Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Drugs a significant health issue for cyclists?

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Drugs a significant health issue for cyclists?

Old 09-28-22, 09:05 AM
  #1  
kyplaskon
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
kyplaskon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 29

Bikes: Old ones

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Drugs a significant health issue for cyclists?

University of Arkansas researchers are calling drugs a "Significant health issue" because 2 percent of people who are riding their bikes and are injured have drugs in their system. Cars cause way more injuries than drugs. Why didn't they call cars a "significant health issue?" When are researchers going to stand up and say what is really threatening public health? https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...awing-concerns
kyplaskon is offline  
Likes For kyplaskon:
Old 09-28-22, 09:11 AM
  #2  
ClydeClydeson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,481
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 516 Post(s)
Liked 793 Times in 458 Posts
Drugs and alcohol + motor vehicles has been known to be a public health & safety issue for many decades. There is no 'Mothers Against Drunk Biking' group, as far as I know.
ClydeClydeson is offline  
Likes For ClydeClydeson:
Old 09-28-22, 09:19 AM
  #3  
howsteepisit
Senior Member
 
howsteepisit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 4,312

Bikes: Mecian

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 501 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 3 Posts
Mostly because the researchers spent the time and effort (money) to collect and analyze the data, and there is no future funding for saying that "it is no big deal". To Public health officials, everything is a public health issue.
howsteepisit is offline  
Likes For howsteepisit:
Old 09-28-22, 10:14 AM
  #4  
Iride01 
Plz hurry Dec 22!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 11,934

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4890 Post(s)
Liked 3,409 Times in 2,363 Posts
Only two percent? I figured it'd be higher. Perhaps cycling is healthier. I'd be certain that drivers have more drugs in their system. Some of my friends that don't ride bikes have a small pharmacy worth of drugs to take daily for their blood pressure, cholesterol and many other health issues.
Iride01 is offline  
Likes For Iride01:
Old 09-28-22, 10:17 AM
  #5  
Daniel4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,264

Bikes: Sekine 1979 ten speed racer

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1371 Post(s)
Liked 517 Times in 348 Posts
The judicial is too lenient on drunk drivers. When drivers are suspended from driving, the driver begs to the judge that he can't get to work without his car. Then he's given back his licence.


Other times, drivers just get back in their cars and drive away from court regardless of the sentence.

Don't be surprised if there are a whole bunch of drivers with suspended licences on the road right now.

Breathalyzers should be standard equipment on all automobiles.

Last edited by Daniel4; 09-28-22 at 10:22 AM.
Daniel4 is offline  
Likes For Daniel4:
Old 09-28-22, 10:23 AM
  #6  
blacknbluebikes 
Senior Member
 
blacknbluebikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NJ, USA
Posts: 1,007

Bikes: two blacks, a blue and a white.

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 343 Post(s)
Liked 547 Times in 273 Posts
everything in moderation, including sobriety.
blacknbluebikes is offline  
Likes For blacknbluebikes:
Old 09-28-22, 10:50 AM
  #7  
Chinghis
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Southern California
Posts: 417

Bikes: Historical: Schwinn Speedster; Schwinn Collegiate; 1981 Ross Gran Tour; 1981 Dawes Atlantis; 1991 Specialized Rockhopper. Current: 1987 Ritchey Ultra; 1987 Centurion Ironman Dave Scott Master; 1992 Specialized Stumpjumper FS

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Liked 139 Times in 83 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01 View Post
Only two percent? I figured it'd be higher. Perhaps cycling is healthier. I'd be certain that drivers have more drugs in their system. Some of my friends that don't ride bikes have a small pharmacy worth of drugs to take daily for their blood pressure, cholesterol and many other health issues.
That's not the kind of drugs they're talking about.

After you said you'd figured it would be higher, I though you were going to go in the direction of how much weed you can smell coming out of cars when you ride through the city. Heck, I smelled it this morning coming in to work.
Chinghis is offline  
Likes For Chinghis:
Old 09-28-22, 11:13 AM
  #8  
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,360

Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,098 Times in 727 Posts
Originally Posted by Chinghis View Post
That's not the kind of drugs they're talking about.

