Originally Posted by
meanwhile
Another reason the study seems to be junk: a lot of hits at intersections can be classified as "behinds" but they are NOT what most cyclists think of as overtaking hits. (And most serious accidents happen at junctions
RiskFactors)
The study you cite gathered
NO data on the severity of injuries suffered as a result of reported accidents, they just totaled up all accidents as if they all were equal. As a result no credible conclusion about cycling risk can be made from such careless methodology.
How did you arrive at at using the term
serious accidents? Do you consider any reported accident as serious? Even the authors of the report never described any of the accidents as "serious." With their bogus methodology all accidents produce equal results and are considered equal for risk analysis purposes.