‘Bike’ is sometimes used as shorthand for ‘motorcycle’, in which case the ‘absurdly dangerous’ claim stands. I agree that riding a pedal-powered cycle without a helmet is somewhat dangerous, and unnecessarily so, but not ‘absurdly dangerous’.
Ah, yes. I agree that motorcycles are more dangerous than bicycles. Generally, avoiding dangerous activities (like those toward the lower end of this chart) seems like a good idea.
That doesn’t seem like a good idea. You’re ignoring long-term harms and benefits of the activity—otherwise cycling would be net positive—and you’re ignoring activity duration. People don’t commute to work by climbing Mount Everest or going skydiving.
‘Bike’ is sometimes used as shorthand for ‘motorcycle’, in which case the ‘absurdly dangerous’ claim stands. I agree that riding a pedal-powered cycle without a helmet is somewhat dangerous, and unnecessarily so, but not ‘absurdly dangerous’.
I was under the impression that riding a motorcycle even with proper protection is still very dangerous?
Ah, yes. I agree that motorcycles are more dangerous than bicycles. Generally, avoiding dangerous activities (like those toward the lower end of this chart) seems like a good idea.
That doesn’t seem like a good idea. You’re ignoring long-term harms and benefits of the activity—otherwise cycling would be net positive—and you’re ignoring activity duration. People don’t commute to work by climbing Mount Everest or going skydiving.
I’m not ignoring them. I’m just comparing danger base rates. That’s why “generally”. The benefits of each activity depend on the user.