5 ms·

These statistics are almost meaningless without other context: for instance Sweden has the ‘best’ stats for road deaths, but there are other factors that the ra

These statistics are almost meaningless without other context: for instance Sweden has the ‘best’ stats for road deaths, but there are other factors that the raw figures don’t tell you: - An important element is that car drivers are driving bigger and bigger vehicles that are safer for their occupants - People here are also consuming new cars - which are also generally safer - What the stats don’t show is that deaths and injuries for other road users are creeping upwards - not so much yet to offset the lives saved in the bigger/safer cars, but it’s a horrible cost to pay - The main drawback is that road use is shifting almost entirely to cars: country roads are often practically impossible to cycle or walk on. This last fact was really brought home to me over the summer: to get to the country place we vacationed in over the summer was a 20 minute drive from a local town. I intended to get some secondhand bikes for the whole family, but after just a week of using this road I realized that it was a no-go area for anything other than cars. The whole summer I saw maybe five/six cyclists on this road - and each time I felt they were defying death. So removing all other road-users, or banishing them from the road to poorly-designed cycle lanes separate from the car traffic isn’t something shown by raw statistics.

chrisseaton 5y ago
> People here are also consuming new cars - which are also generally safer Isn't that a core part of their strategy? Increasing vehicle safety standards (including for passengers)? I don't think that's some kind of gotcha - it's literally what they're trying to do.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  It depends in what context the statistic is used. If you are looking just at vehicle deaths/injuries in general it is fine. If you are trying to justify that road designs and changes are improving driver outcomes, then it is deceptive.
globular-toast 5y ago
Chris Boardman was saying this a few years ago [0]. He also notes that the safety aspect of cycling is often pushed on to cyclists themselves including useless distractions like helmets. His own mother was killed on a bicycle while wearing a helmet. I ride my bike on the road a lot. I first got on a bike on the road as a child and learnt a lot of lessons then that I couldn't afford to learn now. After more than 25 years on the road I've seen it get worse and worse and it's not getting any better. I couldn't imagine getting on the road for the first time today. I'm sad to say I cannot in good faith recommend cycling to anyone. We need to get rid of cars. They are unhealthy and a scourge. Too many adults let their bodies regress into useless blobs the moment they can get in a car. Streets all over the UK are packed with ugly cars parked dangerously, vagrantly disobeying the laws and parking illegally and dangerously around junctions and on footpaths. Bicycles are beautiful technology. A machine which enables you to travel at least 3x faster, with luggage, using nothing but your own steam. Bicycles are quiet, clean, small, efficient and cheap. And we're paradoxically telling people they should use them, while still allowing untrained idiots to drive 3-ton trucks around them at high speeds on the same roads. It's insane. Cars need to go. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/31/chris-boardman-riding-a-bike-on-uk-roads-feels-too-dangerous-for-me https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/31/chris-b...
- foxfluff 5y ago
  Cars will not go. There are too many people for whom cycling is not an option, for various reasons. However, I think the trend for ever bigger and more powerful cars absolutely should go and can go (if politicians choose to make the incentives right). Most people who drive SUVs could do with a subcompact (or less!). In general, I'd be in favor of making roads friendly to all alternative modes of transport, whether that's foot, bicycle, velomobile, motorcycle, microcar, or whatever. Right now however the incentives are mostly aligned against such vehicles, and it is very dangerous to be on the road using a slow & lightweight vehicle mixing with fast, powerful, and large cars.
  - globular-toast 5y ago
    > Cars will not go. I know. > There are too many people for whom cycling is not an option, for various reasons. Rubbish. Complete rubbish. 99% of adults are able bodied and capable of locomotion. Don't forget that most adults let their bodies regress back into a baby-like form. Weak and incapable. But it need not be the case. > In general, I'd be in favor of making roads friendly to all alternative modes of transport They shouldn't be considered "alternative modes of transport". That's the problem. Humans should have the right to move around safely.

chrisseaton 5y ago

> People here are also consuming new cars - which are also generally safer Isn't that a core part of their strategy? Increasing vehicle safety standards (including for passengers)? I don't think that's some kind of gotcha - it's literally what they're trying to do.

xboxnolifes 5y ago
It depends in what context the statistic is used. If you are looking just at vehicle deaths/injuries in general it is fine. If you are trying to justify that road designs and changes are improving driver outcomes, then it is deceptive.

globular-toast 5y ago

Chris Boardman was saying this a few years ago [0]. He also notes that the safety aspect of cycling is often pushed on to cyclists themselves including useless distractions like helmets. His own mother was killed on a bicycle while wearing a helmet. I ride my bike on the road a lot. I first got on a bike on the road as a child and learnt a lot of lessons then that I couldn't afford to learn now. After more than 25 years on the road I've seen it get worse and worse and it's not getting any better. I couldn't imagine getting on the road for the first time today. I'm sad to say I cannot in good faith recommend cycling to anyone. We need to get rid of cars. They are unhealthy and a scourge. Too many adults let their bodies regress into useless blobs the moment they can get in a car. Streets all over the UK are packed with ugly cars parked dangerously, vagrantly disobeying the laws and parking illegally and dangerously around junctions and on footpaths. Bicycles are beautiful technology. A machine which enables you to travel at least 3x faster, with luggage, using nothing but your own steam. Bicycles are quiet, clean, small, efficient and cheap. And we're paradoxically telling people they should use them, while still allowing untrained idiots to drive 3-ton trucks around them at high speeds on the same roads. It's insane. Cars need to go. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/31/chris-boardman-riding-a-bike-on-uk-roads-feels-too-dangerous-for-me https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/31/chris-b...

foxfluff 5y ago
Cars will not go. There are too many people for whom cycling is not an option, for various reasons. However, I think the trend for ever bigger and more powerful cars absolutely should go and can go (if politicians choose to make the incentives right). Most people who drive SUVs could do with a subcompact (or less!). In general, I'd be in favor of making roads friendly to all alternative modes of transport, whether that's foot, bicycle, velomobile, motorcycle, microcar, or whatever. Right now however the incentives are mostly aligned against such vehicles, and it is very dangerous to be on the road using a slow & lightweight vehicle mixing with fast, powerful, and large cars.
- globular-toast 5y ago
  > Cars will not go. I know. > There are too many people for whom cycling is not an option, for various reasons. Rubbish. Complete rubbish. 99% of adults are able bodied and capable of locomotion. Don't forget that most adults let their bodies regress back into a baby-like form. Weak and incapable. But it need not be the case. > In general, I'd be in favor of making roads friendly to all alternative modes of transport They shouldn't be considered "alternative modes of transport". That's the problem. Humans should have the right to move around safely.