
Want a Healthier City? Prescribe Biking - lelf
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2014/04/want-healthier-city-prescribe-biking/8795/
======
maaaats
The hashtag #ReplaceBikeWithCar is currently trending on Twitter. It is
statements bicyclists often hear, turned around for cars. I find them funny.

My favorites so far: "Absolutely no more car infrastructure should be built
anywhere until every single car driver follows all traffic laws.
#ReplaceBikeWithCar"

"Cars who aren't covered in high viz deserve to be crashed into."

"Why don't you lot stick to driving round and round a race track!"

Edit: link
[https://twitter.com/search?q=%23ReplaceBikeWithCar&src=tren](https://twitter.com/search?q=%23ReplaceBikeWithCar&src=tren)

~~~
mason240
"Deerfoot Trail gets you close enough to your destination. Why do you expect
door to door service?"

------
tluyben2
From the Netherlands where we all (should) cycle; it does take quite of a
change to get into it to make it not as dangerous. It's no fun with helmets
and when you feel unsafe, so things need to be adjusted to cyclist as
1500-.... kilos of metal are not very forgiving so you cannot assume that will
work well. In 40 years the only people I knew who died from cycling were semi-
professional cyclists. I have seen horrible accidents ending in mutilation
which were all due to the cyclist thinking 'I am right' (in Dutch law, the
pedestrian and cyclist are always right) and just crossing without looking.
Outside that, nothing happened. But that takes, I believe, a lot of years of
motor vehicle drivers to actually really pay attention all the time as a small
lap is not a dented bumper but much worse. That is not something most people
just pick up although drivers licenses should've taught them that.

~~~
marquis
I love cycling in the Netherlands - where ironically the worst traffic
annoyances, for the cyclist, happen to be pedestrians (especially tourists in
the central district).

~~~
belorn
Its the attitude that is most annoying.

Most people would not dream of walking over a road without looking for
incoming traffic, but they feel perfectly safe walking over a bicycle road
without even bother taking a look.

~~~
bowlofpetunias
It's more than merely annoying, it's f-ing dangerous to the cyclists. You hit
a pedestrian on your bike, the pedestrian will may get a few cuts and bruises,
but it's the cyclist who get's launched off their bike that usually gets off
much worse.

I generally dislike urban tourists that walk around living cities like they're
in Disneyland and getting in everybody's way, but in Amsterdam they are a
dangerous menace.

~~~
msellout
No, pedestrians hit by a bike at speed may be seriously injured, same as
anyone involved not wearing a helmet.

------
dreamdu5t
Queue comments from fat drivers about how dangerous cycling is...
inconsiderate cyclists and drivers complaining that bicycles and cars are
annoying... bicycle evangelists claiming everyone should be cycling...
practical people pointing out that infrastructure is the solution to whatever
problem... Fastidious people insisting everyone should be following the rules
of the road...

I'm sure I'm missing some.

~~~
rsync
You missed mine:

Why don't people just walk more ? It's even more health promoting than cycling
and it requires no investment/gear/tech. It's also really meditative and
enjoyable.

~~~
pearjuice
Walking is slow and requires a lot of patience and extra time.

~~~
k-mcgrady
Replace 'walking' with 'cycling' and you have a drivers response to cycling.

~~~
bjeanes
Except they would be wrong. In cities, cycling is almost always provably
faster than driving or public transport because traffic becomes a non-issue
and you can start immediately when a light turns green instead of waiting for
the 5 vehicles in front of you to start moving or turning out of your way.

~~~
k-mcgrady
>> "you can start immediately when a light turns green instead of waiting for
the 5 vehicles in front of you to start moving or turning out of your way."

It sounds like to do this you would need to be side-by-side in the same lane
with a car. Sounds quite reckless and dangerous. I'm all for cycling and
walking in cities but that kind of behaviour is why cyclists get
injured/killed. I read a few stories recently in the news about cyclists
getting killed and one major repeating problem was that they came up the
inside of another vehicle (in the same lane) which didn't see them a moved
over into them.

------
not_paul_graham
In Atlanta, even if you observe all the rules, wear a helmet, use bike lights,
wear reflecting clothing, you are more likely to get hit by a car than not; or
atleast you might know someone who has been through it. I'm basing my
assumptions that Boston is like Atlanta (aka terrible public transit,
everything is far away, college campuses are in the middle of the city).