After you said you'd figured it would be higher, I though you were going to go in the direction of how much weed you can smell coming out of cars when you ride through the city. Heck, I smelled it this morning coming in to work.
The objective/purpose of the study was "The purpose of this study was to analyze the descriptive epidemiology of bicycle-related injuries associated with substances of abuse other than alcohol and to examine types of drugs involved and injury diagnoses." Bicycle Injuries Associated With Drug Use in the United States, 2019–2020

IOW the population "studied" consisted of bicyclists who were treated in ER's and were found to have been taking psychoactive drugs.
Even a quick glance at the HealthLine summary of the report indicates that the population "studied" was highly weighted towards "studying" the results of bicycle riding done by the homeless and/or psychoactive drug using populations.
Extract:
The most common drug detected in the crash victims was methamphetamine (36%), followed by cannabis (30%) and opioids (18%).

The researchers noted that nearly a quarter of the injured cyclists had alcohol in their system.

They said the injured cyclists were mostly white, male, and between ages 25 and 44. The injured were less likely to be cycling for exercise. Some may have lost their license because of a previous DUI conviction and couldn’t drive a car.

“In the context of the population most affected by these injuries, they likely have substance use disorder, may be more likely to be homeless, and may not have access to other forms of transportation,” said Bart Hammig, PhD, MPH, a study co-author and a professor of public health at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville.

“This is an often overlooked and ignored population when addressing serious injuries related to bicycle crashes,” Dr. Hammig told Healthline.

Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 09-28-22 at 11:57 AM.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline  
Likes For I-Like-To-Bike:
Old 09-28-22, 11:27 AM
  #9  
DonkeyShow
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked 123 Times in 85 Posts
Drunk biking is hard, I recommend shrooms.
DonkeyShow is offline  
Likes For DonkeyShow:
Old 09-28-22, 02:38 PM
  #10  
Milton Keynes
Senior Member
 
Milton Keynes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 3,890

Bikes: Trek 1100 road bike, Roadmaster gravel/commuter/beater mountain bike

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2241 Post(s)
Liked 1,656 Times in 908 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
Don't be surprised if there are a whole bunch of drivers with suspended licences on the road right now.
As someone who used to work as a police dispatcher, I guarantee there are.

Breathalyzers should be standard equipment on all automobiles.
No, that's just punishing the innocent. I don't want to have to blow into a machine every time I want to go somewhere, and I have enough brains to know not to drive if I've been drinking.
Milton Keynes is offline  
Old 09-28-22, 02:54 PM
  #11  
rydabent
Senior Member
 
rydabent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,624

Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II

Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2999 Post(s)
Liked 938 Times in 557 Posts
People that use illegal drugs are absolutely stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They will get killed in traffic, they make good organ donors, and it cleans the gene pool.

Last edited by rydabent; 09-28-22 at 03:22 PM.
rydabent is offline  
Old 09-28-22, 03:32 PM
  #12  
Troul 
:D
 
Troul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 5,945

Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,070 Times in 1,389 Posts
Based on what I hear from the gen pub, a cyclist should be a habitual crack smoker.
We do often ride in such ways "normal" folk would rather not do. Normal folk also tend to sit in a pub drinking all evening too...
__________________
-Oh Hey!
Troul is offline  
Likes For Troul:
Old 09-28-22, 04:24 PM
  #13  
venturi95
Firm but gentle
 
venturi95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oregon
Posts: 520

Bikes: 2005 Litespeed Tuscany, Soma Pescadero, Pure Cycles disc road, Jamis hybrid

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 42 Posts
Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
People that use illegal drugs are absolutely stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They will get killed in traffic, they make good organ donors, and it cleans the gene pool.
I haven't seen that many exclamation points in years. You must really know a lot about riding under the influence.
I've used all sorts of illegal drugs, before, during, and after riding, and I'm above average in intelligence, athleticism, and almost any conceivable way (which is scary if you knew me).
The study mentions homeless people, so there goes your dreams of harvesting all those drugged-up but otherwise good organ donors. It may be a good study - doubtful - but the article is just clickbait.
If you are worried about the gene pool of the world, try eliminating synthetic chemicals used in agriculture.
venturi95 is offline  
Likes For venturi95:
Old 09-28-22, 05:38 PM
  #14  
Daniel4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,264

Bikes: Sekine 1979 ten speed racer

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1371 Post(s)
Liked 517 Times in 348 Posts
Originally Posted by Milton Keynes View Post
No, that's just punishing the innocent. I don't want to have to blow into a machine every time I want to go somewhere, and I have enough brains to know not to drive if I've been drinking.
I'm also not surprised someone will have this response. The innocent-dead don't complain.

