Why are so many of the cyclists killed in London women?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

vickster

Legendary Member
The premiums take into account the first two criteria, apparently.
And rightly so, it reduces the risk of large, costly claims. It's the PI claims that really cost insurers, not fixing / replacing most cars (unless you total a Veryon I guess)
 
I have a fairly high level of confidence that the majority of the speculation in this thread is what is scientifically known as men wibbling about gender issues. I have a strong evidence base for this hypothesis: the OP. 32 men vs 35 women, a difference of 3. Over the time period quoted that's just random noise, not a significant difference. It's roughly 50-50 men and women. Why? Because women hold up half the sky. If there is any bias, it will be in the gender balance in the overall central london cycling population -and probably needing to be measured during commuting hours. Until we know that it's a clear cut case of "insufficient data Watson".
 

welsh dragon

Thanks but no thanks. I think I'll pass.
The differance between male and female deaths over say 12 months or 2 years would probably be the same. A differance of 3 or 4 in the short term does not a pattern or statistic make. I think they are trying to find stats just for the sake of it.
 

KneesUp

Guru
I have a fairly high level of confidence that the majority of the speculation in this thread is what is scientifically known as men wibbling about gender issues. I have a strong evidence base for this hypothesis: the OP. 32 men vs 35 women, a difference of 3. Over the time period quoted that's just random noise, not a significant difference. It's roughly 50-50 men and women. Why? Because women hold up half the sky. If there is any bias, it will be in the gender balance in the overall central london cycling population -and probably needing to be measured during commuting hours. Until we know that it's a clear cut case of "insufficient data Watson".
I was taking the data the OP presented:

Both figures are way too high, given that women account for about 20 per cent of cyclists on London's roads there should be far fewer women killed than men.

as being correct.

What does 'wibbling' mean? It seems to used when the subject being discussed seems to be one in which the data suggest that a statistical difference occurs along lines which we would prefer not to make a difference.

If the data are correct, and 52% of accidents occur amongst 20% of cyclists over a prolonged period (9 years is a decent length) then that needs investigating, or discussing, surely?
 

mjr

Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
If the data are correct, and 52% of accidents occur amongst 20% of cyclists over a prolonged period (9 years is a decent length) then that needs investigating, or discussing, surely?
Needs discussing? I'm not sure. Interesting to discuss? Possibly.

However, I suspect the femaleness of the 52% may be aliasing some other factor. I find it difficult to believe that it's being female itself that contributes, despite the lecherous stereotype of construction workers. Does anyone know existing research about this aspect of London traffic casualties?
 
If that were the case why is women's car insurance less (until that became illegal)?

Because due to exactly those computer games, and competitive etc games, men drive more aggressively and hence are likely to have more accidents?


I don't necessarily believe this by the way, I'm just playing devil's advocate for the original theory :smile:
 
  • Like
Reactions: _aD
Most of our fatalities in Denmark are caused by vehicles turning right, as we drive on the right. Most fatalities are women.

One of the theories in Denmark is that when guys realise the danger situation they are more able and willing to throw themselves off the bike or manhandle the bike up the kerb onto the pavement.

It is only a theory.

Has there been any awareness or educational campaigns that highlights this issue and mentions women specifically?
 
The base is too small for any blips to be significant, beyond being horrible tragedies.
 

S.Giles

Guest
Four of the five cyclists killed in London so far this year have been women.

Statistical blip?

Doesn't look like it, as far as I can research, 32 male cyclists have been killed in London in HGV crashes since 2006, as against 35 women cyclists killed in similar circumstances.

Both figures are way too high, given that women account for about 20 per cent of cyclists on London's roads there should be far fewer women killed than men.

Why is the female death rate so high?
So it's a 'statistical blip' that's been happening since 2006? I find that hard to believe.
 

deptfordmarmoset

Full time tea drinker
Location
Armonmy Way
I'm not a statistician but my gut feeling is that it's not a blip. However, what I do know with a bit more certainty is that a very male business - men in big, powerful vehicles, in all likelihood, getting workplace confirmation of macho ways - is killing a lot of victims. Perhaps they're simply not ready to be released on the general public yet.
 
A 2009 analysis by the Transport Research Laboratory (a private research organisation) found that during the 2005-2007 period, 82% of KSIs were male.

A similar pattern can be seen in data published by the DfT and Transport for London (TfL).

While it is true that male cyclists significantly outnumber female cyclists in the UK, males are still over-represented in the KSI statistics. Even when taking this imbalance into account, it is estimated that males are 1.4 times more likely to be killed and 1.7 times more likely to be seriously injured than females.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02february/pages/cycling-safety-a-special-report.aspx#women
 
Top Bottom