On college campuses (like Georgia Tech) a lot of bikers who are college
students ignored traffic stops, rules of the road and signals. So it is likely
that people from poor households are also equally or more likely to ignore
traffic laws.

Also, lots of roads don't have bike lanes, and riding in the middle of the
street is going to get you a lot of honking, stuff thrown at you by rude
drivers over-taking you, etc (from personal experience).

On another note, London, a city whose mayor is a vocal proponent of making
London bike friendly, has had many fatalities that were bike riders following
the rules so this risk for fatality is a very real problem.

~~~
simonholroyd
I think Bostonians would take issue with your assumption:

\- Boston has one of the best public transportation systems in the country
(ranked #4 by Us news) [1]

\- Boston and the surrounding area is very densely populated making things
generally not far away. In fact, Boston is about 4x as dense as Atlanta and
the surrounding cites of Cambridge and Somerville are more dense still.
[2,3,4,5]

\- Boston is pretty much covered in college campuses. They're in the middle of
the city, edges of the city, and outskirts of the city.

[1] [http://www.usnews.com/news/slideshows/the-10-best-cities-
for...](http://www.usnews.com/news/slideshows/the-10-best-cities-for-public-
transportation/9)

[2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston)

[3]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge,_Massachusetts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge,_Massachusetts)

[4]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerville,_Massachusetts](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerville,_Massachusetts)

[5]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta)

------
twrkit
When Bloomberg ran the show in NYC, he "prescribed biking" [1]. Despite the
focus on cyclists, here's one filmmaker's experience:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-
IMaegzQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ)

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/nyregion/on-eve-of-bike-
sh...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/nyregion/on-eve-of-bike-sharing-
debut-watching-for-a-fiasco-or-a-success.html)

------
g8oz
For the general population, cycling is a reasonable option only for trips of 5
km and under. Mind you that is a good proportion of trips.

~~~
aylons
Actually, if you are healthy, 10km or under is still very reasonable, as
travel time will probably be under 30 minutes.

I'm 30, not athletic at all and daily ride my bike uphill 6 km to work in 22
minutes.

~~~
thirsteh
The ride home must be fun!

~~~
geoka9
Not so much when it's cold.

~~~
aylons
I live in Brazil. Where I am, it gets colder in the winter, but never less
then 10°C in the morning.

------
sarreph
Very good initiative; it will hopefully emulate the benefits reaped by the
more active cycling cities (e.g. Amsterdam).

However, it should be noted that the program's widespread nature (large city +
seemingly non-stringent requisites) has the potential to lead to a black
market for discounted membership based on rent-seeking behaviour.

------
vertr07
Let's call it "cycling" instead.

~~~
wdewind
Why not biking?

~~~
Someone
Google "biker" and click on Images.

Although, to be fair, neither "biking" (Mountain bikes) nor "cycling" (racing
bikes) shows appropriate images.

For appropriate images, you want "fietsen" or, better:

    
    
      site: bicycledutch.wordpress.com

------
ams6110
_in the United States and Canada, bicyclists are more at risk for fatality per
mile traveled than people in automobiles_

So we have to kill people to make them healthier, I get it.

~~~
graeme
You're committing a fallacy. MORE risk than driving doesn't mean you're in
worse health if you cycle. The health benefits may outweigh the increased risk
of life loss.

Such risks also aren't set in stone. The Netherlands has much lower risks.
Encouraging more cycling here could lower the odds of danger.

Snark is fun, but it doesn't add anything to the discussion.

~~~
QuantumChaos
I think the poster understood what you said, but has a moral outlook where
even positive expected value interventions can be immoral. I don't really
understand that viewpoint, but it is a very common one. Usually it is
expressed in terms like "how Would you explain all this stuff about averages
to the daughter of the man whose bike got ran over by a truck "

~~~
alexkus
> how Would you explain all this stuff about averages to the daughter of the
> man whose bike got ran over by a truck

The greatly increased chances of seeing any grandchildren I may end up having
is way more important, to me anyway, than the tiny increase in risk that I may
not see my children reach adulthood (or even their teenage years).

~~~
RogerL
Those are not your only options. You can get exercise, and improve your
health, in ways other than commuting by bike. Ways that reduce risk, not
increase them, even.

