2008 cycling fatality stats

[WeeE]

Been reading the grauniad today and looking at the OND statistics for England & Wales. The stereotype of racer-boys in their 20s and 30s coming a cropper from risky cycling just doesn't hold up at all.

Total cyclists killed in transport accidents = 118 (102 males, 16 females)

61 of the total - over half of cyclist fatalities - were aged 45 and over.
21 of the total - roughly one in six - were aged 70 or more.

Females - fatalities fairly evenly spread through age-groups.
Males: 17 fatalities aged 55-59; by far the highest number for any group.

How do folks think the fatalities stack up against the demographic of cyclists and cycle-journeys?

 

[WeeE]

Here's the pdf with the tables & numbers.

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_health/DR2008/DR_08.pdf

 

[I am Spartacus]

The stereotype of racer-boys in their 20s and 30s coming a cropper from risky cycling just doesn't hold up at all.

Is it a stereotype?
Personally I was unaware..
Most 'roadies' are competent cyclists on the road... road savvy.. less prone to putting themselves at risk at the side of lorries and busses etc etc.. maybe a few do have an attitude tho

A LOT of other cyclists ride as tho they are the reapers' next pay check bonus in contrast

 

[swee'pea99]

That's interesting. And out of line with my expectations. I'm amazed so many old duffers come a cropper, if only because I see so few of them on bikes to start with. In fact I really can't remember the last time I saw a 70+ rider.

One thing that would be interesting would be to compare the stats with those for London, where I think I'm right in saying that the numbers are way more weighted towards women, the vast majority of whom get crushed against railings by left-turning HGVs.

I was surprised, in the first instance, that the numbers were so high. Don't know why, but I had the impression far fewer cyclists got killed. Sobering stuff...

 

[WeeE]

Is it a stereotype?
Personally I was unaware..

Ah, you must never have read the Daily Mail orencountered the phrse "lycra lout", you lucky thing, you!

 

[snorri]

From personal observation in my locality, a cyclist under forty is a rare sight on the road. Take away the over fifties and there won't be many cyclists left. There are a few teens and twenties performing cycle tricks in pedestrian areas, but they clearly do little road mileage so are not exposed to risk of road crashes.

 

[WeeE]

[quote name='swee'pea99']I really can't remember the last time I saw a 70+ rider.

One thing that would be interesting would be to compare the stats with those for London, where I think I'm right in saying that the numbers are way more weighted towards women, the vast majority of whom get crushed against railings by left-turning HGVs...
[/QUOTE]

Apart from a Skyride day, I think I've seen one 70+ cyclist. Ok, so they don't bounce as well as someone younger, but it's shocking, innit?
It doesn't have regions, but the breakdown for women is
7 - collision with motors, vans & pickups
1 - "non collision" traffic accident (perhaps ice/pothole/ forced off?)
4 - collision with lorry or bus
4 - "other and unspecified"

The numbers for male unspecified is also unexpectedly high: 36.

So...given that the 2007 London stats said that accident causes are roughly 10% for right-turn-into-bike, 10% left-turn-into-bike and 10% open-car-door-without looking... it seems big lorries and buses probably aren't quite as much the culprit as we think, compared with car & van drivers.

 

[WeeE]

..in my locality, a cyclist under forty is a rare sight on the road.

Do you think maybe different regions do have different frequent-cyclist ages?

My general impression of Glasgow, in the city areas, is that men of 35-45 probably make about two-thirds of all the cycle journeys, and the rest are mostly older geezers and kids riding in circles on the wrong side of the road. Within the city, the areas where you see women on bikes at all are quite patchy. I can go weeks in my part of town without seeing another woman on a bike.

 

[summerdays]

I don't know how often I see 70+ (though it would be biased by the old bloke who lives around the corner from me), but certainly I would say I see a number of more elderly cyclists. They usually seem very fit, and sensible, though perhaps the thing about that group might be when they cycle - not constrained by jobs, and the distances that some seem to do. I certainly wouldn't look at them as an unusual sight on the road.

But it is embarassing being overtaken by someone twice your age

If I had to sum up the spectrum of cyclists I see - all ages, primary school going to school, teenagers on the pavement going to the skate park, then the commuters, and retired. In all age groups the men dominate the women in the ratios probably in a 5:1 or 10:1 basis I guess.

 

[Coco]

Within the city, the areas where you see women on bikes at all are quite patchy. I can go weeks in my part of town without seeing another woman on a bike.

I see quite a few women along the Clydeside. Although I normally come in after 9, I tend to see more on my occasional earlier journeys.

But it is embarassing being overtaken by someone twice your age

They've had twice as much practice

I think the most interesting aspect of this report is just how safe cycling is. With over 500,000 cycling journeys into London alone in 2007 (best figures I could find) to have only 118 fatalities in the whole of E&W is pretty impressive.

 

[semislickstick]

I think I remember reading that if it took a certain amount of time to die from a collision, say coma, it wasn't recorded as being a traffic death.
Do you think that changes anything?

 

[WeeE]

I think I remember reading that if it took a certain amount of time to die from a collision, say coma, it wasn't recorded as being a traffic death.
Do you think that changes anything?

I'm not certain I understand the presentation on this point, but from what I can gather, it appears to - in general - take a 28-day period as defining cause of death as traffic/transport fatality.

With the level of trauma care these days, I think that's pretty reasonable. Death after 28 days would probably mostly be down to clinical complications - infection, complications in planned surgery and so on. (Not too many cyclists languishing with burns, I wouldn't think.)

Given the small total number, then death after several weeks in a coma wouldn't it be pretty random from year to year, from none to a couple?

 

[knackeredknees]

From personal observation in my locality, a cyclist under forty is a rare sight on the road. Take away the over fifties and there won't be many cyclists left. There are a few teens and twenties performing cycle tricks in pedestrian areas, but they clearly do little road mileage so are not exposed to risk of road crashes.

My experiences are much the same as Snorri's, in my small town many people cycle, but the majority are over 45. The kid's seem to cycle and really enjoy it until they are old enough to drive.

 

[orienteer]

There is a very high proportion of elderly cyclists on the CTC section rides. The mid-week rides especially, because they are retired!

 

[WeeE]

Still seems odd that men in their late 50s die at about twice the rate of the next highest group, though. They're likely, surely, to have a fair amount of cycling experience compared with guys ten years younger. Or is there a watershed age somewhere in there where survivable accident becomes non-survivable?

But as swea'pea said, it's heartening to see how few the cycling fatalities actually are.
around 12,000 deaths in accidents

2676 deaths in transport accidents
of which;
118 were cyclists
605 were pedestrians (48 of them killed by trains - didn't expect that)
And the other two thousandtransport deaths were mostly people in cars.