Judy, as you are surrounded by a ton of steel, you should show more consideration for those road users that do not feel the need for armour to be on our roads.

How would you feel if a lorry driver with a 44 ton load treated you with equal contempt, and drove you off the road because you have less armour than him?

It is nit wits like you that use their cars as weapons that I have to deal with every day.

Martin, Bristol,

I would be far more inclined to ride my bicycle if when on the roads, cars choose to leave more than a metre of space when trying to pass (which at least a third to a half don't, which is particularly scary when out of the 30 mph zones). What is even worse is when they start to swerve in before even clearing you. It's pathetic. I don't care if some drivers hate cyclists - it doesn't give them the excuse to try and kill them.

Natalie, Hemel Hempstead,

Judy from Liverpool you are not a nuisance you are a menace. Cyclist are "asking for it"?! Statements like that offer further proof that most people are too irresponsible to safely operate motor vehicles. The sooner we outlaw personal use of the internal combustion engine the better off the environment and society will be. Using a high speed metal box to project individual insecurities is no worse than using a loaded gun to coerce and theaten to get your way. Stop the insanity.

Joseph Thornton, Warrenton VA, USA

I am pushing 70 and have ridden bicycles, motorcycles and driven cars for over 50 of them. I had a number of accidents in my younger days but looking back I could have avoided them by being a bit more careful. I now cycle about 100 miles a week, I stop at all traffic lights, do not ride on footpaths, dress in bright clothes, at night light my bike up like a christmas tree. On my 1100cc motorcycle I dress in flourecent yellow and use headlights, and I have found that by treating every other road user as a threat/idiot and by being very very carefulI can avoid trouble.There is no doubt that most of the trouble on our roads is the 'me me' syndrome. That is 'Sod everyone else, I'm all right'. In other word bad manners.
I also firmly believe that any fool can drive fast and that most do.

Stuart Downie, London, England

Why do we need the Government to tell us that these nuisance factors on the road are dangerous? I have more metal around me in a car than these nit wits have, If I hit them and believe me a lot of them ask for it, they are going to be badly damaged. It's obvious. I would have thought that they're all at risk.

Judy , Liverpool, england

To Bill Q.:
I'm sorry that you think (mistakenly) that the risks of cycling outweigh the health benefits. Population studies shown that regular cyclists have an extended life expectancy. Using cycle paths on pavements significantly increases the risk of cyclists being hit- drivers don't expect there to be fast-moving vehicles on the pavement- junctions require many more checks by the cyclist to proceed safely.

Ben, Oxford,

As a motorcyclist and cyclist in London for the last 30 years, its time the Government truly recognised the massive advantage that 2 wheel transport can make to reduce traffic congestion. Whilst the current segregated cycle lanes have improved flows there is a lot more routing to be done which will increase safety. Motorcyclists have not faired so well, with local authorities adamant that motorbikes shall not use bus lanes. A simple solution that would immediately improve safety.

thomas, Earlsfield , London

Absolute non-story.
How many people will read this exagerated story today, decide that they're not letting their child/spouse cycle to work tomorrow and into the future - which in turn will lead to more congestion, more stress, more obesity, more costs etc. etc.
I guess it might just double the number of cyclists who will die over the same 20 year period.
Maybe you should publish this as a story - the negative effect of scare mongering and weak journalism...?

Nigel, Wrexham, Wales

Fun with statistics: many cite 'crazy speed motorcyclists' whenever motorcycle deaths are mentioned. Yet the truth is that the vast majority of those killed on motorcycles are actually on the slowest, lowest powered models. Hence if the knee jerk loons were to be taken at face value all low powered bikes should be banned and only 600cc and above allowed!