Can we just ask and beg for drivers to not get back into their cars after drinking a lot? Like we have been doing for at least 50 years? Maybe this time they'll all listen.

There once was a time when everybody complained about having to put on seat belts before driving off. And the same thing about bike helmets.

Last edited by Daniel4; 09-28-22 at 07:27 PM.
Daniel4 is offline  
Likes For Daniel4:
Old 09-29-22, 05:19 AM
  #15  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 14,003

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7338 Post(s)
Liked 7,593 Times in 4,264 Posts
Originally Posted by Daniel4 View Post
I'm also not surprised someone will have this response. The innocent-dead don't complain.

Can we just ask and beg for drivers to not get back into their cars after drinking a lot? Like we have been doing for at least 50 years? Maybe this time they'll all listen.

There once was a time when everybody complained about having to put on seat belts before driving off. And the same thing about bike helmets.

Is crazy bad policy advocacy a hobby of yours? All that would happen if you installed this on every vehicle is you'd get an industry of products designed to disable/fool the testing device. Not to mention, it's absolutely useless for preventing drug dui.

Pssst--lots of people don't wear bike helmets.
livedarklions is online now  
Old 09-29-22, 05:21 AM
  #16  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 14,003

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7338 Post(s)
Liked 7,593 Times in 4,264 Posts
Originally Posted by kyplaskon View Post
University of Arkansas researchers are calling drugs a "Significant health issue" because 2 percent of people who are riding their bikes and are injured have drugs in their system. Cars cause way more injuries than drugs. Why didn't they call cars a "significant health issue?" When are researchers going to stand up and say what is really threatening public health? https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...awing-concerns

Walk, check. Chew gum, check.

False dichotomy much? Does every article on bike health risks need to mention every other risk that bicyclists face?

BTW-- https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-...safer-d-c.html
livedarklions is online now  
Old 09-29-22, 06:41 AM
  #17  
kyplaskon
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
kyplaskon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 29

Bikes: Old ones

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Drugs vs Cars - which are more dangerous?

Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
Walk, check. Chew gum, check.

False dichotomy much? Does every article on bike health risks need to mention every other risk that bicyclists face?

BTW-- https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-...safer-d-c.html
Nice story about doctors as advocates. Would you consider issuing a statement calling cars a "Significant health risk" to other forms of transportation?

To answer your question, yes, I dichotomy often. The similarity between drugs and cars is the researcher's statement "significant health risk." Calling drugs a "significant health risk" at a 2 percent injury rate requires them to examine the opinion statement of what constitutes a "significant health risk." If everything over 2 percent constitutes a significant health risk, then the researchers should have context of what are the significant health risks for cyclists. By telling the public that drugs are a significant health risk to cyclists, they are drawing people's attention away from the real significant health risk, which is cars. They are likely afraid to call cars a significant health risk or a much greater health risk than drugs because they would run afoul of public opinion and the media is unlikely to pick up and run with the story. What do you think is a more significant public health risk? Cars or drugs? Do we need to re-start the war on drugs? lol
kyplaskon is offline  
Old 09-29-22, 06:45 AM
  #18  
kyplaskon
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
kyplaskon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 29

Bikes: Old ones

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
We just had the Dutch Cycling Embassy in Reno and they said not to wear a helmet because it gives the impression that cycling is dangerous. Driving is much more dangerous and no one is suggesting that people who drive cars wear helmets.
kyplaskon is offline  
Likes For kyplaskon:
Old 09-29-22, 06:48 AM
  #19  
kyplaskon
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
kyplaskon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 29

Bikes: Old ones

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Legality of drugs and intelligence

Originally Posted by rydabent View Post
People that use illegal drugs are absolutely stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They will get killed in traffic, they make good organ donors, and it cleans the gene pool.
What about people who use drugs that were illegal and are now legal? Are they absolutely stupid or smarter than the ones who use drugs that are still illegal?
kyplaskon is offline  
Old 09-29-22, 08:17 AM
  #20  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 14,003

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7338 Post(s)
Liked 7,593 Times in 4,264 Posts
Originally Posted by kyplaskon View Post
Nice story about doctors as advocates. Would you consider issuing a statement calling cars a "Significant health risk" to other forms of transportation?

