= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
taw comments on How to avoid dying in a car crash - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (288)
I used to cycle a lot, and I had no doubts whatsoever this drastically increases my chance of dying early, or suffering other horrible accident. There are health benefits due to regular physical activity (and attractiveness and energy level benefits), but they probably don't come anywhere near matching increased risk of death due to drivers completely disregarding cyclists' safety.
An article in an Italian magazine I've read claims a study found the reverse. Among the 181 thousand subscribers of Barcelona's bike sharing service (11% of the population), who cycled in average 3.29 km a day during weekdays and 4.15 km a day during weekends, there appear to be 0.03 more deaths per year (than among the same number of car drivers) from traffic accidents and 0.13 more deaths per year from air pollution but 12.46 fewer deaths per year from sedentary lifestyle. (Plus, cycling instead of driving itself reduces pollution, which affects everybody's death rate, so even if your point is to decrease your own chance of dying there still can be superrational reasons to do that.)
If you're travelling a fixed distance, be very wary of cycling (and walking).
Some numbers:
Source: http://www.swov.nl/rapport/promising/wp5final.pdf which quotes Transport Statistics Great Britain 1979-1989
(If you're otherwise unhealthy and this is the only exercise you'd give yourself, you may still be better off. If you can make yourself do other exercise, please do.)
And if you thought you'd get away with walking by staying mostly not alongside traffic:
Source: http://grapevine.net.au/~mccluskeyarundell/Ped_casualty.pdf
The scale of the benefits of buses is pretty dramatic.Based on that it seems rational to take buses whenever possible (unless I'm missing something).
Here in Tampa Bay, my commute by car usually takes about 25 minutes. Google says that, by bus, it would take around 2 hours. Commute time has a huge effect on quality of life. So, I probably wouldn't gain and quality-adjusted life years by switching to bus.
I also noticed when I was managing large numbers of people that people who used public transportation seemed to get a lot more (~double) the number of illnesses. When they bought a car, their sickness rates went down.
I found the same thing myself when I switched.
However as this is a politically fraught topic, good studies seem to be scarce.
It'd be great to get same data, but without highway fatalities at long trips.
Then cycle in a safer place. (I agree btw about the drivers).
Unless you're suggesting stationary bike, it's hard to find a safer place in the middle of London.
Not to mention the enormous quantities of crap you'll inhale cycling in the street in London. (Anecdotal evidence from friends who've done it, complete with black snot.)
I've never really notice that, how long ago is your anecdotal evidence from?
About nine or ten years ago. The hanky in question was a notably foul sight.