NYTimes.com: Well: Phys Ed: Do More Bicyclists <br /> Lead to More Injuries?
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Richard Hughes
Nov 6, 2009, 8:43:25 PM11/6/09
to GEARs List Serve
| |||||||||||||||||
Seager
Nov 7, 2009, 3:43:36 PM11/7/09
to GEARs
Interesting read, however I wouldn't be worried. This study has no
control group and doesn't account for many other possible changing
variables, like city size, driver habits, changes in car sizes,
whether the accidents are solo or with cars, etc. It is therefor very
unscientific and entirely circumstantial It also should have looked
at rate percentage of accidents per total rider number, not total
number of accidents overall. The percentage can drop while total
number rises.
It wonder what affect the "study" will have on people?
On Nov 6, 5:43 pm, Richard Hughes <hughes97...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <http://www.nytimes.com/>
>
> *HEALTH * | October 27, 2009
> *Well: Phys Ed: Do More Bicyclists <br /> Lead to More Injuries?
> <http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/do-more-bicyclists-lead-to-m...>
> *
> <http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html> The New York
> Times Company <http://www.nytco.com/> | Privacy
> Policy<http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/privacy.html>
control group and doesn't account for many other possible changing
variables, like city size, driver habits, changes in car sizes,
whether the accidents are solo or with cars, etc. It is therefor very
unscientific and entirely circumstantial It also should have looked
at rate percentage of accidents per total rider number, not total
number of accidents overall. The percentage can drop while total
number rises.
It wonder what affect the "study" will have on people?
On Nov 6, 5:43 pm, Richard Hughes <hughes97...@gmail.com> wrote:
> <http://www.nytimes.com/>
>
> *HEALTH * | October 27, 2009
> *Well: Phys Ed: Do More Bicyclists <br /> Lead to More Injuries?
> <http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/do-more-bicyclists-lead-to-m...>
> *
> By Gretchen Reynolds
> A recent study seemed to indicate that getting more people to ride bicycles
> to work means more will be hurt. But that's not necessarily so, a
> well-established body of counter-intuitive science promises.
> Copyright 2009
> A recent study seemed to indicate that getting more people to ride bicycles
> to work means more will be hurt. But that's not necessarily so, a
> well-established body of counter-intuitive science promises.
> <http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html> The New York
> Times Company <http://www.nytco.com/> | Privacy
> Policy<http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/privacy.html>
Douglas C. Hintz
Nov 9, 2009, 5:52:37 PM11/9/09
to GEARs
A couple of comments: This is an observational study, not an
experiment. In fact it would be unethical to design an experiment
where the response variable is "injured or killed". You can only
have a control group if there is an experiment. It is hard to know
if it is unscientific unless you could read the entire article to
determine if they addressed the lurking and confounding variables
listed in the response. They should have reported rates, not
counts, as noted in the response.
Doug
experiment. In fact it would be unethical to design an experiment
where the response variable is "injured or killed". You can only
have a control group if there is an experiment. It is hard to know
if it is unscientific unless you could read the entire article to
determine if they addressed the lurking and confounding variables
listed in the response. They should have reported rates, not
counts, as noted in the response.
Doug
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages