Not owning a car is a great way to stay fit, save money, and avoid loads of hassle. This is a blog with thoughts, photos, ideas and links about carfree life: walking, active travel, public transport, places and spaces - things that matter to everyone, but even more when you don’t own a car. Photos are by me unless credited. Forthcoming: book on carfree life. Meantime, get in touch via email at carfreelifeoutsidethebox@gmail.com or Twitter @carfreebrighton
A curious award when you realise that serious injuries increase after 20mph schemes have been implemented. Rod King has not provided a single example where a reduction in injuries could be attributed to a 20mph implementation. His "services to Road Safety" credentials do not withstand scrutiny - this award is a sham.
I am looking forward to you sharing your evidence, since it is clearly more persuasive than that which has been published by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the National Audit Office, the Department for Transport, The House of Commons Transport Select Committee, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, the World Health Organisation, etc, etc.
None of those reports contains evidence of a reduction in injuries attributable to 20mph. To pick on the WHO one, here is what I recently sent to Rod King ... "You [20's Plenty] recently cited the WHO report in a press release. 20mph is mentioned once – in the title of the Lancashire study on page 39. 30km/h is mentioned once – in a discussion of measures implemented in New York (and then they are school zones), with no assessment of their effect on casualties. Your quote from page 75 “One of the most effective ways to improve pedestrian safety is to reduce the speed of vehicles” comes from a 2001 report about impact speeds and injuries (which will tell the blindingly obvious - hitting pedestrians at slower speeds kills fewer of them). Why delve into 12 year old reports but turn a blind eye to what has been happening in the 20mph schemes that have been implemented? So your press release title “World Health Organisation Say Wide 20mph Limits Are Proven To Help Pedestrian Safety” is grossly misleading – WHO says nothing at all about 20mph limits. It’s another 20’s Plenty lie. PLEASE RETRACT IT.
He has not replied, nor has he been able to provide a single example where a reduction in injuries could be attributed to a 20mph implementation. I will be debating with Rod in Harrogate at the Road Safety GB Conference in November, as I did at the 20mph Places Conference a year ago. 20mph is a social behaviour experiment that has no proven or even convincing casualty reduction effect (actually quite the opposite). Eric Bridgstock Independent Road Safety Research
A curious award when you realise that serious injuries increase after 20mph schemes have been implemented.
ReplyDeleteRod King has not provided a single example where a reduction in injuries could be attributed to a 20mph implementation.
His "services to Road Safety" credentials do not withstand scrutiny - this award is a sham.
Dear Mr/Ms Anonymous
ReplyDeleteThank you for your rapid comment.
I am looking forward to you sharing your evidence, since it is clearly more persuasive than that which has been published by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the National Audit Office, the Department for Transport, The House of Commons Transport Select Committee, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, the World Health Organisation, etc, etc.
Stephen
Stephen
DeleteNone of those reports contains evidence of a reduction in injuries attributable to 20mph.
To pick on the WHO one, here is what I recently sent to Rod King ...
"You [20's Plenty] recently cited the WHO report in a press release.
20mph is mentioned once – in the title of the Lancashire study on page 39.
30km/h is mentioned once – in a discussion of measures implemented in New York (and then they are school zones), with no assessment of their effect on casualties.
Your quote from page 75 “One of the most effective ways to improve pedestrian safety is to reduce the speed of vehicles” comes from a 2001 report about impact speeds and injuries (which will tell the blindingly obvious - hitting pedestrians at slower speeds kills fewer of them). Why delve into 12 year old reports but turn a blind eye to what has been happening in the 20mph schemes that have been implemented?
So your press release title “World Health Organisation Say Wide 20mph Limits Are Proven To Help Pedestrian Safety” is grossly misleading – WHO says nothing at all about 20mph limits.
It’s another 20’s Plenty lie.
PLEASE RETRACT IT.
He has not replied, nor has he been able to provide a single example where a reduction in injuries could be attributed to a 20mph implementation.
I will be debating with Rod in Harrogate at the Road Safety GB Conference in November, as I did at the 20mph Places Conference a year ago. 20mph is a social behaviour experiment that has no proven or even convincing casualty reduction effect (actually quite the opposite).
Eric Bridgstock
Independent Road Safety Research