3 ms·
Which just by itself would help reduce the total number of injuries, as the unfortunate reality is almost every other form of transport is less likely to result
by wizofaus 4y ago
Which just by itself would help reduce the total number of injuries, as the unfortunate reality is almost every other form of transport is less likely to result in hits to the head. So you then have to balance that against the downsides of people choosing "safer" forms of transport, which are not inconsiderable.
- RyanHamilton 4y agoIf you are implying cars. What about deaths from pollution? Reduced years of life from pollution? Reduced years of life from being overweight due to lack of exercise? Miserable years of life caught in traffic? "Air pollution, which is primarily the result of burning fossil fuels, takes 2.2 years of the global life expectancy for each person". https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/air-pollution-cuts-life-expectancy-by-more-than-two-years-study-2022-06-14/ https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...
- wizofaus 4y agoAbsolutely, I certainly don't wish to see more people driving cars! But for any individual, if safety is your primary concern and you're deciding between a car and a bicycle, you'd choose the former.
- ricardobeat 4y agoNot true, if you look into the data there are more pedestrian head injuries than cyclists’. Or car accidents.
- wizofaus 4y agoIt might be conceivable that more people hurt their heads on a per-km basis walking than cycling, but I'd be extremely surprised that for the same individual, walking (or driving) a given distance would be more likely to result in a serious head injury than cycling it.