To answer your question, yes, I dichotomy often. The similarity between drugs and cars is the researcher's statement "significant health risk." Calling drugs a "significant health risk" at a 2 percent injury rate requires them to examine the opinion statement of what constitutes a "significant health risk." If everything over 2 percent constitutes a significant health risk, then the researchers should have context of what are the significant health risks for cyclists. By telling the public that drugs are a significant health risk to cyclists, they are drawing people's attention away from the real significant health risk, which is cars. They are likely afraid to call cars a significant health risk or a much greater health risk than drugs because they would run afoul of public opinion and the media is unlikely to pick up and run with the story. What do you think is a more significant public health risk? Cars or drugs? Do we need to re-start the war on drugs? lol
The dichotomy is still absurd, just as is your assumption that identifying the patterns of how drug use affects mortality and morbidity in bicycle accidents is only useful in a war on drugs scenario. I won't get too much into this because it's more a P&R forum issue, but I consider a public health approach (instead of a criminal approach) to drug abuse to be a significant change that needs to be made to save lives so I think your false dichotomy obscures that.

The labeling of "public health problem" really only matters if it's somehow going to affect how policy gets made in the particular area. If you want to advocate for labeling cars a public health risk, make the case that it would change anyone's thinking on this matter. Frankly, I just think you're proposing shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. Most, if not all, of our economy relies on motor vehicles, that's where the parallel to drug abuse just makes the comparison silly.
livedarklions is online now  
Old 09-29-22, 08:27 AM
  #21  
Chuckles1
Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Foothills of West Central Maine
Posts: 402

Bikes: 2007 Motobecane Fantom Cross Expert, 2020 Motobecane Omni Strada Pro Disc (700c gravel bike), 2021 Motobecane Elite Adventure with Bafang 500W rear hub drive

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 173 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 141 Times in 92 Posts
Idiotic

Originally Posted by kyplaskon View Post
University of Arkansas researchers are calling drugs a "Significant health issue" because 2 percent of people who are riding their bikes and are injured have drugs in their system. Cars cause way more injuries than drugs. Why didn't they call cars a "significant health issue?"
At least 2% of people have drugs in their system, period. Idiotic statement by researchers desperate to fund their next "research."
Chuckles1 is offline  
Likes For Chuckles1:
Old 09-29-22, 08:44 AM
  #22  
kyplaskon
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
kyplaskon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 29

Bikes: Old ones

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
The dichotomy is still absurd, just as is your assumption that identifying the patterns of how drug use affects mortality and morbidity in bicycle accidents is only useful in a war on drugs scenario. I won't get too much into this because it's more a P&R forum issue, but I consider a public health approach (instead of a criminal approach) to drug abuse to be a significant change that needs to be made to save lives so I think your false dichotomy obscures that.

The labeling of "public health problem" really only matters if it's somehow going to affect how policy gets made in the particular area. If you want to advocate for labeling cars a public health risk, make the case that it would change anyone's thinking on this matter. Frankly, I just think you're proposing shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. Most, if not all, of our economy relies on motor vehicles, that's where the parallel to drug abuse just makes the comparison silly.
The definition of dichotomy is that there is, or is not a relationship. I think it is absurd that you do not see cars as a bigger public health issue for cyclists than drugs. The fact that you equate my advocacy as shufflng the chairs on the titanic shows that you are throwing up your hands and saying there is nothing we can do. Apathy is also a public health problem. With regard to your comment on how our economy relies on motor vehicles, I am well aware of that as a former tow truck driver. That does not mean we shouldn't point out the negative public health consequences. You are advocating for economics over public health - and that is the root of our society's problems. BTW, most of our economy also relies on drugs, legal and illegal. The fact is that cars are a WAY bigger public health problem for cyclists than drugs and you, the researchers and everyone should not be afraid to say it.
kyplaskon is offline  
Old 09-29-22, 09:04 AM
  #23  
Troul 
:D
 
