http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: media & risk en Sun, 31 May 2026 15:32:09 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36608 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:52:47 +0000 Dave 36608@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Not so simple, unless driving 230 miles after two bottles of wine is only as risky as adding 4 µMort (wine) to 1 µMort (drive)..? </p> <p>;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36607 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:31:25 +0000 crowriver 36607@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Taking an eckkie then going out cycling might pose some greater risk of death?</em></p> <p>About the same as smoking 1.4 ciggies then cycling (17 miles per micromort), if you believe wikipedia. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36606 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:29:13 +0000 gembo 36606@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Staying in the house [even awake rather than asleep] and taking a tablet of MDMA should not pose a risk of death greater than just staying in the house [awake or asleep]. Risk from ecstasy tends to be to long term mental health if anything. Possible risk if not MDMA in the tablet but some other drug?? Or instead of sensibly sipping water at regular intervals you drink too much too quickly? [not in house but discotheque with rave type dancing]</p> <p>MDMA was used in late 1980s in California as a therapeutic aid in couple counselling.</p> <p>Taking an eckkie then going out cycling might pose some greater risk of death? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36605 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:19:02 +0000 amir 36605@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>And of course some forms of transport may be safer per mile but be a cause of danger to other forms. Also I am sure that this only considers direct risks and not indirect risks eg on health </p> <p>He is quite right about the distorting effect that media has on perception of risk. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36603 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:14:13 +0000 Dave 36603@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Actually, a micromort only refers to an increased risk of death - there's a figure for skydiving and it's not relative to the number of miles you jump :)</p> <p>The transport examples on wikipedia, for instance, are given in µMort per mile but there's no reason why you couldn't give it per journey. Of course, for many the comparable figure is indeed per-mile because their daily choice is whether to take the car or bike for the same journey from A to B (although in the bigger picture, people who cycle will choose to live closer to their work so it's not as simple as this really).</p> <p>It's quite a useful measure when you see things like taking an ecstasy tablet is only as risky as breathing the polluted air of New York city for a weekend. Personally I'd have guessed that it was a lot more risky than that... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36589 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 18:38:37 +0000 crowriver 36589@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The problem with the micromorts model he champions is that it is risk of death per mile travelled. The majority of cyclists ride only short distances, whereas people make longer trips by car and train, and much much longer ones by air. What is the micromort per mile of, say, ferries? We are none the wiser. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3502#post-36585 Thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:53:06 +0000 amir 36585@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Spiegelhalter cites media's role in dominance of emotions over statistics about travel risks"</p> <p><a href="http://www.rssenews.org.uk/articles/20110719" rel="nofollow">http://www.rssenews.org.uk/articles/20110719</a></p> <p>A bit of rationality </p>