Google sponsored links


crhilton
 
http://cyclehelmets.org/mf.html?1026

According to the first chart you're four times more likely to die playing tennis?! I don't play much tennis, so maybe I'm missing the risk in this sport? Must be musty old guys having heart attacks. I'd hardly consider that related to the sport.

They also mention hunting as much safer. I think Dick Cheney would disagree ;).


The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.

Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)

Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net

randya
 
I once knew a guy had a heart attack and died playing tennis at age 40


Pig_Chaser
 
...According to the first chart you're four times more likely to die playing tennis?! I don't play much tennis, so maybe I'm missing the risk in this sport?...

It's probably because they don't wear helmets :D (sry couldn't resist)


crtreedude
 
It's probably because they don't wear helmets :D (sry couldn't resist)

You beat me to it! The injury was probably sustained though due to having their opponent be John MacEnroe... ;)


DieselDan
 
Defiantly a UK survey, as American Football is much more dangerous then the football stat reported, and the motorsport stat is more safe then reported in the USA.


crhilton
 
Defiantly a UK survey, as American Football is much more dangerous then the football stat reported, and the motorsport stat is more safe then reported in the USA.

I dunno. I've heard about the crowds at (international) football matches. American football fans don't riot in the stadiums ;). They beat each other up in the bars afterwards.


AndrewP
 
I knew that risk of incury for cyclists was much higher for children, but I was surprised that it was at its minimum for cyclists in their 30s. Perhaps its that older cyclists dont bounce so well and they are also riding slower.


StrangeWill
 
I knew that risk of incury for cyclists was much higher for children, but I was surprised that it was at its minimum for cyclists in their 30s. Perhaps its that older cyclists dont bounce so well and they are also riding slower.

Or they only ride once a week and spend the other 6 days spreading their wealth of cycling knowledge through "cycling advocacy".

I once knew a guy had a heart attack and died playing tennis at age 40
I think health causes are a little unfair, the same guy that just got on a bike would be deemed to have died on the bike too. Not to mention, not as many kids play tennis, where you're less likely to see such health conditions. Skews the numbers greatly. A pre-existing condition should not be counted when you're talking about risk.

However, I wonder how you die from accidents in tennis...


diff_lock2
 
Bioshock is pretty old now, Mr.Bubbles is down for good.


crhilton
 
I think health causes are a little unfair, the same guy that just got on a bike would be deemed to have died on the bike too. Not to mention, not as many kids play tennis, where you're less likely to see such health conditions. Skews the numbers greatly. A pre-existing condition should not be counted when you're talking about risk.

However, I wonder how you die from accidents in tennis...

That's my thoughts exactly. If you die of a heart attack during an activity then you died of a heart attack, not the activity.


Allister
 
That's my thoughts exactly. If you die of a heart attack during an activity then you died of a heart attack, not the activity.

What if you have a non-fatal heart attack, and fall under a truck?


StrangeWill
 
Bioshock is pretty old now, Mr.Bubbles is down for good.

I've also had my crankset for months, I just haven't been creative enough to change it yet.

What if you have a non-fatal heart attack, and fall under a truck?
Stop needlessly complicating things!

Oh wait this is A&S.

Continue!


cyclezealot
 
Wish one could find similiar data for a greater variety of countries.


Trucker_JDub
 
What is rambling? there is as far as I know it talking on and on in a boring and uninteresting fashion. Whats happening, are the people that are subjected to rambling people shoving pencils in there ears? Or am I missing something completely?

What ever it is, it has a safer rating the cycling.


StrangeWill
 
What is rambling? there is as far as I know it talking on and on in a boring and uninteresting fashion. Whats happening, are the people that are subjected to rambling people shoving pencils in there ears? Or am I missing something completely?

What ever it is, it has a safer rating the cycling.

I laughed being as I'm sure thats what they mean.


AndrewP
 
"Rambling" is archaic english for "hiking"


Trucker_JDub
 
"Rambling" is archaic english for "hiking"
And they couldn't just say hiking because...... (I know you didn't write the report; just saying in general)


mikepoole
 
"Rambling" is archaic english for "hiking"

Just as "hiking" is modern American for "going on a walk"


ChipSeal
 
Just as "hiking" is modern American for "going on a walk"

"Hiking to an American is the journey from the car into the Starbucks! :p


Cyclaholic
 
Home living (including sleeping) 0.014
Residential fire 0.003



Check it out, you're safer at home when your house is on fire!


crhilton
 
What if you have a non-fatal heart attack, and fall under a truck?

Still killed by failing health.


thdave
 
Can you believe these stats? (I want to, since they look great) But, it looks like they were written by cycling advocates who don't share how they did it.


Keith99
 
Home living (including sleeping) 0.014
Residential fire 0.003



Check it out, you're safer at home when your house is on fire!

Yea. That is just one of the examples that make one wonder just how these numbers were collected, my bet is from different sources that were compiled under different assumptions.

In other words worthless.


crhilton
 
Yea. That is just one of the examples that make one wonder just how these numbers were collected, my bet is from different sources that were compiled under different assumptions.

In other words worthless.

The fire numbers aren't at all surprising. Most of us won't be in a house fire. And those of us who are will be on our toes for a very short period of time. It's dangerous, but if you get out following a few simple instructions you'll probably be fine.
However, ALL of us live our whole lives in houses. We stub our toes monthly, break something every now and then, and yea some of us fall down the stairs.

So the odds of getting hurt over the course of your life in your home are higher than the odds of getting hurt in the average 30 seconds we all spend in a fire in our life.

Now if you look at the odds of getting hurt in a fire verse the odds of getting hurt in the home with time factored out it might seem more sensible.


Previous - Top - Next