SkepticalButOpenMinded

I don't know, the health gains seem VERY substantial, not minor. I think biking even a moderate amount, 2 or 3 times a week, would be literally life changing for most Americans and Canadians. And this isn't even counting the gains to mental health, happiness, and finances.

I believe you that your personal trip isn't worth it. But you claimed that "it doesn't hold true over here", which is a bold claim that's not just about your personal situation, which you're declaring without any evidence.

Surprisingly, the positives of bike exercise seem to outweigh the harms of breathing in even extreme air pollution. Here is a BBC article on the topic.

"Even in Delhi, one of the most polluted cities in the world - with pollution levels 10 times those in London - people would need to cycle over five hours per week before the pollution risks outweigh the health benefits," said Dr Marko Tainio, the lead author of the study.

It's uncouth partially because it's simply not as likely that the cyclist broke the rules.

But also, even if a cyclist did break some road rules, they should be allowed to sometimes. This is like "jaywalking", which doesn't really exist outside North America. When a cyclist makes a mistake, people don't usually die, receive life ruining injuries, or suffer significant property damage. In fact, many places allow cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs precisely because it's actually safer if cyclists have some leeway to make their own decisions.

Road rules are mostly to protect everyone from cars. Cars make streets dangerous, and it's misleading to shift the blame to cyclists.

That’s a great way to put it.

That's possible, but yours is a separate empirical claim. Do you have a source for that? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. As the article notes, the health benefits in the UK are overwhelming, so even with the increased risk of accidents in the US, it may still end up being worth it.

It should also be noted that the risks of a sedentary life are probably also much higher in the US than the UK, because it's so much more car-centric. Obesity and other health metrics are much worse in the US, so the benefits of cycling might be all that much higher. I would want to see some evidence instead of guessing.

Indeed, the US is unfortunately a huge outlier. These charts comparing the US to other countries are shocking. The US is apparently one of the only developed countries that have gotten less safe in the last few years for non-drivers.

It's especially egregious when you consider that Canada has less than half the accident rate, despite similar city design. Canadian cities are getting safer for cyclists every year.

That said, if you live in a place with good biking infrastructure in the US, I suspect it's still worth it to bike.

Je suis un peu partagé parce que je pense aussi que ceci fait une partie du processus de correction du marché du logement. Ce n'est pas au gouvernement de protéger les investissments immobiliers. Mais je suis également sensible au fait qu'il s'agit de l'abri des gens.

This is a huge issue throughout Canada, which famously has the most educated population in the world, but under utilizes that human capital at every turn. Sometimes I feel like the BC NDP are the only competent provincial government in the country.

That's my thought too. My friends and acquaintances who cycle the most haven't had a single accident in years. Defensive cycling is a skill.

It's like that line from gun safety: "Every gun is loaded." Every car will not stop or follow the rules. They will blow through stop signs and lights. Turn without looking. If you treat every car that way and adjust your trajectory and speed accordingly, the chance of an accident is tiny.

Donating to charities might be a better idea. I'll look into this. I think people nowadays underestimate the effectiveness of charities. Some aren't efficient, but some have been highly effective.

Yeah this reassured me too. Especially because the benefit doesn't seem to be small, but overwhelmingly in favour of cycling even with the increased risk of accidents.