Bicycles more dangerous than terrorism?

It is indeed a mistake because it is inaccurate – he doesn't mean 'bicycles'. The sentence therefore requires the reader to have some mental agility to sort out what he means as opposed to what he says.

You have to be fucking joking !? :)

What level of stupidity must you project onto the readership to suppose that they lack the 'mental agility' to work out that the bicycles are not killing people but . . . bicycle accidents.

Really, this is a silly point. When I read that there were 3,000 car related deaths in a certain period / area - I would not usually presume the cars had somehow got hold of guns and gone on a shooting spree - you should really credit people with some basic understanding of common parlance.

Do you honestly think the writing's good?

Yeah, it's fine, the message of the study comes over clearly.