http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01p70rs

Pretty cool (head cam needed to be tilted up a few degrees). Thanks. I was really impressed by the sheer number of cyclists.

The NHS says there are 35,000 obesity-related deaths in England each year – 1 in every 16 deaths. It says most cases of obesity are caused by eating too much and moving too little.

How much is the use of cars to go everywhere, replacing the fundamental human function of walking (even if just walking to the nearest bus stop or train station), contributing to this epidemic?

It's bound to be part of it, and a significant part, but I imagine gluttony is far more to blame.

The situation is worse in the States and the difference seems not to be the amount/lack of walking (that must be similar), but the portion sizes and (even more) processed nature of the food.

Japanese people are car obsessed and probably don't walk much, but apart from the deliberately fat Sumo stars, are all thin because of their diet (although McDonalds et al is trying to change that, and with some alarming success I believe).

Ha! ha!! - no match for the bonnet-mounted 76mm Oto-Melara, stabalised rapid firing gun loaded with proximity fused high explosive shells that i am planning to fit next week !    

Cheers

Don

Last year (2011) 95% of the people who died in the UK had eaten tomatoes........

Cheers

Don

Using this kind of argument to undermine genuine statistics such as obesity related mortality and morbidity is facile.

many of these so-called statistics are put out by people or organisations with an agenda. Next week they are usually forgotten about or simply argued as irrelevant due to new and contradictory evidence.

Most of them should be taken with a pinch of salt......

.....oh bugger it, I'll now be accused of insidiously promoting heart failure in the nation.

Instesd of simply quoting statistics, and issuing warnings that obesity/salt/fat/whatever is bad for us (and I accept too much of it all is), I wish the NHS and news media would concentrate their effort on clear advice on what to do about it. eg as indicated above - eat less, eat less meat and potatoes, eat more fruit and vegitables, and go for a brisk walk for 20 minutes every day (or whatever).

oh, and loosen up and laugh every day

Cheers

Don

cheers

Don

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/O...Pages/Treatment.aspx

http://www.bicyclelaw.com/blog...the-Scofflaw-Cyclist

This is a well-written piece. Worth your time to read it.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/new...in-training-accident

Cyclist down.

Slow down people. Seriously.

Winky

Tragically two more cyclists have been killed in the UK since this thread began. You have to think of their families at this time of year.

Both both drivers have been arrested on suspicion of careless driving and it brings the number of cyclists killed on the UK's roads to a 5-year high.

Careless driving (driving without due care)

This offence is committed when the accused's driving falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case.

The maximum penalties are:

• a £2,500; and
• mandatory 3 to 9 penalty points; and
• discretionary disqualification.
• Hmmm, not indicative of a really serious offence?

It's kind of like shooting rifle along the neighbourhood street, and if you accidentally hit and kill someone, you've just been "careless".

Most voters drive. Drivers will never take seriously their duty not to kill someone. And therefore they will never support appropriate penalties. Therefore penalties for operating your two-tonne weapon in a lethal manner are laughable (tragic, actually). 

I completely disagree with your generalised statement that "Drivers will never take seriously their duty not to kill someone". That is simply a grotesque over-statement and completely unjustified and unfounded.

However,

Quite often, motorists are arrested and charged with manslaughter. So I'm not sure why these two cases are only charged with careless driving, for which the maximum penalties appear (IMHO) to be inadequate - I presume that we are somewhat agreed on this aspect.( BTW, until the evidence in put in front of us, its a bit too early to jump to conclusions).

Cheers

Don

I'm basing my assertion on the egregious law-breaking that I observe every day. Speeding (nearly everywhere and all the time unless being physically impeded), blowing stop signs (100% of the time unless impeded) , running amber/red lights at speed (nearly always). Passing to close to cyclists (often but actually most are OK), turning across the paths of cyclists (regularly), barging through crowded pedestrian crossings (common), failing to indicate (nearly universal), talking on cell phones (easily observed every few minutes in the city). These things are so common that it would be laughable if it wasn't resulting in 30,000 deaths per year in the US alone. 1.2 million worldwide. How can you possibly assert that motorists take their responsibility seriously?

If say, 80% of road fatalities resulted in a manslaughter conviction, and a fair percentage of accidents resulted in attempted manslaughter charges, then I'd say we were being serious.

I have driven in many, many countries the world over (ok, probably only 40 or so) and even in Bombay or Bangalore I have never witnessed wide-scale disregard for the safety of others as described by yourself.

I have driven in Vancouver too many times to remember, and again, your description is alien to my experiences.

Sure, some drivers fit your descriptions, but not IMHO a large proportion. It is simply misleadingly wrong of you to demonise all drivers in the way you continually attemp so to do.

Punishments should fit the crime. A moment's carelessness isn't the same as a pre-meditated act. Why should 80% of road fatalities result in manslaughter conviction ? Only on one occasion have I been a direct witness to the moment a fatality occured. It was due to carelessness as I cut and pasted above. No way could it have been described as manslaughter.

On a lighter note, why stop with manslaughter convictions? Why not introduce a mandatory death penalty on conviction. It might act as an effective deterrant ?

Cheers

Don

If manner of operating a motor vehicle is inherently so dangerous that "a moment's carelessness" will regularly kill someone, we should have good think about how we are operating these vehicles. In what other field do we have so little disregard for our safety that we accept circumstances whereby a "moment's carelessness" will kill people so regularly and reliably?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/new...olved-in-hit-and-run

Another cyclist hit by a motorist. I guess it was probably just a moment's inattention" so the motorist should suffer few consequences. The cyclist, on the other hand, seems to have suffered quite a few consequences.

So why then ARE all these people being killed and maimed? What behaviour causes it? I remain convinced it is the aggregate of drivers' negligence. They drive too fast, with too many distractions and pay too little regard to laws designed to keep people safe.

Maybe we just should accept it and move on.

Maybe we just should accept it and move on.

Please. This thread seems to have run it's course with the same views expressed ad nauseum. Time to put another record on.

By the way Winky, I'm sure there are many of us on this forum who would love to know whether you yourself drive a car?

Yep. Not very often, though.

Steve, barely a few posts up I see people discussing legal penalties. This has not been discussed on this thread before has it?

I am sorry you once experienced a dented wing mirror. However, whilst fresh deaths and legal penalties are being discussed, this doesn't give you a platform upon which to declare the discussion over.

You know it wouldn't be right to accept and move on. Motorists make mistakes. The punishment fits the severity of the crime (more or less IMHO). We continue to run awareness campaigns and road accidents in the UK have fallen dramatically over the past 30 years. Not sure of the trend in Canada.

Cheers

Don