yet it pales into insignificance against lots of other KSI figures.That's only the reported KSIs (reported to or attended by police). The majority of injuries aren't reported and, even when they are, the police often don't attend.
The real figures are far higher.
Not really. You're not comparing like with like.
That said, cycling is still one of the best and safest forms of transport.
Is that all collisions, or just collisions that result in injury?Drivel. We already know, from far more robust studies, that lack of lights is only a factor in 1-2% of collisions.
This appears to be based on a sample of only 100 and the word of the driver involved (and insured by Aviva).According to ES, 1/3 of the accidents at night involved cyclists without lights. No idea how many of those had the lack of lights as a contributory factor though.
All collisions reported to the police, so all where injury occurred.Is that all collisions, or just collisions that result in injury?
Is The 1-2% figure is calculated looking at collisions when it is dark or is it over all collisions, including ones in daylight where lights would not be a factor?
|G||Cyclist injured in Richmond Park||General Cycling Discussions||11|
|Female cyclist vs Trump||News & Current Affairs||1|
|Cyclist's offences||General Cycling Discussions||11|
|S||Another 'must have' gizmo for the dedicated cyclist - ?||Components, Accessories & Clothing||26|