Nick wrote:
> burtthebike wrote:
>> Make sure you're sat down and there is nothing throwable in the
>> immediate vicinity before you read this. Can it be just a coincidence
>> that yet another 10 minute bill is before parliament?
>>
>> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article2658130.ece
>>
>
> The article seems quite sensible to me. What do you think is wrong with it?
While it's true that a per unit distance will slant the figures one way,
it's equally true that a per unit time measure will slant them the other
way: if, as the article suggests, it's silly to compare my per unit
distance measure to a pedestrian's, because I travel for more distance,
it's just as silly to only compare per unit time for exactly the same
reasons.
The fact is that you can't /directly and equitably/ compare the
transport modalities that way. The information is useful but it can't
be taken as an absolute measure of safety.
Why is the per unit distance "wrong" and per unit time "right"? The
article clearly implies that to to be the case.
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net
[email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/