Oddbean

@04a10faa Im not sure this approach to analysis is really fair... The total number of fatalities means nothing if it isnt adjusted against the change of death per mile... and the COVID deaths mean nothing unless you represent it as a chance of death per infection. What we measure here is important.

@b05df304 you could be correct on the other hand, I could be correct not really sure how to do an accurate analysis; we have to factor in that, apparently, the ratio of deaths/infections is going down, a lot, as the population gets immunity, but one has to factor in age as well . . .

@04a10faa Wouldnt be too hard to figure out... figure out the percentage of the population that drives, the percentage each year that dies in car accidents, and the average number of miles driven per person... you can then calculate the chance of death per mile. Covid youd have to 1) find the chance you will get infected if you hug or are near a person infected 2) find the percentage of people infected that die... That should handle both cases, and the info is out there.. im just too lazy right now to do it :)

I did this for transportation - to try and convince my wife that driving a car was not, in fact, safer than biking. I don't remember the absolute numbers, but biking and walking were the lowest risk of death or serious injury per mile traveled for personal transportation, and nearly the same (the Williamsburg colonists were onto some with their walking helmets). Driving a car is three times more dangerous than walking/biking per mile. Riding a motorcycle is 5 times more dangerous than driving a car (which is maybe where her false intuition comes from). In fact, motorcycles are equivalent risk to active duty in the Iraq war (as an American - we prefer to kill people from other nations to feed the MIC). Buses and trains were 5 times safer than cars - i.e. safer than walking/biking. I take my bike on both quite a bit for longer distances. Airplane travel was the safest of all per mile (this would be 2005, when I sold my car and got a bicyle). I wonder about it now that many pilots are dropping dead from the mandated Pfizer shots and airlines are considering relaxing copilot requirements.

@300ec228 > I did this for transportation - to try and convince my wife that driving a car was not, in fact, safer than biking. I don't remember the absolute numbers, but biking and walking were the lowest risk of death or serious injury per mile traveled for personal transportation, and nearly the same (the Williamsburg colonists were onto some with their walking helmets). I would suspect this is highly variable based ont he location.. Biking in the city is far more dangerous than through the woods or in the suburbs I suspect. Moreover it would vary greatly from city to city. Cities with guarded bike lanes would probably be quite safe whereas cities that require cars to occupy the same space as bikes are likely very dangerous. @04a10faa

This was US transportation stats - averaging city and country. The problem with country roads, is they are narrow and twisty with no shoulder or bike path/lane - and are actually quite dangerous when you encounter a car, even if there are fewer cars. Cities and suburbs have extensive bicycle infrastructure, with a network of "no motorized vehicles" paths and lanes. Plus "secret" routes where no car could ever go that are fun to discover.

@300ec228 Not in philly, though we are probably well outside the avg. In philly there are few if any bike lanes. When they exist they arent guarded. And the drivers are more than happy to kill you for sport :) @04a10faa