As to junctions, being a regular cyclist I can see what is happening. It is just not true that car drivers fail to see motorcyclists and cyclists at junctions. That is just what they say when they cause an accident. They in fact do: many car drivers then pull out regardless assuming the (motor)cyclist will stop for them. The (motor)cyclist has to, otherwise they will suffer injury. The only solution I can think of for this is a 'black box' video camera on bikes. This will show the truth of these 'sorry didn't see you mate' types of accidents.

threaded, Roskilde, Denmark

IMO the article is scaremongering hype at its worst. If cycling fatalities run at 13.05 per 100 million journeys and the average cyclist does 6 journeys per week, this converts to about 4 fatalities per 100,000 population annually. Published figures for Cornwall and Carmarthen convert to 2 per 100,000 and 26 per 100,000 cyclists annually respectively. So the figures that Dominic has given probably show a significant improvement in cyclist safety.

Also, the claim that cycling is "clearly more dangerous than walking" don't add up. Carry out the same calcs assuming 3 or 4 journeys per day converts to 4 or 5 fatalities per 100,000 - or about the same as cycling.

Shame on you, Dominic

Geoff, Torpoint, UK

A factor not mentioned by Brake because Volvo are one of their sponsors, is the carnage caused to vulnerable road users caused by vehicles using environmentally polluting daytime headlights which distract drivers from seeing less conspicuous road users.

UK pedestrians, cyclists and motor cyclists, the DfT and many MP's are unaminous in ther eopposition to daytime headlights. DaDRL UK have formally asked Ruth Kelly to ban them follwing disasterous trials in USA, Austria and Bulgaria.
Roy M , Pwllheli

Roy Milnes, Pwllheli, Wales

There are some mad motorcyclists out there - is not surprising that so many die.
A biker undertook me on the motorway in an incredibly stupid way last Friday - I was in the outside lane of a motorway moving past a HGV in the middle lane.... He then sped between the two of us.
There needs to be more police on the roads to deter against such erratic driving / biking.

Rob, Birmingham, West Midlands

It would be interesting to analyse cycling deaths by type of road and time of day. I suspect a significant proportion are on fast roads such as dual carriageways and late at night when darkness and drunk drivers increase the risk greatly. In over a year of daily cycle commuting in Birmingham I've had one minor accident, caused by a careless car driver. Cycling for routine daily journeys and leisure is very safe. It'll be even safer when more people take to their bikes: critical mass will make drivers more attentive and accepting of cyclists.

Chris Packham, Birmingham,

Interesting that the Times measures the death rate on the basis of number of journeys and omits to mention that on that measure, flying actually comes second. Why isn't Brake advocating lower speed for planes then? Perhaps because it's not speed that kills, but stopping too quickly (this sounds flippant, but is at the root of advanced driving techniques).

This can happen to cyclists and motorcyclists alike mostly because they are not easily visible: they are small, they don't stay in place very long, and drivers are not looking for them.

The first two points are dealt with by making oneself more conspicuous (hardly a panacea) and mostly riding defensively. The third point can and should be addressed by massively increasing the number of two-wheelers. Only then will they become so habitual that drivers will learn to look out for them. But that means councils such as Westminster have to start being reasonable with parking spaces and allowing bus lane use consistently.

Francis C, Hampshire,

The car lobby is slightly more powerful I think.

Pete Balchin, Solicitor , Bristol, UK

Having been knocked off my bicycle this morning by a car driver who failed to see me (or 'saw' me but did not recognise by presence in spite of being brightly lit and clothed), I can confirm that cycling has its dangers.

However, as a regular cycling commuter, I am fairly fit and not overweight, so the dangers of health problems typically brought on by obesity and a sedentary lifestyle are much reduced while my quality of life (and my cash-flow) are positively enhanced by cycling.

If we can get more cyclists onto the road, the roads will become safer for cyclists as car drivers become more used to dealing with them. Every cyclist not using a car is just a little less pollution and congestion on the road.

