Message from discussion Cycling Safer than Walking?
Received: by 10.66.81.74 with SMTP id y10mr4938035pax.17.1349188549913;
Tue, 02 Oct 2012 07:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 09:35:49 -0500
From: Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Cycling Safer than Walking?
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 15:35:47 +0100
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 06:36:03 -0700 (PDT), PhilO <goo18...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>On Monday, October 1, 2012 8:14:17 PM UTC+1, Judith wrote:
>> I see from the DfT recent figures that there are 450 pedestrian casualties per
>> million of the England population.
>> Unless of course I am missing something?
>I notice the switch to "per million of the England population"
>You always used "per billion passenger miles" before. Did that not suit you any more?
>Is cycling a mile still less likely to lead to your death than walking a mile?
>I think you'll find it is.
>Cycling is not nearly as dangerous as you pretend.
Don't take my word for it:
Cycling became more dangerous last year, when the rate of cyclists killed and
seriously injured rose sharply, official figures showed today.
The rate of cyclists killed and seriously injured measured as a proportion of
distance travelled rose by 9 per cent in 2011. It was the third consecutive
year in which the rate of death and serious injury amongst cyclists had
You really are exceptional value.