Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: "Danger! Danger!" - or not!
Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 20:43:02 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <101djao$ohj7$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 31 May 2025 02:43:05 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="45d4d3cce94d44ce1feabd54423e49f8";
	logging-data="804455"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/wFi/H/nMcFZnGNuhah95ToJR1RKGXK3Y="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:vXpwWNdzE55f/QoV20icf06HSJo=
Content-Language: en-US

I'm constantly amazed at the "Danger! Danger!" warnings heaped on 
ordinary bicycling. It seems that millions of people "know" that one 
cannot be safe riding a bike unless they wear a very weird styrofoam 
hat; or garish, hi-viz clothing; or run bright lights front and back, 
even in full daylight; or ride only on flat, boring multi-use paths, 
because riding anywhere near motor vehicles can't possibly be safe.

Yet research comparisons between various activities almost always show 
ordinary cycling (i.e. not gonzo off-road downhilling) to be quite safe. 
I came across another relevant research paper today: "Active Living and 
Injury Risk" by Parkkari, in the International Journal of Sports Medicine.
http://bionics.seas.ucla.edu/education/Rowing/Injury_2004_01.pdf

They used extensive surveys to evaluate risk of injuries per 1000 hours 
of activity in dozens of activities. Here are results for some common 
activities - with lower numbers being better:

Ordinary (e.g. commuting) bicycling: 0.42 injuries per 1000 hours.
Walking;   0.19 injuries per 1000 hours
Gardening: 1.01
Home Repair: 0.54
Basketball: 9.1
Soccer: 7.8
Tennis: 4.7
Badminton: 4.6
Running: 3.6
Competitive cycling: 2.0
Dancing: 0.7 injuries per 1000 hours.

So if you're afraid to ride a bike on a normal road, you should be more 
afraid of gardening. (And this is not the only study that found 
gardening to be riskier than cycling!) Also, think twice before going 
dancing, let alone the scary sport of badminton!

BTW, the paper says "when commuting to shop, office or school it is
safer to walk rather than ride a bike." I think that's a mistake. Since 
whatever shop you're heading for is a fixed distance away, what matters 
is the risk per km or per mile, not per hour. Bicycling's per hour risk 
was found to be 2.2 times that of walking; but I think almost all 
bicyclists ride faster than 6.6 miles per hour - that is, faster than 
2.2 times the normal walking pace of 3 mph. So per mile, cycling is 
safer than walking, a fact that pops up consistently in relative risk 
studies.

Zen is apparently the only one posting here who still races. He should 
take comfort in the fact that they found racing to be safer than badminton!


-- 
- Frank Krygowski