Boyd J, Glasgow,

Cycing is good for you, really, really good for you. Some people even take it up as for example it would put less stress on some joints than other sports. Other than the physical benefits I believe it has strong other benefits. On a bike you are able to absorb the views of where you travel at a better pace and feel more intune with the journey and have the wind and sun and noise that you don't get from whizzing past in a car. Some roads are very peaceful and so I believe it can be very relaxing too. A lot of people also think cycling can alter mood quite radically too.

Cycling is a dangerous activity to an extent but research has shown safety comes in numbers, the more cyclists there are in a particular area and people become more aware of them (in a good and bad way unfortunately).

Paul, Sheffield, UK

If the government is serious about improving the health of the nation it HAS to find a way to seriously curtail the car. If it wants to halt the atrocious toll of death and injury it has to curtail the car. If it wants to avoid an impending crisis with peak-oil it has to curtail the car. If it wants the UK to play its part in reducing CO2 emissions it has to curtail the car. If it is at all interested in reclaiming the urban environment for people - it must curtail the car. If it is interested in cutting obesity, heart-disease and respiratory illness it must curtail the car. If it wants to tackle the problems of social exclusion and traffic-induced isolation it must curtail the car. If it wants to have efficient, comprehensive, properly resourced public transport it must stop squandering resources on the car. If the government wants Britain to get a life back it HAS to curtail the car. Do I make myself clear?

David Bond, Wellington, New Zealand

Having grown up in Germany until I was 15, as a teenager I used to cycle everywhere - it was my main form of transport. I always felt really safe on my bike even in the busiest cities. Upon my return to the UK, I stopped cycling, motorists in the UK appear to have no concept of how to drive when there are cyclists on the road. The idea that just by painting a line on the road you can create a 'cycle lane' is ludicrous. I now cycle on off road cycle routes (mainly sustrans routes, canal towpaths, and bridal paths. Even pedestrians often pose a risk to cyclists, often when cycling in towns which have demarked cyclepaths next to pedestrian routes, pedestrians often 'wander' into the marked cycle lane and then shout abuse when you ring your bell to announce your presence behind them or fail to recognise what these lanes are for; saying ' oh is that what that symbol means'. To me it just seems to be another sympton of the inconsiderate nature of our whole society in Britain.

Nicola, Leeds,

Of course the cyclist is always in the right and never does anything wrong on the roads. Really? I don't think so. I hate cyclists. They think they don't have to stop at traffic lights, they think that road signs and the highway code don't apply to them, they think they can ride on pavements and then blame local authorities for not providing them with cycle paths, meanwhile pedestrians are being knocked out the way by arrogant, self-centred pseudo-environmentalist do-gooders - nothing a cyclist does can be put down to wanting to protect the environment or can be blamed on anyone else. Cyclists: take responsibility for your own actions. You know the risks, don't complain when you get hit by a car driver, because you were weaving in and out of traffic and can't easily be seen, and don't complain when I take a baseball bat to you after you knock me over on a pavement or don't stop at a pedestrian crossing...

Cyclist Hater, London,

A rise in motorcyclists being killed and injured at junctions? Then they should stop motorcycles (and other road users) driving with headlights on in daylight.The use of headlights is a threat to road safety - not an advantage. Amongst several problems they can cause, I'm sure that the misunderstanding of 'unintentional' headlight flash, caused by the movement in the suspension of a motorcycle while breaking or going over a bump, is a cause of this rise in problems at junctions.

At night we should be encouraging all drivers in well lit streets to drive on sidelights only so that we can see the less brightly lit road users more easily.

Ian Kew, Taunton, Somerset

I ride a motorcycle and a bicycle. While I agree that a lot of the causation is automobile drivers (cagers) my experience with regard to the relative safety of a motorcycle and bicycle is quite contrary to this article. Cars give my motorcycle a lot more respect than my bicycle. On my bicycle I am harrassed by thoughtless cagers who cut me off or pass dangeously close almost every time I ride. Obviously, bicycles cannot keep up with faster moving traffic, as motorcycles can, and, unfortunately, some motorists seem extremely impatient to wait behind a slower moving bicycle for a safe passing location.

