<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Isn&#8217;t Traffic Reduction a Top Public Health Concern?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/</link>
	<description>The national blog network for sustainable transport, smart growth and livable streets.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:16:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew D. Smith</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14912</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew D. Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 21:28:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14912</guid>
		<description>Driving and walking obviously carry risks and while I can certainly see the benefits in public education campaigns to help people understand those risks accurately, nothing here convinces me that the government should try to reduce deaths by encouraging less driving. Driving less (whether that means staying at home or taking alternative transport) imposes a cost of inconvenience upon people in exchange for the benefit of fewer fatalities. But who are you guys (and who are the bureaucrats in DC) to be directing people to the &quot;right&quot; choice. People can make the best choices for themselves, so long as they understand the costs and benefits properly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Driving and walking obviously carry risks and while I can certainly see the benefits in public education campaigns to help people understand those risks accurately, nothing here convinces me that the government should try to reduce deaths by encouraging less driving. Driving less (whether that means staying at home or taking alternative transport) imposes a cost of inconvenience upon people in exchange for the benefit of fewer fatalities. But who are you guys (and who are the bureaucrats in DC) to be directing people to the &#8220;right&#8221; choice. People can make the best choices for themselves, so long as they understand the costs and benefits properly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14894</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 04:58:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14894</guid>
		<description>Douglas: yes, the total fatality figure in the US dropped in the late 2000s, mostly because the rise in oil prices reduced the amount of driving.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Douglas: yes, the total fatality figure in the US dropped in the late 2000s, mostly because the rise in oil prices reduced the amount of driving.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Douglas A. Willinger</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14865</link>
		<dc:creator>Douglas A. Willinger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:35:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14865</guid>
		<description>Has not the total fatality figure declined from something in the low 40K to somewhere in the 30s?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Has not the total fatality figure declined from something in the low 40K to somewhere in the 30s?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14858</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 07:49:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14858</guid>
		<description>Jim, you&#039;re wrong and DE is right. Adams does in fact take the increase in VMT into account. Part of his research shows how the decades-long trend for a reduction in accident deaths per VMT has persisted regardless of safety laws. You wouldn&#039;t be able to tell when speed limit laws and seat belt laws were enacted just by staring at a death rate graph.

You would, however, be able to tell when higher-quality roads were built, by seeing an uptick in the death rate. The only time in US history when per-VMT death rates remained constant instead of falling was the years following the construction of the Interstates.

The only way to make sure fewer cars hit pedestrians is to ban either walking or driving. In the UK, pedestrians die in road accidents at one third the rate they did in 1920. The reason isn&#039;t that safety improved; it&#039;s that the increase in the number of cars has led people to walk less and play in the street less. As long as just a few people drive or just a few people walk, cars will hit pedestrians.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim, you&#8217;re wrong and DE is right. Adams does in fact take the increase in VMT into account. Part of his research shows how the decades-long trend for a reduction in accident deaths per VMT has persisted regardless of safety laws. You wouldn&#8217;t be able to tell when speed limit laws and seat belt laws were enacted just by staring at a death rate graph.</p>
<p>You would, however, be able to tell when higher-quality roads were built, by seeing an uptick in the death rate. The only time in US history when per-VMT death rates remained constant instead of falling was the years following the construction of the Interstates.</p>
<p>The only way to make sure fewer cars hit pedestrians is to ban either walking or driving. In the UK, pedestrians die in road accidents at one third the rate they did in 1920. The reason isn&#8217;t that safety improved; it&#8217;s that the increase in the number of cars has led people to walk less and play in the street less. As long as just a few people drive or just a few people walk, cars will hit pedestrians.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14849</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 19:02:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14849</guid>
		<description>Drunk Engineer-

John Adam&#039;s research, which does not in any way take into account steady increases in vehicle miles traveled, assumes something crucial- that people are, rational beings.  Which they are not.  

I promise, when I was 17 years old and doing stupid things in my car, I was not thinking that since I was safer becasue of the seat belt, I could go faster.  The car was going to go as fast as it could, regardless of the safety equipment it had.  The point though, is that due to mandatory seat belt laws, I had ingrained a habit of putting the seat belt on.  I was safer, becasue the seat belt was on, regardless of what stupid things I was doing.  People will do dangerous things regardless of the safety mechanisms that are there to protect them.  Vehicle safety mechanisms do save lives.  There is no way around that fact.

