

Poisoning??!!!

No refrigeration after the winter snows melt in August? Eating wild mushrooms? Draino cocktails? A
little arsenic by a not so loving wife?

What's going on up there in the Great White North?

SMH

Quoted message said:

Sold. Ridden more or less than before the law is the real question. (and taking into account all
the other factors)

I see more riders then I used to when the law was not in effect. Most have helmets but not all.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices See
knight-toolworks.comknight-toolworks.comOpen ↗ For prices and ordering instructions.

"Frank Krygowski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Robert Chambers wrote:

Should car riders be mindful of the potential dangers? Certainly. Is car riding "dangerous"? Not
so much that people should wear protective gear, apparently!

In my car I have seat belts and multiple air bags. These safety devices do not encourage me to drive
dangerously.

And now here is my question, has wearing a helmet on a bicycle ever killed or seriously injured
someone? In other words, except for the helmet, they would still be alive today.

Matthew

Ian said:

If you were statistically to compare the danger of driving versus bicycle riding on a "per mile",
"per trip", or "usage" basis, you would find bicycling to be more dangerous than driving a car.

You need to compare on a per hour of use basis, since per mile or per trip (which still has a per
mile of comparison component to it) doesn't normalize for differences in exposure to danger.

Say I ride 15 miles in one hour. The car covers that distance in perhaps 10-30 minutes. So while I'm
pedaling home from my ride, still exposed to being run down by someone, the car user is sitting on
the sofa watching TV, with his danger of being in a car accident being nil.

Pretty much the same for that one trip: by car, 15 minutes; by bike, 60.

Not a fair comparison.

SMH

Stephen Harding <[email hidden]> wrote in :"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

No refrigeration after the winter snows melt in August?

Don't be ridiculous, winter snow is always gone by the end of June...its the ice on the ponds that
doesn't melt till August.