Don't forget that, every biker takes a spill sometime. And if you aren't wearing a well fitted and modern helmet, you are way more likely to experience a traumatic brain injury.

Once you have a TBI, there are some serious odds that you will be a fundamentally different person, potentially alienate loved ones, and end up living unemployed with your mom or in a group home. This happens more than you might think and doesn't show up in these fatality rates.

I thought this one was interesting:
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration uses a fatality rate per million population to state that 2.14 cyclists were killed per one million population in 2003 - the same figure for pedestrians would be 16.3 people per million and for motor vehicle fatalities the figure is closer to 127 people per million. By that measure, bicycling looks considerably safer than other modes!

Don't think I'll even bother to ask for the reference for this claim of what is or is not "way more likely" when every biker takes a spill.

True, that graph is for everybody in the US and doesn't have much of a break down, but rest assured far more young people (say below the age of 60) of heart disease than do on bikes. If those people did ride a bike, their chances of death would be far lower.

To the issue of brain injury, there is far too much focus on traumatic brain injury when acquired brain injury is a much larger problem. In my province there are about 1,000 strokes (by definition, brain injury) to people under the age of 60 and there are about 5 deaths to all cyclists. Is there a question on what is the bigger problem (particularly when cycling is one activity that could greatly reduce the chance of a stroke)?

But really, you're not arguing that accidents outweigh deaths by diseases are you? You can't be saying that the exercise inherent to cycling is of no benefit. Accidents make up a tiny portion of deaths and according to our national newspaper, there are more people who die from choking on ball point pens than die on bicycles, but I'd say if you're drunk, riding on the wrong side of the road in the middle of the night, dressed in black and with no lights, I'd concur the odds of dying on a bike would be greater than choking on that pen.

Wow. You haven't looked too hard, have you? From the FHA:

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/PED_BIKE/...crash_iihs.pdf

This was the first official google hit, I think I remember seeing 2006 figures somewhere and bike deaths in the US seem to be around 700 or so each year.

Also:
https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/download...fatalities.pdf
https://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/fish/sharks...lariskbike.htm (I REALLY like this one...)
https://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhts...006/810802.pdf

And there's plenty more from non-official sources.

Admittedly not the kind of detailed stuff that might actually be useful, but the raw info is out there.

That does it. I'm more likely to die choking on food. No more eating for me. It's too scary!

“Giving up eating for fear of choking” is an ancient Chinese proverb and is clearly demonstrated here. Just as eating is a net benefit to health (in spite of the risk of choking), in spite of it's inherent risks, to ride a bike is beneficial for health, not detrimental to health.

In BC, we have many dams made to produce hydro-electric power and a study was done on the perceived peoples fears of these dams failing and causing flooding of the valleys they are located in. They found the further away from the dam, the greater the fear from flooding from the dam failing. It's not that the risk was any greater, in fact it was a bigger risk closer to the dam, it's just that those who live in the shadow of the dam accepted the risk because it was a part of their every day life.

It's kind of the same with driving and cycling. If someone feels they have no choice but to drive, they accept the risk. If they feel cycling is not a priority, it's an unacceptable risk regardless of whether the risk is the same or not.

To ride a bike is "different" and it's subject to much social judgement that other more "normal" things are not.

I see greater danger in not cycling.

Or maybe, living in the shadow of a dam, their opinion of the risk is based on fact and experience rather than imagined dangers.

My intended point was that helmets are a huge factor in both fatalities and crippling injuries. This reference from helmets.org seems supporting:

"About 540,000 bicyclists visit emergency rooms with injuries every year. Of those, about 67,000 have head injuries, and 27,000 have injuries serious enough to be hospitalized."

"Bicycle crashes and injuries are under-reported, since the majority are not serious enough for emergency room visits. 44,000 cyclists were reported injured in traffic crashes in 2006."

"1 in 8 of the cyclists with reported injuries has a brain injury."

So my math says there were 5500 brain injured cyclists in 2006 compared with 770 fatalities (of which 2/3rds were directly related to traumatic brain injuries).

So roll your eyes if you will, just wear a helmet.

Oh, boy. You had to go there, didn't you?

This will end well...

in the interests of good will on the boards, I'll be merciful and simply suggest some would be better off if they learn about the subject before spouting off the rantings of a fear mongering site.

A good place to start would be the bicycle helmet entry on wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet

where they address many of the issues surrounding the topic and provide reputable references and a balanced point of view

Yep, and how many of these are people that are hit when they get to the far end of the crosswalk by someone that was speeding and decides to do a rolling stop? I'd be willing to bet that's higher than the ones where it's the cyclist or pedestrians fault. I see this happen at almost every major intersection on my commute to work. Fortunately no pedestrians/cyclists involved there.

Gosh I like this quote. Well said CB.

Glad it helps. I've read quite a lot on the topic and find it facinating. To articulate a point of view to someone in a way that resonates with them is the goal.

Interesting article on the perception of security vs. the reality of security... and why they sometimes diverge..

https://www.wired.com/politics/securi...urrentPage=all

Exactly, and they get thinned out pretty quickly. I rode motorcycles for 25 years, 5 of those years I didn't own a car, crossed the continent many times, rode to Alaska (and back, dammit!), yada yada. I'm sure I logged 300k or 400k+ miles on motorcycles, big screaming 1000cc plus ones, and I was a pretty big student of motorcycle safety.

I remember one study I read some years back, I can't remember the exact numbers, but it was something like 90% of the motorcycle accidents happened in the riders first 1k miles, then something like 90% of the remaining accidents happened within 10k miles. So if you made it out to 11k miles, you were something like 99% less likely to get in an accident than a noob hopping on a bike for the first time.

This was probably a combination of filtering out risk takers as well as the advantages of experience.

I know that after a while, I essentially rode a motorcycle with the attitude that a car couldn't hit me even if they were trying to. It is a lesson I try to apply to bicycling.

You know, I believe that 10 out of 10 motorist die over time (eventually). Who are these 9 of 10 immortal motorcyclist? I want to be one of those 9 guys.

It's funny, I say the exact same thing to my wife. "They couldn't hit me if they were trying to - I refuse to let them".

I've also got to wonder at the crossover effects of being a safety-conscious cyclist. I think my car driving safety has improved immensely.

sorry, faulty memory. Off by 1 digit. Less than 1,000. With 50 states, that's just 20 a state. More die from falls/year than that. {I'ld bet, I don't have the numbers.}. Point I was trying to make is the number is not high enough to warrant official interest.

I should have edited but you know what I meant. I meant as a direct result of motorcycling around aka 1 in 10 regulars will get run over.

I bet you that all 10 of said motorcyclists will die over time.

Edit: Damn I was late on that.