3 ms·
If the risk is 100x and you eliminate 90% of it, then statistically eliminating most of the risk still doesn't make it all that great a choice.
by ummonk 2y ago
If the risk is 100x and you eliminate 90% of it, then statistically eliminating most of the risk still doesn't make it all that great a choice.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago> If the risk is 100x Where does this number come from?
- lupusreal 2y agoIf you do as I suggest then you eliminate a lot more than 90% of the risk. 62% of cyclist fatalities weren't wearing a helmet, so that alone is a huge thing you can do to improve your odds. 22% are drunk. 50% are on major roads. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/bicyclists https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/bicyc... I knew I would get responses about "why don't cars just..." e.g. why should I change, they're the ones who suck. I'm not suggesting or opposing public policy changes here. I'm giving practical advice which makes cycling much safer than the statistical average. If you do all of what I say, it's a reasonably safe and healthy pastime.