Ben K, New City, USA, NY

We should remember that other countries have far lower deaths for cyclists and pedestrians than the UK. The primary differences are no-fault liability for damage to vulnerable road users and a civilised speed limit of 30 kph (18.5 mph) in residential and urban areas. Surely the most dangerous factor when cycling or walking is not whether one is on a bike or on foot, but whether individually and collectively motorists are acting responsibly on the roads in both their speed and interaction with vulnerable road users.

We should not be spreading the word that cycling, walking or motorbiking are unsafe, but concentrating on the fact that it is driving a motor vehicle which is dangerous when done without due respect for more vulnerable road users.

Rod King, Warrington, Cheshire

Why not publish the real story for a change?

Show us how many people are killed BY each mode of transport.

It's time to abandon the failed automobile experiment - join the struggle against the real terror. I'm not being alarmist here. Are you afraid to ride on the roads? The numbers of dead and and maimed speak for themselves, as the people they represent cannot.

Robbie Price, Hamilton, New Zealand

I have been cycling for 50 years and do so now almost every day. The nearest I have got to an accident was when I was walking! I was on a narrow country lane and was clipped with a wing mirror by a car doing at least 40mph. It was almost certainly done deliberately as there was no one else on the road for half a mile either side. Probably a game these stupid motorists play!

Peter Day, Doncaster, UK/ Yorkshire

I do two bicycle journeys a day, 5 days a week. At that rate I would need to cycle for 15,000 years for a fatal accident. Meanwhile the medical evidence is that I will live an average of 2.5yrs longer from the health benefits of my regular cycling which sounds like a pretty good bet compared to the one in 15,000 years risk of being killed. But hey, stuff like that doesn't sell newspapers in the same way a good blown out of proportion scare story does.

Tony, Cambridge, UK

The 9th paragraph, the one where bikes look alarmingly dangerous, has a missing word. It may be hours or journeys.

Yes, that's right, folks, on average, you can expect to cycle for a thirteenth of 100 million, i.e about 7.6 million trips, or maybe hours, before getting killed. I cycle a lot, but even for me that's about 10,000 years. And other figures show that experienced cyclists have a much lower risk of dying than inexperienced ones, which could lower the odds by a factor of 5.

I'll take the 1 in 200 (or less) chance of dying prematurely, since I have a 199 in 200 chance of living a few years longer because cycling makes me healthier.

Colin McKenzie, London,

Of course the "new figures" look worse. They are "per journey" rather than "per kilometre". Thing is, motorcycle journeys are invariably longer than cycle journeys, which are in turn longer than walking journeys. You are therefore not comparing like with like, which is why the DfT chooses quite correctly to measure exposure per kilometre rather than per journey. This gives them more honesty; perhaps you would like to try this too?

Stu, london,

One thousand times as many people die from heart attacks as get killed in bicycle accidents, and cycling protects against heart attacks. If you cycle you have a very, very small chance of dying sooner and a very, very big chance of living a lot longer, and being fitter and healthier for all of your long life.
Insurance companies, who deal in real figures and hard cash, know this and cyclists can expect to get better deals on life insurance.

Don Shipp, London, England

Seperate cycle-lanes do not protect cyclists at junctions which is where most accidents happen. Cycle-lanes do not help cyclists at all and do not make the road safer for anyone.

Don Shipp, London, England

The continued assertion that what we need for cyclists is separate lanes is just silly - where are those separate lanes going to go? We're a densely populated country with a road network that's already eating up our green spaces. And our cities are largely based on old, narrow street layouts that aren't going to go away.

Simply put - drivers need to show more consideration to cyclists. Particularly drivers of lorries, that disproportionately are responsible for cyclist fatalities. Slow down, pass with lots of room, indicate clearly, don't jump red lights, don't accelerate to pass, then sharply turn in front of cyclists etc.

Simon M, London,

I'm sorry but what exactly has riding a motorcycle to do with The Times or BRAKE.