Reducing vehicle miles traveled, altering road design so that it is actually safer instead of faster, and enforcing existing traffic law (through things like automated enforcement) will all make things even safer for all of us, especially the most vulnerable, those who are not in cars at all.

 `</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Drunk Engineer-</p>
<p>John Adam&#8217;s research, which does not in any way take into account steady increases in vehicle miles traveled, assumes something crucial- that people are, rational beings.  Which they are not.  </p>
<p>I promise, when I was 17 years old and doing stupid things in my car, I was not thinking that since I was safer becasue of the seat belt, I could go faster.  The car was going to go as fast as it could, regardless of the safety equipment it had.  The point though, is that due to mandatory seat belt laws, I had ingrained a habit of putting the seat belt on.  I was safer, becasue the seat belt was on, regardless of what stupid things I was doing.  People will do dangerous things regardless of the safety mechanisms that are there to protect them.  Vehicle safety mechanisms do save lives.  There is no way around that fact.</p>
<p>Reducing vehicle miles traveled, altering road design so that it is actually safer instead of faster, and enforcing existing traffic law (through things like automated enforcement) will all make things even safer for all of us, especially the most vulnerable, those who are not in cars at all.</p>
<p> `</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Drunk Engineer</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14843</link>
		<dc:creator>Drunk Engineer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 03:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14843</guid>
		<description>&quot;Even as conventional traffic safety techniques have made driving less deadly.&quot;

Research by Dr. John Adams (&#039;Risk in a Hypermobile World&#039;) has thoroughly debunked this myth. Conventional &quot;safety&quot; technologies like ABS, air-bags, or even seat-belts have had no measurable impact on traffic fatalities. In fact, these technologies give a false sense of security, an encourage more aggressive driver behavior (i.e. &quot;Risk Compensation&quot;).

Road &quot;safety&quot; improvements due not reduce fatalities either. They do the opposite: increasing the volume and speed of cars on the roadway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Even as conventional traffic safety techniques have made driving less deadly.&#8221;</p>
<p>Research by Dr. John Adams (&#8216;Risk in a Hypermobile World&#8217;) has thoroughly debunked this myth. Conventional &#8220;safety&#8221; technologies like ABS, air-bags, or even seat-belts have had no measurable impact on traffic fatalities. In fact, these technologies give a false sense of security, an encourage more aggressive driver behavior (i.e. &#8220;Risk Compensation&#8221;).</p>
<p>Road &#8220;safety&#8221; improvements due not reduce fatalities either. They do the opposite: increasing the volume and speed of cars on the roadway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cap'n Transit</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14842</link>
		<dc:creator>Cap'n Transit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:16:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14842</guid>
		<description>Thanks!  I guess in a national, or worldwide, audience, not everyone knows what a kludge is!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks!  I guess in a national, or worldwide, audience, not everyone knows what a kludge is!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jamie</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14836</link>
		<dc:creator>jamie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:31:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14836</guid>
		<description>Feel free one and all to join me at the August 3rd SFMTA Board meeting as I plan to scold the SFMTA on their negligence in regards to improving pedestrian safety in downtown San Francisco during Public Comment. In fact, the SFMTA made pedestrian conditions worse recently in my Rincon Hill neighborhood by adding a second left turn lane on Folsom Street at Main Street. They get grants to improve pedestrian safety, but their actions decrease pedestrian safety - huh?!?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Feel free one and all to join me at the August 3rd SFMTA Board meeting as I plan to scold the SFMTA on their negligence in regards to improving pedestrian safety in downtown San Francisco during Public Comment. In fact, the SFMTA made pedestrian conditions worse recently in my Rincon Hill neighborhood by adding a second left turn lane on Folsom Street at Main Street. They get grants to improve pedestrian safety, but their actions decrease pedestrian safety &#8211; huh?!?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://streetsblog.net/2010/07/29/traffic-reduction-saves-lives-so-why-isnt-it-a-top-public-health-concern/comment-page-1/#comment-14835</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:22:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://streetsblog.net/?p=6605#comment-14835</guid>
		<description>It would be helpful to define VMT upfront, rather than finding its meaning towards the end of the article.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It would be helpful to define VMT upfront, rather than finding its meaning towards the end of the article.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

