WADA set to extend doping bans from 2 years to 4 years from 2015

@Mr Anderson One of the comments was from a person who describes himseld as a "family man and business owner", who fought off two attackers trying to rob him and is now facing charges of GBH. I am reminded of "The Little Onion"'s brush with the law and Dave Clifford's prosecution for reporting a phone driver.

@swagman But what if they are sleeping bags or stoves that are not specifically designed for cycling, just might be useful for some cyclists, that would definitely be crossing a line to a new low, wouldn't it?

Don't see what's so baffling - fashion's always moved in cycles.

An UTTERLY DEPRESSING day! For over 4 years I have been seriously considering giving up cycling. I have escaped 1 bikejacking attempt, and managed to avoid 2 others (1 in Orpington where 2 other cyclists were robbed in June 2022 reported by Road.cc). I have survived several attempts to deliberately push me off from passing motorists. Then there are the lucky escapes from near collisions with distracted drivers. I have watched many videos from bikepackers, mainly Josh Parsons, and I decided I needed to return to off-road cycling if I am to continue enjoying cycling, free from those threats. This morning, YT suggested this video: https://youtu.be/a9PDAOYVYm0?si=G2ZoPkLq9jT2tbXQ Then I read the many, many comments. Not only that, the locations of these incidents. For some while I have been considering where I can move to in the UK to find better roads to cycle on, but I am beginning to believe the blight I experience in SE London, Kent and Surrey, are widespread. Over the last few years I have been a subscriber to road.cc. This is because this appears to be the only publication in the UK that is willing to highlight the bad situations many of us cyclists face regularly. But in recent months I am now under the impression even this forum is shying away from reporting the bad stuff. So I have ended my subscription. I am now left yet again pondering my future cycling choices!!

@Rendel Harris Yes - it is. And you're personally responsible for it.

@swagman So it's "crossing the line" and "a new low" to review a product that doesn't fit with the way that you like to do your cycle holidays? Just a tiny bit solipsistic, don't you think? It's a tent, it fits on a car, some people take their cycling holidays using their cars and camping, therefore it may be of interest to those cyclists. It's not what you're looking for, that's fine, for other readers it might be just the ticket.

@Pub bike Indeed. Too many drivers don't give a shit about pedestrians and cyclists no matter what car they are in. Why would they care if they are in an SUV?

Isn't this the whole problem in a nutshell? Takes ages to deliver half a scheme, which is then poor at the intended purpose, thus promoting even the middle ground to conclude that few want to cycle and it's a waste of money / capacity? The status quo is that way because it's self-reinforcing (now... with large injecting of taxpayer money...) Cars offer convenience. But they also reduce any desire to walk / cycle in closer proximity to them. Because they're space-inefficient they then take over spaces. And for decades we've framed "where should we site x" in terms of "can people drive there from y", building in motor dependency. Then: because all the money and effort goes into motor vehicle works, the councils don't have expertise or large budgets to hand for active travel - especially not cycling. Because of the space inefficiency and incentive to drive, small losses in motoring capacity can easily lead to substantial delays and (short term) congestion. And thus promote an outsize reaction from drivers. ("No alternatives" - because we've gone all-in on motoring). And businesses everywhere consistently overestimate the importance of customers being able to *drive* to their business.

Sorry, but Glasgow City Council keep quoting Victoria Road, and the higher than average share of traffic thats on bikes. The majority of the road is blocked to cars, with only buses and taxi's permitted beyond the southern end, so cars generally avoid going via this route. It's meaningless. Try looking at the parallel roads to see where the cars are. I am a keen cyclist and all for safer riding, but how Glasgow has gone about this - and totally mismanaged its delivery with schemes that should take months taking years, resulting in chaos and a city that looks like a council dump - has resulted in unprecedented animosity toward cyclists. Glasgow isnt a model to shout about.

A climate scientist taken out by a motorist is symbolic of the primary societal problem causing driver anger toward cyclists. It’s irrational, but climate emergency fear and denial is resulting in angrier motorists taking it out on those they consciously or subconsciously perceive to be the enemy. Cyclists are symbolic of the inevitable change ahead, whereby active transport is the best solution for the rampant energy consumption problem for humanity in the post Industrial Age. (AI data centres and water consumption will be next). Conversely protecting cyclists is symbolic of a self aware society preparing for a better world without fossil fuels. It’s obvious, so why isn’t it happening? RIP Francois Primeau and thank you.