Troul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 5,945

Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,070 Times in 1,389 Posts
Originally Posted by Chuckles1 View Post
At least 2% of people have drugs in their system, period. Idiotic statement by researchers desperate to fund their next "research."
Anything to discount the existence of anyone with a bicycle hobby & you'll notice certain large groups of Americans throwing money & donating all there time to make it happen. Very hateful people out there, & for no real good reason.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
Troul is offline  
Old 09-29-22, 09:35 AM
  #24  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 14,003

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7338 Post(s)
Liked 7,593 Times in 4,264 Posts
Originally Posted by kyplaskon View Post
The definition of dichotomy is that there is, or is not a relationship. I think it is absurd that you do not see cars as a bigger public health issue for cyclists than drugs. The fact that you equate my advocacy as shufflng the chairs on the titanic shows that you are throwing up your hands and saying there is nothing we can do. Apathy is also a public health problem. With regard to your comment on how our economy relies on motor vehicles, I am well aware of that as a former tow truck driver. That does not mean we shouldn't point out the negative public health consequences. You are advocating for economics over public health - and that is the root of our society's problems. BTW, most of our economy also relies on drugs, legal and illegal. The fact is that cars are a WAY bigger public health problem for cyclists than drugs and you, the researchers and everyone should not be afraid to say it.
.

1) The relative size of the problems has nothing to do with whether either, both or neither should be discussed as being primarily a "public health" problem. You've made no case for relabeling cars in this way other than they kill more people than are killed riding under the influence. That's not an argument that makes any sense.

2) No one here is arguing or has ever argued that the danger cars create for people should not be discussed nor that we should just give up advocacy. I have no problem with you being an advocate, I just think you're giving us a prime example of bad advocacy. My point is that you haven't said anything that makes me think that relabeling this as primarily a public health problem instead of a law enforcement/engineering/education/economic problem is going to move the ball in any meaningful way. And by denigrating unnecessarily a public health approach to an issue of drug abuse, you simply alienate people who actually consider the abandonment of the "war of drugs" approach a very important thing.

3) Our entire economy is not reliant on drugs, and certainly nowhere near the extent that it is on motor vehicles. Crashing our economy would itself create a rash of public health problems, so even in terms of public health the range of structural reforms are constrained by that reality. Where are you going with this? Do you think cars should be eradicated as a public health scourge? Do you think the relabeling somehow will make that more palatable?

4) So you're ok with trucks, they can do whatever? I can't tell what you're actually identifying as the actual public health problem. If you mean all motor vehicles on roads, then good luck spelling out what the practical implications of getting them banned as public health problems. If it's just cars that are going to get banned, we already kind of did that when auto manufacturers figured out that trucks have lesser safety standards and invented the SUV as the category buster.

5)Be careful, you're looking for medical people to weigh in on here. What makes you think they might not see the presence of cyclists on the road as being the public health problem? You think they're any more anxious to give up their SUVs than any other interest group?
livedarklions is online now  
Old 09-29-22, 09:59 AM
  #25  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 14,003

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 62 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7338 Post(s)
Liked 7,593 Times in 4,264 Posts
Originally Posted by Chuckles1 View Post
At least 2% of people have drugs in their system, period. Idiotic statement by researchers desperate to fund their next "research."
Originally Posted by Troul View Post
Anything to discount the existence of anyone with a bicycle hobby & you'll notice certain large groups of Americans throwing money & donating all there time to make it happen. Very hateful people out there, & for no real good reason.

Obviously, neither of you actually read the study, the recommendations are really about how best to get resources out to disadvantaged people so their only transportation option is not riding while intoxicated, and how to more effectively treat people who are brought into the ER under these circumstances, including getting them treatment for drug and mental health problems.
They take great pains to delineate who these cyclists are likely to be and if they're talking about throwing money anywhere, it's into meeting the safety, transportation and health care needs of the very poor.

Sorry if those aren't the cyclists you think we should care about.
livedarklions is online now  
Likes For livedarklions:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.