Advocacy & Safety - Are Bikes Dangerous?

Bicycle Risks (http://www.bikexprt.com/research/petty/general.htm)


The safety of bicyling is something that seldom gets considered until one has an accident or some form of tragedy. The above link ranks cycling below Hunting,Driving,Swimming and Boating in risk for death.

There are a lot of variables and I expect many will share different opinions on this subject. However it seems like the true litmus test is the bike. How many of you have purchased a bicycle for your kid? How many let the kid ride unsupervised around the block or around town?

If it is truly a dangerous thing, why do we do this? A 5 year old was just killed (http://www.saljournal.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/1145/format/html/displaystory.html) in our area a week ago on a bike.

I think bikes are safe and also safe enough for our kids if used properly.

You are very vulnerable on a bike, so you have to be careful. Thats why I supervised my children closely, when we went out on the roads. They need to be taught the rules of the road and how to watch for other road users. I let them ride around the school parking lot next door unsupervised. My daughter went on a 20 mile bikeathon with me when she was 4 1/2. When they had learnt the basics they went around the neighborhood on their own - I think that was about aged 6. They didnt go for longer rides on their own until they were 12 or 13.

Bike accidents are a lot less likely to kill because they usually happen at much lower speeds than car accidents. However that doesnt stop me from driving a car.

Bikes are not too dangerous, unless you are jumping cliffs like the crazy freeriders. For your average, everyday rider the real danger lies in the stupidity of those in larger vehicles. How often do you get cut off in your car by some a**hole blabbing on his/her cell phone? Take the same a**hole and throw in a biker. Very vunerable position is what we put ourselves in. It is our duty to make it safer for our sport to co-exist with motorists. When i was in drivers ed, no mention was made of bikers. None. Zip. That is where the problem lies people.

I believe that since the bicycle is a two-wheeled vehicle, it inherently presents more risks than many other consumer products.

It is interesting to see that the fatality rate is low compared to the injury rate. Also, since head injuries are the number-one cause of bicycle fatalities, it would be more instructive, if the statistical sheet had shown some correlation to helmet use or the lack of helmet use.

On Sunday. Feb. 15th, I crashed on the highway. It was my fault, because I assumed I could ride over some cinders that had been spread for snow traction. I was wrong and went down hard. Luckily, I was wearing a helmet, which cracked when it impacted the pavement, undoubtedly preventing rather serious injury to my skull.

The crash left me limping badly from bruises to my right leg and pulled muscles on the same leg. That's probably the worst crash I've had. I'm still limping, though my leg is much better and I'm back riding.

The point is bicycle riding does involve more risks than many other activities because the bicycle is a vehicle frequently used on the highways.

In the "Further Background" section of the link, the author does mention the alarming lack of helmet use and provides some correlation of that lack of helmet use compared to medical treatment provided injured bicyclists.

Helmets save lives. As bicyclists, we should all push for mandatory use of bicycle helmets. Helmet use will not prevent all head injuries or all fatalities, but will significantly reduce the amount of head injuries and their severity. There is no excuse for not using a helmet.

After my crash, believe me, I will be wearing a helmet even for short test rides.

Life is dangerous

Take the same a**hole and throw in a biker.


Now that sounds dangerous. :roflmao:

One of the major risk factors in cycling is the people who do it.
Young children are not very good at anything, have poor judgement of speed and distance, and lack experience. They even fall out of trees. When was the last time you fell off a tree?
Teenage riders have a built-in death wish whatever they do.
Competant adults cyclists have a much lower "incident" rate than these high risk groups.
I think that good quality training at a young age would reduce the casualty rate for cycling. Helmets only work after a crash has happened.

I rode away after being T-boned by some idiot female on a cell phone driving an SUV bigger than Rhode Island. I had pain in my leg, bad pain, but i was more angry than anything. I didn't even say a word, i just got up and left, after pulling my bike out from under her truck, which wasn't hard because i could almost stand up underneath it. The real pain didn't start until after i got home, and found all of the bruises that i had. That really got me pissed off at cars.

they need to make bike highways.

they need to make bike highways.

