Cycling under the influence
I would generally never set out to cycle in a state other than stone sober. But the other night one drink turned into several and suddenly I was following my friends back to theirs for ‘one for the road’.
It’s a long way from Piccadilly to Clapham, yet we sailed across Green Park, round Buckingham Palace over Chelsea Bridge and through the mean streets of south London in half the time, fuelled by the giddy power of alcohol.
Strangely, there’s actually no legal limit for cyclists. There’s a charge for being found ‘drunk in charge of a pedal cycle, carriage or animal’(drunken dog walkers tread with care) but you have to be obviously incapacitated. Theoretically, you can’t even be arrested on the spot for this as it’s a summons-only charge but, as the police tend to treat drunks as emergency health cases these days, you and your bike run the risk of being bundled into the back of an ambulance and ferried off to the nearest A&E.
More sobering thoughts come from studies at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, US, which found that a single drink increases cyclists’ risk of death or serious injury by five times. And, because riding a bicycle requires greater coordination than driving a car, the danger rises dramatically with alcohol intake. Having five drinks before riding your bike increases the risk a whopping 20 times. Strangely they don’t mention the increased invincibility and warm glow.
Route rating
Miles 4.6 (Piccadilly to Clapham).
Average cycle time A fleeting 20 mins.
Calories burned 170.
White wine consumed 4 glasses.
Feature continues
|
|
The best of London in your inbox
Up to the minute picks of the best things to do in London, delivered to your desktop.
|
|
6 comments
'Why adhere to a law that endangers me?' (re illegal pavement cycling) The same stupid selfish comment could possibly be made about knife-carrying. Get off the pavement, you selfish git - even if people say nothing to you don't take it as tacit acceptance, it's probably because they're frightened. Read letters in the local press and reports of local community and police meetings - it's you and others like you who are making the pavements in London a no-go area for old, disabled and vulnerable people. What a stupid and irresponsible article for Time Out to endorse - I will not be purchasing it again.
I was with a cyclist who was catapulted off her bike in an accident last week. She landed on her head and shoulder. Result: Helmet severely dented, concussion, face had a nasty case of road rash, broken collar bone. Without a helmet I think it could have been much worse.
Re: amazing statistics - the trouble with accident statistics is it is impossible to measure all the accidents that don't happen...
Did the writer really mean;
'Anarchic behaviour under the guise of protest is selfish and self-defeating.'
Or perhaps;
Selfish behaviour under the guise of protest is self-defeating.
Or maybe;
Selfish behaviour under the guise of anarchy is self-defeating.
Clean up on the stereotypes mate.
I ride through that road system most days and, as I've found generally with cycling in London at all times of day and night, if you ride with your wits about you, it isn't a problem. A cycle lane past Central St. Martin's would be safer and there's loads of pavement but in the mean time the author should grow a pair and use the road.
LB 's Southwark and Lewisham provide free Adult Cycle Training for all those who live, work or study in the borough. Available via www.cyclinginstructor.com. Online Booking!
Statistics show that amazingly cyclists who wear helmets have more accidents than cyclists who don't. This is because, the study says, drivers of cars and other vehicles tend to take it "slightly easy" when they see a cyclist wearing a helmet as opposed to when a cyclist is unprotected. A model Catch-22 situation innit?