|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclists hurt seven times more often than figures show
On 18/05/2018 16:45, colwyn wrote:
On 18/05/2018 11:27, JNugent wrote: On 18/05/2018 11:08, colwyn wrote: On 17/05/2018 23:56, JNugent wrote: On 17/05/2018 20:26, MrCheerful wrote: On 17/05/2018 18:22, colwyn wrote: On 17/05/2018 16:11, MrCheerful wrote: On 17/05/2018 14:08, colwyn wrote: On 17/05/2018 13:08, MrCheerful wrote: On 17/05/2018 11:35, colwyn wrote: Cyclists hurt seven times more often than figures show Graeme Paton, Transport Correspondent May 17 2018, 12:01am, The Times British cyclists are four times as likely to be killed as those in the Netherlands The number of cyclists being injured on British roads could be almost seven times higher than previously thought. Huge under-reporting of cycling injuries, often involving minor collisions with cars and other vehicles, has been found by researchers. About a third of incidents did “not involve anyone else”, suggesting that they were linked to potholes in the road or other obstacles such as bollards. The report by Rachel Aldred, a reader in transport at Westminster University, will fuel demands for an increase in the number of segregated cycle lanes. She said that British cyclists were four times as likely to be killed as those in the Netherlands, where cycle lanes are far more common. The study also unearthed great under-reporting in the number of people injured while walking, with pedestrians three times more likely to be hurt than official police accident figures show. It revealed that people with disabilities and those from poorer homes, who are less likely to be able to afford their own car or public transport, were more likely to be injured than the national average. Dr Aldred analysed feedback from the National Travel Survey, an annual poll of the transport habits of 147,000 people. She compared this with road accident figures based on police reports, which recorded 18,477 cycling casualties on roads in 2016, including 14,978 slight injuries and 3,499 people who were killed or seriously injured. Analysis of the National Travel Survey showed that the risk of cycling injuries was much higher, although most of these additional injuries were likely to be slight, Dr Aldred said, suggesting that the true scale of injuries could exceed 125,000. Figures published by the Department for Transport at the start of the year showed that the number of people cycling has flatlined over the past decade as traffic has risen steeply. The average adult made 15 journeys by bicycle in 2016, two fewer than ten years earlier. The number has fluctuated between 14 and 18 trips since the mid-1990s. The government has launched a review of cycle safety to increase the use of bicycles. It is likely to consider imposing mandatory passing distances to prevent motorists overtaking too close to cyclists on busy roads. It could also investigate the possibility of fines for “car dooring”, when motorists or car passengers negligently swing open doors and hit passing cyclists. Cyclists do not use segregated cycle lanes in the UK There are no figures to show how she has arrived at her conclusions. Eh? This is a newspaper article analysing responses form 147,000 people! 18,477 cycling casualties in 2016 etc - I suggest you read the article or why not contact Dr Aldred? Cycling in the UK overall is actually declining. And again, read the article. Here it is again: "Figures published by the Department for Transport at the start of the year showed that the number of people cycling has flatlined over the past decade as traffic has risen steeply. The average adult made 15 journeys by bicycle in 2016, two fewer than ten years earlier. The number has fluctuated between 14 and 18 trips since the mid-1990s." If it is, then it is high time government does something something about it! So you agree, cycling is declining. There is no link for me to follow, in order to read and analyse the figures she gives. Here you a* http://rachelaldred.org/ I am sure she'll be able to explain. Nothing recent on there, where is the 4 times more likely to be killed bit? Rachel Aldred... a rabid cyclist byh er own admission... Exercise a *little* source criticism, for God's sake. If you were quoting a sociologist you'd be prepared to discount their "findings" to take acount of their predilections. If Jeremy Clarkson came up with findings about transport, you'd pull them to pieces before even thinking about them. Be consistent be critical and be reasonable (clearly difficult for cyclists, admittedly, but that's the way that academia is supposed to work). **Rabid cyclist? You might take issue with "rabid", but that's only a matter of degree. She is certainly exceptionally pre-biased. Too much to have her work and "findings" accepted uncritically. Read and listen to her research ( something Cheerful was having problems with - not being able to assimilate cycling related information) Most of her papers can be found without difficulty and even a cyclist can make sense of it! That's not the point. I remind you of my observation above about Clarkson. http://rachelaldred.org/ Well, exactly. http://www.ciht.org.uk/en/media-cent...nars/index.cfm http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/21111/ https://www.icevirtuallibrary.com/do...jmuen.16.00068 http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/cont...ev-2017-042498 https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...01457518301076 And more for frothing anti cyclists! Pre-biased ? (What's that?) Not neutral, and therefore predictably inclined to make "findings" which favour cyclists and cycling and which excoriate people who are minding their own business as they drive to work, the shops or otherwise about their lawful occasions. Fancy that, a cyclist in favour of push bikes, whatever next? Exactly. Are you unable to see what that means? Have you forgotten the question I asked about your reaction to a publication on transport by Jeremy Clarkson (were he to write one)? You'll be praising the neutrality of Loony David Begg next. Not only having a doctorate to her name, contrary to limited intelligence according to newsgroup critics, ????? she has the ability to get approval from august bodies such as the BMJ. And? But hey, what do you expect from someone with a degree. Nick Griffin has a degree (and of course, he is very far from being the only one to have one). Does that mean that he is authoritative on any of the matters on which he writes and speaks? [I assume that you don't have a degree, based purely on your forelock-tugging in the presence of Ms Aldred, who has a degree, after all.] |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Racing cyclists fall off and hurt themselves. | Mrcheerful | UK | 0 | July 1st 14 05:23 PM |
This guy has been mown down by cyclists three times in three months ! | Mrcheerful[_3_] | UK | 16 | July 3rd 12 11:44 AM |
OT cyclists do not hurt pedestrians | Marie | UK | 0 | May 23rd 10 08:25 PM |
Cyclists are a Perverted Pestulance [Times Article 18/02] | David Off | UK | 70 | February 24th 04 11:50 PM |
New BBC Show needs super fit cyclists | kingsley | Australia | 2 | July 11th 03 10:00 PM |