One needs headlines to sell papers the other a alleged road safety group, ask how many qualified road safety professionals they employ, who needs to create drama to promote its self.

Riding a motorcycle or scooter is a perfectly legitimate form of travel and I can’t say I’ve noticed anyone forcing people on to this mode.

What’s new here, most road safety professionals are aware of these stats thus the drive to make the roads safer for both cyclists and motorcyclists.

A good starting point would be another review of penalties relating to driving offences particularly for dangerous and death by. BRAKE have let the Government off the hook on this despite the recent increase in sentencing levels.

Richard Olliffe, Norwich, UK

Is this a surprise??? Drivers, motorcyclists and cyclists need to be taught how to drive safely and separate lanes need to be made for cyclists (not just a painted bicycle on the road! -It has to be at a separate level where cars can't touch the cyclists!)

MP, London,

Where is the risk assessment from government to offer this healthy cycling advice?

A couple of months ago I helped organise a fit kids club in a local leisure centre, which required a four page risk assessment. All the kids were doing were playing on interactive gym equipment and enjoying themselves. If the same risk assessment approach would be carried out for cycling, would this not force government to act to reduce the risks? A lot more expensive than throwing words at the problem of physical inactivity, I suggest.

Commitment is required at all levels to help outdoor play and physical activity to be safer. Just yesterday I took my children out to the local park, to play basketball, only to come home with blood pouring from hands due to shards of broken glass on the court being picked up by the basketball. Actions are needed if government is offering more than pre-election words.

Richard Coshott, Southampton, Hampshire

I used to cycle evenings and weekends for health beneifits.Recently on a Saturday afternoon I fell from my mountain bike breaking my elbow. The elbow was cast and braced for 3 months , then externally fixated. I still cannot straighten or twist my arm properly nearly 4 months later. All from a 15mph crash on a gravel pathway.

Steve C, northants, uk

Southwark in London is in my opinion one of the best organised boroughs, with many cycling paths. Still more can be done, and joining the campains for better cycling in London can make a difference.

Chiara Rapisarda, London,

Sad that motorcycle deaths have risen by a third in the last decade, but so has the use of motorcycles, notably by "born again bikers" (babes). Many factors influence the situation, not least of which is the pre-occupation of Brake and law enforcement agencies to focus on speed via camera technology. Returning to pro-active traffic policing would have a profound effect upon the "racer" mentality that now prevails.
When did you last here of anyone being prosecuted for a traffic offence other than speeding unless there had been serious injury, or worse ? Our highways are tarnished by nutters of all ages operating all forms of vehicles.
Traffic calming, cameras, unenforced laws, notably realting to mobile phone use whilst driving, are not "fit for purpose". Fines and points on licences are not resolving the carnage on our roads.
For the record, I'm a retired teacher and been motorcycling continuously since 1963.

John Procter, Huddersfield, England

I have recently stopped riding motorcycles, after 23 years, as it is now just too dangerous. I would have a near miss on average of once a week. Car drivers not using their mirrors, talking on mobile phones or just a general lack of anticipation were the main causes. The "oh it has only just turned red i'll run it" was another popular one.
A possible solution to the problem is to make cycling/motorcycling for a day on major roads part of the driving test. If you do not ever ride on todays busy roads you just do not realise how vunerable a cyclist is.

Gary dawe, Denmead, UK

I used to cycle regularly at weekends but decided that despite the health benefits it offered, the death or serious injury benefits were not so great. I confined my activities to cycle trail riding, but I had to drive the bike to the beginning of the trails! When I consider just how badly cyclists are treated in this country, few cycle paths, laughable 'set asides' on main carriageways which, more often than not are blocked by parked cars, no real segration between motorised vehicles and bikes, cyclists penalised for using pavements, even when these are wide enough to encompass a cycle path, it seems to me that the powers that be are looking to provide a source of healthy organs rather than healthy individuals.

Bill Q, Derby,