in message , David Arditti
') wrote:
If we take this kind of thing, quoted by Patrick Herring in this
thread:
Traffic safety of cycle tracks in Danish cities.
Before and after study of 105 new cycle paths in Denmark, introduced
1978-81, totalling 64km. Cyclist casualties increased 48% following
introduction of paths.
one kind of wonders why all the cyclists in Denmark and The
Netherlands have not been wiped out by now, since they have both
continued to built more segregated tracks since then.

People who hold this view need to explain why these localised studies,
if correct, seem so out of kilter with the overall national statistics
of cycling deaths and injuries. Why is it so safe in Denmark and The
Netherlands in reality?

That one is easy. Because it used to be very very safe, but since the
introduction of separate facilities it is merely very safe. The
absolute numbers may be lower than in Britain, but the trends may not
be.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Human history becomes more and more a race between
;; education and catastrophe.
H.G. Wells, "The Outline of History"