> then goes on to claim "In the grander catalogue of neighborhood dangers, getting hit by an e-bike is far from the deadliest" which is outright ridiculous, do

> then goes on to claim "In the grander catalogue of neighborhood dangers, getting hit by an e-bike is far from the deadliest" which is outright ridiculous, do these neighborhoods not have cars, that are way more dangerous? "... e-bike is far from the deadliest" means that there are things that are much deadlier than e-bikes, like cars. So you seem to be in agreement with (this part of) the article.