We don't need bike highways, good roads already exist. Motorists need to drive more responsibly, or face serious consequences for misuse of their WMDs. Alternatively, 'they' could kick all the cars off the existing roads and, presto, bike highways!

Are cars dangerous?

I feel safer riding my bike than driving home at midnight.

So, according to the report. Boxing is twice as safe as cycling. Damn, it pays more too. :rolleyes:

Well with regards to why you hear about biking related injuries and death so much? Maybe it's because we're all so much into this area.
I mean I'm sure someone's posting on hiking forum right now why there are so many deaths in hiking and camping. Maybe it's just that we're into it more so a) we pay more attention to it, b) we're more aware of it and c) it strikes us deeper inside us hearing about it than hearing about someone who just plunged into the ground cause his parachute didn't work.

Two answers to that (statistically speaking).

Fatalities: Bicycling is very safe. In fact, you're safer over-all on a bike than staying in your house due to the health benefits (e.g., not dying of a heart attack sitting on your couch).

Injuries: Bicycling is dangerous. It's likely you will encounter some injury, just like with many other sports. That's why helmets are a good idea. Try and keep those injuries to scrapes and bruises instead of concussions and brain damage.

Well with regards to why you hear about biking related injuries and death so much? Maybe it's because we're all so much into this area.
I mean I'm sure someone's posting on hiking forum right now why there are so many deaths in hiking and camping. Maybe it's just that we're into it more so a) we pay more attention to it, b) we're more aware of it and c) it strikes us deeper inside us hearing about it than hearing about someone who just plunged into the ground cause his parachute didn't work.

Yep. It's called the Fallacy of Misleading Vividness. The stories that we hear and share are emotionally frightening to us which makes the danger of these small examples seem more real than the statistical truth.

bikes are more fun. they aren't more dangerous. people just need to get a rearview mirror and be patient in high risk situations.

Bicycles aren't dangerous, people are dangerous.

Ironically, I just got rid of my mirror and I feel safer (ok i did get hit by a van...)
With the mirror, I found myself a) banging into cars in tight traffic with it and b) looking down at it too much and losing confidence in taking the lane since I was always thinking to myself, "there's a car right behind me, slow down and stay to the right!" Now I turn my head, glance quick, signal if I have to. That tells the driver behind me that a) I'm checking who's behind me and b) I'm checking for a reason so you better be prepared to slow down if I have to go wide.

However, that's just personal preference and I did used to prefer mirrors. Even though I've been hit a few times and tumbled off a few times, I still feel if I stayed at a reasonable speed and weren't so impatient, it's probably even safer than walking.

maybe a raised mirror and some leaning forward is a good idea?

Competant adults cyclists have a much lower "incident" rate than these high risk groups [children.]
I only want to say one thing: the above statement is true and yet bicycles are marketed as "toys." Go figure.

It is a shame that our public roadways are so dangerous for all road users. Stricter individual accountability for all motorists would help, as would improved public transit, which would make it much easier for the legal system to suspend or revoke the driver's licenses of those who demonstrate that they do not merit the privilege of motoring.

Two answers to that (statistically speaking).

Fatalities: Bicycling is very safe. In fact, you're safer over-all on a bike than staying in your house due to the health benefits (e.g., not dying of a heart attack sitting on your couch).

Injuries: Bicycling is dangerous. It's likely you will encounter some injury, just like with many other sports. That's why helmets are a good idea. Try and keep those injuries to scrapes and bruises instead of concussions and brain damage.

When you get right down to it, injuries is a pretty vague term. An injury can, technically speaking, range from a minor scrape that heals within three days, to something that leaves you in a wheelchair for the remainder of your life. Personally I'd like to see "injuries" broken down a little further. And the prevention of injuries goes beyond simply wearing a helmet, although they definitely have their place.

Ironically, I just got rid of my mirror and I feel safer

Personally, I'd rather ride without my helmet than without my mirror...

Keep in mind in NYC traffic, there's ALWAYS a car behind you anyway.
You're telling me you'd rather be on the road with a mirror and no helmet, god forbid you get into an accident since most accidents happen in collisions from in FRONT of the bike rather than behind. I'll rather sell my bike and get a cheap $10 rust bucket with 20" crappy bmx tires than ride w/o a helmet.
Personally, I've been saved by my helmet many times vs. the mirror. I really would hope that if given the choice, people choose helmet over mirror but thank god everyone has the right to use both if they wish to.
I just choose to forgo the latter as my personal option.

