Category: Biking Elsewhere

[B’ Spokes: A lot of good talking points for promoting bicycling and demoting accommodating the automobile.]

…
Risk Estimates
A snapshot of risk estimates from these studies includes the following:
For light vehicles or cars
* Dialing a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 2.8 times as high as non-distracted driving;
* Talking or listening to a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 1.3 times as high as non-distracted driving; and
* Reaching for an object such as an electronic device made the risk of crash or near-crash event 1.4 times as high as non-distracted driving.
For heavy vehicles or trucks
* Dialing a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 5.9 times as high as non-distracted driving;
* Talking or listening to a cell phone made the risk of crash or near-crash event 1.0 times as high as non-distracted driving;
* Use of, or reach for, an electronic device made the risk of crash or near-crash event 6.7 times as high as non-distracted driving; and
* Text messaging made the risk of crash or near-crash event 23.2 times as high as non-distracted driving.
…
https://www.vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2009/07/2009-571.html

Via: Science Daily
Feb. 20, 2013 — Using your bicycle to commute to work has numerous health and environmental benefits. Yet, the largest Canadian study on cycling injuries led by Ryerson University suggests cyclists are at risk of injury due to the lack of cycling infrastructure in large urban centres.
"Previous studies have focused on the measures such as helmets that reduce harm after a crash occurs," says Anne Harris, lead author of the study, who is an avid cyclist herself and an assistant professor with Ryerson’s School of Occupational and Public Health. "Our study is one of the first to take a comprehensive look at how route infrastructure, particularly at intersections and major roadways, might influence the risk of cyclist injury in Canada."
…
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130220131744.htm

By GRETCHEN REYNOLDS, New York Times
…
The same dynamic has been shown to apply to cycling, where wind drag can result in much greater energy demands during 25 miles of outdoor cycling than the same distance on a stationary bike. That means if you have limited time and want to burn as many calories as possible, you should hit the road instead of the gym.
But there seem to be other, more ineffable advantages to getting outside to work out. In a number of recent studies, volunteers have been asked to go for two walks for the same time or distance — one inside, usually on a treadmill or around a track, the other outdoors. In virtually all of the studies, the volunteers reported enjoying the outside activity more and, on subsequent psychological tests, scored significantly higher on measures of vitality, enthusiasm, pleasure and self-esteem and lower on tension, depression and fatigue after they walked outside.
Of course, those studies were small-scale, short-term — only two walks — and squishy in their scientific parameters, relying heavily on subjective responses. But a study last year of older adults found, objectively, that those who exercised outside exercised longer and more often than those working out indoors.
…
https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/the-benefits-of-exercising-outdoors/?smid=fb-share

Continue reading “People spend more on bikes than they do on flying!”

Tell DOT That Cyclist Fatalities Matter.
Transportation agencies across the country are about to miss an important opportunity to improve non-motorized traffic safety and encourage healthy and active transportation options.
The US Department of Transportation is required by the new transportation law to establish national safety goals and performance measures to guide the states. Right now, they are NOT proposing any separate national goals or performance measures to improve the safety of bicyclists and/or pedestrians. We cannot let this happen – these measures will be used to guide traffic safety policy and funding at the national and state level for years to come
If this is allowed to happen, there will be no national target to improve the safety of cycling or walking; there will be no measures established to track or monitor pedestrian and bicyclist safety or collect data related to these areas; and there will be no incentive, guidance or leadership given to state and local agencies to tackle this important piece of overall traffic safety policy. Without a specific performance measure to focus on nonmotorized safety, bicyclists and pedestrians will remain firmly in the blindspot of traffic safety.
Funding for overall highway safety programs was almost doubled in MAP-21. Even though bicyclists and pedestrians now account for almost 16% of all traffic fatalities in the US, states are spending less than 0.5% of their safety funds to solve this problem. This is exactly the time to establish meaningful national goals and performance measures to tackle bicyclist and pedestrian safety as part of an overall, comprehensive and multi-modal traffic safety program.
That’s why we have written this letter to Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood asking him to include specific national goals and performance measures for bicyclist and pedestrian safety. We urge you to add your voice to our request.
Take action: https://www.capwiz.com/lab/issues/alert/?alertid=62423866&type=AN

For more information, see the CyclingSavvy FAQ: Why Do You Ride Like That?
https://cyclingsavvy.org/hows-my-driving/
Continue reading “A Public Service Announcement.”

Via Alliance for Biking & Walking
“Bicycles are revolutionary machines: they construct equality. … While cars are a means of social differentiation and exclusion, bicycles integrate people as equals. When two people on bicycles meet, they meet as human beings.”

– Dr. Enrique Peñalosa, former mayor of Bogotá, Colombia in a keynote address at the Recycle-A-Bicycle Youth Summit last weekend.

For more Peñalosa wisdom, visit: https://bit.ly/XmZp7I
Continue reading “Bicycles are revolutionary machines”

If Maggie McIntosh is so concerned about our safety maybe she make a law requiring turn signals. Just saying, that it’s not right to go lax on car drivers while getting tough on cyclists.
Continue reading “I’m not a mind reader”

So I took this:

and made this from the relative odds compared to driving:

Points:

• There is a very good reason why motorcyclists should wear a helmet
• All cycling is way safer then driving
• All cycling is very close to walking (though with Maryland being the 8th highest in pedestrian fatalities cycling maybe even safer then walking here.) If we are not considering a mandatory helmet law for pedestrians, then let’s not consider one for cyclists.
• Cycling with a helmet may be biased toward bike club rides, where people drive to ride someplace nice and there is a safety-in-numbers effect when riding with a group.
• That is to say the helmet alone may not be the major factor here, bike clubs promote safe cycling practices among other things.