No, they ranking the usage of a car as less dangerous. Which is correct.
Not really no cars cause a MASSIVE amount of deaths less likely to be the driver potentially but its still far more fatal to other people which imo is actually worse
If we look at it statically, biking is healthier because it reduces health problems.
Bike is healthier until you get pancaked by an SUV or pickup which are increasingly all that people drive on roads nowadays. The roads aren’t safe for bikes. If you live somewhere without dedicated bike infrastructure (no, painted bike lanes on the street don’t count), biking is basically playing Russian roulette.
Even in area not made for bikes, the health benefits outweight the risk of getting killed by a car in the total longevity.
This become false when the road have too much traffic: air pollution damage start to outweight the health benefits of doing sport.Areas not made for bikes also tend to have a lot of car traffic
In any case, the health benefits of bikes can be easily achieved by other means, so I don’t think it’s worth bringing up.
Riding a Grizzly bear is right up there with hot air ballooning? Wow! How about riding a grizzly while eating a raw meat sandwich and having a large cut on your leg?
I mean, it’s more dangerous for someone on a bike or Scooter on car-centric infrastructure than it is for someone in a car.
Only if you consider only the safety of the vehicle’s pilot. Another perhaps more rational way to look at it is to look at how it affects the safety of all people. And then it’s clear that the car is still more dangerous than the bike, even on infrastructure specifically designed for car safety above all else.