It's sad that people have the mentality that just because someone gets into an accident on a bike, it's their fault since they choose to ride a "toy" whereas if someone gets into an accident with a car, oh it's the sun, oil slick on the road, hot coffee on my groin!

Keep in mind in NYC traffic, there's ALWAYS a car behind you anyway. You're telling me you'd rather be on the road with a mirror and no helmet, god forbid you get into an accident since most accidents happen in collisions from in FRONT of the bike rather than behind. I'll rather sell my bike and get a cheap $10 rust bucket with 20" crappy bmx tires than ride w/o a helmet. Personally, I've been saved by my helmet many times vs. the mirror. I really would hope that if given the choice, people choose helmet over mirror but thank god everyone has the right to use both if they wish to.

I rode in suburban NYC for 17 years w/o a helmet and w/o any serious accidents except one dooring. In fact, I didn't start using a helmet until I was close to 40 w/o any serious consequences. IMO, the 'need' to use a helmet is just another indictment that bicycling in the US is a 'dangerous' activity. Go to Holland and observe how many cyclists wear helmets, stupid reflective clothing, etc., etc. (all the 'necessary' accoutrements for cycling in the US) - they simply don't, yet the accident rate is a whole lot lower...I'm not saying you shouldn't wear a helmet, etc. for your own protection; simply that this is another indictment of the US 'motorist-first, damn the other road users' attitude...make the consequences of injuring or killing a cyclist with a motor vehicle severe enough, and the drivers would behave a whole lot better...until then, advocacy, advocacy, advocacy!!!

There's no 'need' to wear a helmet, I would highly recommend it.
There's also no 'need' to wear a condom, I recommend that too. And seat belts. No need to wear sunglasses either. No need to put on sunblock. No need for smoke detectors.
The 'need' to wear sunglasses and sunblock doesn't mean that lying on the beach is a 'dangerous' activity. It's just a nice way to hedge your bets when the reaper comes knocking at the door.
While I'm not saying you're wrong, if you do a search here, you'll find a whole bunch of people, from casual weekend rider to the serious sponsored racers that have had their lives saved more than once over by a helmet.
I ride in the middle of NYC manhattan traffic and I've been in a few accidents. Everyone has their own experiences.
Doored at 25mph with no helmet, as someone pointed out to me here; my girlfriend would be wiping drool off my lip for the rest of my life.
Having a helmet does not make biking anymore dangerous than having seatbelts in a car or a smoke detector in a house.

It's just that most people are too ignorant to realize that a whole hell of a lot more people die in automobile freak accidents and crashes along with obesity and whatnot.
In fact, this country's so ignorant and biased towards motor vehicles that some insane lunatic can get off easier KILLING a whole BUNCH of you with a car in a "freak" accident than if he were to be caught sharing MP3's on kazaa. The moral integrity of US govt. and authorities seriously needs some questioning...

I read a lot of bad things about mirrors on bikes and have never had one until last week. I bought one of these. Personally I can't believe what I have been missing. It is so nice to know if anyone is behind me. Keep in mind that where I typically ride, there is little traffic and when there is someone approaching now I know. Sometimes before (depending on conditions) my only warning was a whoosh of air as the vehicle sped by me.

One place i really love the mirror is out on the gravel county roads. OUt on the flats it is nice to see clear road a mile ahead and a mile behind me. Thumbs up for the helmet mirror. Guess I should quit believing everything I read and hear.

Why is a mirror on a car good and a mirror on a bike bad? Some have suggested that it is hard to get used to the mirror and it might prove distracting. Well my experience has been that it is very easy to get used to. I have already spent 7 or 8 hours with it on and it probably took 30 minutes to get everything figured out.

I'll have to agree you on that one. When I'm out on roads without much traffic, I use a mirror, I like to know if there are cars coming up behind me. But in heavy midtown traffic (which is probably NOT the norm for most people who commute in the suburbs), a mirror just gets in the way for me.

