I
am truly shocked by the news that the National Institute of Health one of the
areas best examples of promoting biking to work as well as being one of this
nations authorities on health issues has done a 180 degree turn and has set forth
policies that not only discourage cycling to work but they also endanger the
safety of those who do choose to ride their bike to work against these new
obstacles and delays. And it seems that their primary motivation for this is to
make it even easier for those poor people who have to pollute the environment
and live an inactive lifestyle not to be inconvenienced in the slightest by health nuts. This
is so wrong! I am also appalled by
Greetings Biking Advocates!
As I have communicated with you over the past
week, I have been amazed at the outrage, anger and concern regarding the
dangerous NIH Perimeter Security System policy we face and it’s lack of regard
for bicycle commuters. In general, the broader biking community is just as
outraged as NIH Bike Commuters are with a security protocol that forces
cyclists off the roads and onto sidewalks, through turnstiles and gates
designed for pedestrians. Bicycle Commuters working at other Federal
Institutions such as the EPA are equally shocked to learn that the Federal
Government Institution devoted to Understanding and Improving the Health of
the American Citizenry, is actively installing impediments to Bicycle
Commuting and producing unnecessarily dangerous commuting conditions
specifically for those employees who try to utilize non-motorized modes of
transportation.
so….
Please join us at a “Bikes are
Vehicles, Too” rally here on the NIH campus perimeter,
Monday, August 29, during the morning commute (6:30-10:30
am).oldId.20050824160433493
https://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20040309.html
Citing "Dangerous Increase" in Deaths, HHS Launches New Strategies Against Overweight Epidemic Study Shows Poor Diet, Inactivity Close To Becoming Leading Preventable Cause of Death
Well to be fair, I think it a legitimate concern how to facilitate how to get a lot of people through a limited number of openings. Well you could adopt a policy that normal people must use the entrance with the shortest line, but that would just sound silly. So how about a policy for the non-normal people to use a longer line? It just might work if the non-normals are cyclists.
—
. . .o
. . /L
=()>()
Perimeter Security System — Frequently
Asked Questions (FAQs)
Your discussion puts NIH in sharp contrast with EPA and–I suspect–most of the federal government in DC. Bikes go in the same gates as cars, and our regular electronic passes–not our weight–opens the gate.
The obvious question: Is there a federal policy on bike commuting to federal installations? If not, maybe there needs to be one; if so, it clearly needs some modification.
Why does NIH need to be so novel. Is this so that they can have alot of unmanned entry points? If there is a guard it makes no sense not to let bikes come in–but that seems quite odd, unguarded entry points are never very secure.
– Jim Titus
—
. . .o
. . /L
=()>()