![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/0943eca5-c4c2-4d65-acc2-7e220598f99e.png)
I do and it’s honesty much better than those 33+ c days. When it’s below freezing, I wear thermal high tops, snow pants, down jacket, face mask and ski goggles. Its perfectly comfortable.
I do and it’s honesty much better than those 33+ c days. When it’s below freezing, I wear thermal high tops, snow pants, down jacket, face mask and ski goggles. Its perfectly comfortable.
I don’t doubt anything you are saying, but it’s worth mentioning that (iirc) 80%+ of severe injury and death on a bicycle is caused by motor vehicles, or complications of motor vehicle involvement. People very rarely have severe injury or death on dedicated bike infrastructure. The primary risk on bicycles is motor vehicles. If you remove motor vehicles, there is still risks, but someone might decide that risk is low enough to forgo a helmet. I don’t feel those people should be called stupid for their choice.
There is considerable evidence that everyone wearing a helmet in a car would save vastly more lives and prevent severe head injury, and yet pretty much no one even considers that as a normal thing to do. The bike helmet thing is therefore just as much a cultural attitude, as it is about safety.
I still use a helmet, and more importantly, visibility gear, on my bicycle in 100% of my rides. I’ve never worn a bike helmet walking or driving in a car, even though my cousin died from a head injury getting hit by a car while walking and my grandma-in-law died of a head injury in a car…
A helmet is only needed if you intend to spend significant time in traffic. Most of the world doesn’t use one.
The math behind using one is a lot more on the margins than people realize. In order for it to save you, it first has to prevent a head injury, and then prevent one that is in the range of severity that makes it useful. The vast majority of bike injuries won’t fall in that range, they’ll either be related to another part of the body, or in the case of high speed crashes from a car, too severe for a helmet to matter. But helmets do give people a false sense of security. Statistically people ride faster and take more risks with a helmet on. Lastly, again statistically, the visibility gear you put on yourself while riding does more to keep you safe in traffic than a helmet. Lights, reflectors, reflective vest, etc.
All this to say, the religiosity with which people proselytize helmets is misplaced. I still wear one, but I don’t judge people who choose not to.
Maybe comparable was the wrong word but I think think your using that to intentionally miss my point. When assessing the risk of a commute, if you are looking at per mile risk, biking is less lethal but more injury prone.
By comparable, I mean from point a to point b. If you have a 10 mile commute to work, you have a slightly higher lethality driving a car on a highway, than biking to work, but you have a higher chance of non-lethal injury by biking.
From what I recall it really depends on how you classify danger. Bikes are more dangerous for non-lethal injuries. But any car trip that you drive over 45 mph is slightly more lethal than biking per comparable trip. So it depends on what danger you’re willing to risk.
deleted by creator
I looked it up, named after how you eat it, by pulling it apart like a monkey.
Getting caught up with semantics arguments seems like a waste of energy. Because, genocide or not, for many people impacted by any war with disproportionate power imbalance, it sure as fuck is as horrific as a genocide regardless of how one defines it. (I’m not necessarily criticizing the use of the word by some, I just think many activists get bogged down in defending the use word rather than addressing the horror.)
Any regular person putting significant cash in individual stocks instead of index funds is just gambling. All US broad market index funds beat inflation over every 10 year period since index funds have existed.
Transportation pales in comparison to heating and cooling homes and businesses. The single greatest thing we can do to reduce climate change from a policy standpoint involves reducing that. From work at home, to multi family zoning, to converting business skyscrapers into living space, to increasing efficiency and fossil fuels from energy production. And all that does a lot to improve transportation environmental costs as well.
Under your simplified system a person making 55k brings in less than someone making 49k. Which disincentives getting a raise at that salary range. There is a reason that currently we only tax money over the brackets set.
Progressive taxation isn’t really the problem here though, our low tax on investment profit is. We should also probably enforce a 2% wealth tax on anyone making over a billion dollars.
The grizzlies were far more likely to attack but due to distance and spotting them early to avoid there was no issue.
They are not more likely to attack, you just perceive them that way. As long as you don’t do something that makes them feel threatened you are statistically in far more danger around the humans you cross paths with. I don’t remember where I read it, but even with the tiny amount of bear attack, even those attacks are most often the result of human fear causing humans to be aggressive and then lose the fight they started. For instance a hunter with a gun may get scared, shoot the grizzly, and then hit it without a fatal shot. They just created a danger that wasn’t there. “Fear is the mind killer”.
Black bears are less dangerous than nearly every other larger mammal. They are terrified of everything and not violent. Grizzly attacks are caused by you being perceived as a threat, if given the perceived option, most grizzly bears will run away. Fatal attacks are far more rare than people think 3 in all of north america in the last year. Humans are far far more dangerous to encounter.
Plenty of states it’s much higher, in Minnesota the rate is set by the state according to patient need. It’s not unheard of to pay $15k a month as $14k month is the average cost per resident.
“They constantly attack the right” if you view reporting what they have learned from investigation as an attack on the right, you should really asses what you think journalism’s role is. Should they report belief as truth, or truth as truth? “Only have liberal guests on” this is an obvious lie, and makes me question whether you ever actually listen to NPR or if you just have severe confirmation bias and view ANY liberal or Democrat on as proof of no conservatives even when they have both on at the same time… I hear conservatives on there pretty regularly.
What is true is that slightly more of the guests are Democrats than Republicans, but NPR has been very honest about how difficult it has been to get Republicans on their channel. They might ask 12 Republican senators to come on before one agrees meanwhile the first Democrat they ask agrees. With the decades long effort by the right to delegitimize any news that isn’t their tightly controlled propaganda machine, is this a surprise?
I don’t think it’s proof of bias to just attempt to report the investigative results of their work and have one party be anti-truth and then claim bias. Real news channels have an obligation to report reality irregardless of one parties unsubstantiated belief in anti-science, anti-fact, and anti-democracy demagoguery.
With that said, their is no such thing as unbiased news as humans are all biased. At least channels like NPR attempt to be unbiased, unlike the hundreds of propaganda rags all over this country.
I used to always do that until my carpet guy told me the oils from my feet directly on the carpet accelerates it’s end of life. He suggested keeping socks on or using indoor shoes (slippers, etc).
When the NBA sells a jersey with Curry’s name on it, Curry gets a cut of the profit. When the WNBA sells a Breanna Stewart jersey she gets $0. This isn’t complicated, they are obviously getting fucked over if you’ve read anything about how the business actually runs.
You can have fun doing all sorts of things without doing them in excess. If you’re preoccupied with doing something in excess while missing other opportunities, that is truly boring…
Realistically it’s only those 1-2 days after snowing when things are still being cleared that it’s an issue. I bike commute 52 weeks a year in Minnesota and there were only 3 days this year I regretted biking. 2 snow days and one heavy cold rain. I can always supplement another option on those days.