I have a third eye, glasses mounted mirror, and now I feel most uncomfortable riding without it. It doesnt get in the way in tight traffic.

It enables me to be continuously aware of what is going on behind me. This is particularly useful when there is a big difference in traffic speed.

For changing lanes nothing can beat looking over your shoulder.

For changing lanes nothing can beat looking over your shoulder.
Mirrors have the benefit of giving you an quick and easy way of seeing behind you.

The only concerns I have about mirrors is that: 1) mirrors can cause some people to forget to look behind them, or to even teach newbies to rely on a mirror instead of learning to look behind, and 2) mirrors can cause a rider to be too focused on what is behind them rather than what's ahead.

Here's some slightly more recent data based on hours of exposure. Note airline safety doesn't look all that great compared to cars when you look at it this way.

COMPARATIVE RISK OF DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES

Estimates of Fatal Risk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



fatalities
Activity per million hrs
-------- ---------------
Skydiving 128.71
General Aviation 15.58
On-road Motorcycling 8.80
Scuba Diving 1.98
Living (all causes of death) 1.53
Swimming 1.07
Snowmobiling .88
Passenger cars .47
Water skiing .28
Bicycling .26
Flying (scheduled domestic airlines) .15
Hunting .08
Cosmic Radiation from transcontinental flights .035
Home Living (active) .027
Traveling in a School Bus .022
Passenger Car Post-collision fire .017
Home Living, active & passive (sleeping) .014
Residential Fire .003


Compiled by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. (Design News, 10-4-93)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 1998

Here's some slightly more recent data based on hours of exposure. Note airline safety doesn't look all that great compared to cars when you look at it this way.

COMPARATIVE RISK OF DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES

Estimates of Fatal Risk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



fatalities
Activity per million hrs
-------- ---------------
Skydiving 128.71
General Aviation 15.58
On-road Motorcycling 8.80
Scuba Diving 1.98
Living (all causes of death) 1.53
Swimming 1.07
Snowmobiling .88
Passenger cars .47
Water skiing .28
Bicycling .26
Flying (scheduled domestic airlines) .15
Hunting .08
Cosmic Radiation from transcontinental flights .035
Home Living (active) .027
Traveling in a School Bus .022
Passenger Car Post-collision fire .017
Home Living, active & passive (sleeping) .014
Residential Fire .003


Compiled by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc. (Design News, 10-4-93)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 1998

This is more like it, a more level comparison of risks. The original CPSC data ignored cars as a consumer product, since they have been legislated out of their coverage.

Risks can be managed. Training, best practices, protective equipment & experience can save your hide.

Note airline safety doesn't look all that great compared to cars when you look at it this way.
how's that?


General Aviation 15.58
Passenger cars .47
Flying (scheduled domestic airlines) .15
commerical flying .15 is 1/3 of Passenger cars.

sure, flying in a PRIVATE plane is more dangeour than driving (per time), but for most people Flying is still WAY safer than driving!

and driving is one of the few activities on the list that a lot of people spend a lot of time doing (how much TIME does your average person skydive or snowmobile?) - it is part of the "daily life" of most people

General aviation is definitely risky and for two reasons: alcohol and inadequate pilot proficiency. One needs to fly about 200 hours per year (single engine) to maintain proficiency. I don't fly with even friends who don't fly that much. Road motorcycling safety is another proficiency issue. Like cycling, you shouldn't do it unless you can focus constantly on defensive driving. My wife and I put 38,000 touring miles (mostly on twisty roads and mostly very fast) on our BMW and only had one moderately close call. My number one rule was to always go faster than the traffic to eliminate the threat from behind. I used a flashing headlight to minimize the ahead-risk.

The number one risk for the bicycler between intersections is being hit from behind. On the bike I have to rely on a good mirror, a very bright flashing LED taillight and forcing the overtaking traffic to cross the centerline to pass when the lane is too narrow to share safely. For the ahead-risk, I use a bright flashing LED headlight. I change batteries before the lights lose too much brightness.

Al

I always read that most accidents happen from the FRONT at intersections.

