-
Being barged into on the tube tends not to lead to broken bones and brain damage.
Given a quick think about it, how close is the KSI rate of London commuting by bicycle to the rate for London commuting by train/bus/tube if you consider the various random events over the years (7/7, Kings Cross fire, Ladbroke Grove, Clapham Junction, Hatfield[1], Potters Bar, etc)?
My point is, whatever form of transport, it might be it has about the same level of risk involved. The difference is that you can't do much to mitigate risk of accident due to poorly maintained points when travelling by train, but you can be better prepared when out on your bicycle.
- I include stuff like this because I was commuting between Cambridge and London when that happened. I still remember walking between the two Hertford stations to be able to get to London with a lot of angry people shouting at some very ashen faced Network Rail employees.
- I include stuff like this because I was commuting between Cambridge and London when that happened. I still remember walking between the two Hertford stations to be able to get to London with a lot of angry people shouting at some very ashen faced Network Rail employees.
Greenbank-
My point is, whatever form of transport, it might be it has about the same level of risk involved.
Not so much. The stats for this nationally do exist. Here's 2008, for eg:
(from http://cyclinguphill.com/safe-cycling-stats-cycle-casualties/ )
When it comes to fatality rates, literally everything is safer than walking and cycling, except motorcycling which we can perhaps regard as cycling on steroids. So yes, my current train/tube habit is statistically a lot safer than my previous cycle commute, although god help me on my walk to and from the stations.
bothwell
Being barged into on the tube tends not to lead to broken bones and brain damage.