<?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: Bigger is &#8230; Bigger</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mighkwilson.com/2009/04/bigger-is-bigger/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mighkwilson.com/2009/04/bigger-is-bigger/</link>
	<description>Expert Advice for Central Florida Bicycle Users</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:50:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rantwick</title>
		<link>http://mighkwilson.com/2009/04/bigger-is-bigger/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>Rantwick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 19:55:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mighkwilson.com/?p=368#comment-60</guid>
		<description>&quot;Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Finds Bicyclists, Pedestrians Have Virtually No Impact on Others&quot;

Love it... I know I&#039;ll be using that in conversation. Nice Post

Rantwick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Finds Bicyclists, Pedestrians Have Virtually No Impact on Others&#8221;</p>
<p>Love it&#8230; I know I&#8217;ll be using that in conversation. Nice Post</p>
<p>Rantwick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve A</title>
		<link>http://mighkwilson.com/2009/04/bigger-is-bigger/comment-page-1/#comment-59</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve A</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mighkwilson.com/?p=368#comment-59</guid>
		<description>BTW, in the same article, they trot out the old canard that helmets reduce head injuries by 85% - even the AUTHORS of that study concede that number&#039;s too high.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW, in the same article, they trot out the old canard that helmets reduce head injuries by 85% &#8211; even the AUTHORS of that study concede that number&#8217;s too high.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve A</title>
		<link>http://mighkwilson.com/2009/04/bigger-is-bigger/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve A</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mighkwilson.com/?p=368#comment-58</guid>
		<description>IIHS. I think their credibility is pretty low when they claim things like &quot;Ninety-five percent of bicyclists killed in 2006 reportedly weren&#039;t wearing helmets.&quot; (Reference website link above).

That falls BELOW the level of &quot;junk science.&quot; Even given the low level of details available in news stories, it&#039;s easy to see that a much larger fraction of dead cyclists WERE wearing helmets than 5%.

Go ahead, slam them - at least when they do slipshod stories...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IIHS. I think their credibility is pretty low when they claim things like &#8220;Ninety-five percent of bicyclists killed in 2006 reportedly weren&#8217;t wearing helmets.&#8221; (Reference website link above).</p>
<p>That falls BELOW the level of &#8220;junk science.&#8221; Even given the low level of details available in news stories, it&#8217;s easy to see that a much larger fraction of dead cyclists WERE wearing helmets than 5%.</p>
<p>Go ahead, slam them &#8211; at least when they do slipshod stories&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChipSeal</title>
		<link>http://mighkwilson.com/2009/04/bigger-is-bigger/comment-page-1/#comment-57</link>
		<dc:creator>ChipSeal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 17:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mighkwilson.com/?p=368#comment-57</guid>
		<description>The vulnerable users crowd propose overlaying an entire separate system of separated facilities to mitigate the hazard of motor vehicles. Practical? A reasonable solution? LOL!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The vulnerable users crowd propose overlaying an entire separate system of separated facilities to mitigate the hazard of motor vehicles. Practical? A reasonable solution? LOL!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