On a slightly unrelated note: holy crap, I'm twice as likely to die in my sleep than in a fire in my house... Just all the more reason not to sleep.

At a death rate of .26/million hrs. I can ride for about 440 years before certain death. I'll probably have to give up cycling way before that.

What's with this "Cosmic Radiation from transcontinental flights" business.

I always read that most accidents happen from the FRONT at intersections.

On a slightly unrelated note: holy crap, I'm twice as likely to die in my sleep than in a fire in my house... Just all the more reason not to sleep.

If your referring to my comment, I was trying to say that "between intersections", i.e.. on the road sections with no intersections, the greatest danger is from overtaking vehicles. That's the risk I concentrate on for country road riding.

Al

My wife and I put 38,000 touring miles (mostly on twisty roads and mostly very fast) on our BMW and only had one moderately close call.

I really don't think twisty roads are all that dangerous, in fact, I'd regard them as being safer than straight roads. When riding around Tasmania recently I had to deal with more than my fair share of them, often trafficked by log trucks. I never felt in any danger at any stage, possibly because the very nature of those roads forces people to concentrate.

Of course, it could also be that Tasmanians are just better drivers than Queenslanders.

I really don't think twisty roads are all that dangerous, in fact, I'd regard them as being safer than straight roads. When riding around Tasmania recently I had to deal with more than my fair share of them, often trafficked by log trucks. I never felt in any danger at any stage, possibly because the very nature of those roads forces people to concentrate.

Of course, it could also be that Tasmanians are just better drivers than Queenslanders.

Twisty roads are far safer and more fun than most for motorcycling. I don't know about biking. I particularly like the twisty mountain roads for bikes and motorcycles. Our longest motorcycle trip, 5000 miles, was planned from a topo map so we coud spend as much time on these kind of roads as possible. It was a great trip. Good upper-body builder due to the constan work-out from counter-steering.

Al

Of course, it could also be that Tasmanians are just better drivers than Queenslanders.

That's not saying much.

We don't need bike highways, good roads already exist. Motorists need to drive more responsibly, or face serious consequences for misuse of their WMDs. Alternatively, 'they' could kick all the cars off the existing roads and, presto, bike highways!

I think I would have to disagree with this. Just as lions and tigers and bears, can't really share living space with humans, cars and bicycles are just two different animals. Look at sidewinders post a few up from yours. The same road "treatment" that probably improved safety for cars, made it more dangerous for bikes.

I really think a two-tier road system would bring many more people out to the world of cycling and go a long way towards solving some of our countries other problems; like dependence on foreign oil and pollution and such.

Imagine folks going to work in the morning, actually saying "Good Morning" to someone as they pedaled past them. ;)

Artie

I really think a two-tier road system would bring many more people out to the world of cycling and go a long way towards solving some of our countries other problems; like dependence on foreign oil and pollution and such.


Actually, it wouldn't simply because in most cities in the world, there simply isn't enough space for "seperate but equal" road networks. Invariably one would get the rough end of the stick, and I think I know which it would be. The few bikepaths I've ever used have been much more dangerous than any road I've cycled, and far less practical.

I, for one, would be forced to quit cycling to work and start driving if such a system ever became a reality, simply due to time constraints.

Yes, bikes are dangerous. Our bikes are plotting against us as we speak(type?).

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by randya
We don't need bike highways, good roads already exist. Motorists need to drive more responsibly, or face serious consequences for misuse of their WMDs. Alternatively, 'they' could kick all the cars off the existing roads and, presto, bike highways!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree, but for a different reason. Countries like Holland who have well developed bikeways make riding on many (most?) roads illegal. The bikeways are intended to keep the bikes off the roads for the benefit of the motorists. The cyclist are relegated to sharing these nice bikeways with pedestrians, joggers and children and are lucky to average 7 mph. Not my kind of biking.

I used to think that rails to trails was a good idea until I rode some in Florida and Prince Edward Island. They are boring. Not too surprising when one remembers that train tracks were run as straight and level as possible. The one on PEI is lined with thick foliage which means you can't see anything. The one south of Tallahassee is so crowded on weekends it's not worth riding. I'll take the roads or a single-track in the woods anytime.

Al