dougmc

No, not guessing. Just think about how they must have gotten the information -- the only way to tell how much cyclists ride is to ask them. A telephone poll, perhaps? Are you a cyclist? If so, how much do you ride per week? Telephone polls have their own problems (the poor often don't have phones, the young have disproportionate numbers of cell phones which are avoided for polls due to the cost, for example), but the big problem is likely the "how much do you ride?" figure. It's a hard question to answer, and while some can answer it accurately (extremely accurately if they bother) -- lots have no clue whatsoever. People serious about training usually have cyclecomputers, but commuters, students and casual riders often don't.

Some extrapolations based on studies from several places. ("Thus, while the risk of a fatal injury per mile is nearly 2½ times greater for the cyclist.") Of course, he then immediately dismisses this figure because he says it's not fair because bikes are slower -- which they are, but either way, going slower doesn't make work any closer, or the trip to the store any shorter. Personally, the only time I bike by time (I'm going to ride for two hours) rather than distance/trip (I'm riding to work) is when I'm looking for exercise or fun ...

(I should also mention that Ken Kifer, the author of that page that talks about how biking is safer than driving (by picking the right statistics and ignoring/dismissing the rest) was killed by a drunk driver while riding his bike.)

Well, most of the people killed by cars are in cars of their own. Pedestrians and cyclists are killed too -- but the number of motorists killed is much higher.

The medical community seems to agree that regular exercise makes people healthier and live longer, yes. Bicycling is one way to get regular exercise, yes.

This discussion is pointless. I'm going to try and refrain from continuing it