Thread by @adamtranter

Today you might read that cycle lanes will have an impact on ambulance response times, which naturally sounds concerning. But the more you look into it, the more baseless it becomes; quotes from just one individual used by media with an agenda. (Thread)

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8…

A new phenomenon caused by hastily rushed through COVID measures, another thing to be concerned about in 2020?

Well, no, the same spokesperson @Richardwebber99 said the same thing in 2017, also to the Mail, about separated cycle lanes then. Concerns that never materialised.

When pushed, articles had to admit that there is no data that specific cycle lanes cause delays to ambulances.

None of the articles referenced that new cycle lanes were actually being used on 999 calls to cut past congestion caused by motor vehicles.

When it comes to the data you *can* get for the hypothesis, if you look at Waltham Forest, home to more cycle lanes and low traffic neighbourhoods than any other borough, response times have decreased from pre-LTNs and cycle lane times.

And, of course, you can find lots of first responders who support these measures. They just don’t make it into the same newspapers.

https://twitter.com/hackneycouncil/status/1326932349301485569?s=21

https://twitter.com/hackneycouncil/status/1326932349301485569

All this, before we even investigate the real issues of congestion which hinders movement on roads in towns and cities. Could it be the fact that 3.6 billion more miles are being driven on London’s roads, for example? The only way to get this down is to provide alternatives.

Fortunately, there are others in the health profession doing brilliant things for cycling safety and public health worth sharing. Such as a hospital’s charitable trust has proposed to directly fund 3 LTNs in South London. Amazing vision.

https://twitter.com/allpartycycling/status/1327642984498782208