I've no idea really what you're talking about, other than "that's what happens in stats", I'm guessing ... you expect wobbles, but (as with London last November) they even out in the end. Cycling is statistically still safe, even though times like this make one feel more vulnerable.Using a simple Poisson model with the assumption of no change in cycling levels, 13 deaths in January is a 1-in10 event.
If we're more realistic and assume a 10% per annum increase in cycling and look at 13 deaths in half of January, it's a 1-in-20 event - not that unusual.
(For the geeks, I reckon it's a Poisson with a mean of 8.5 per half month, and I'm assuming a constant mortality rate in each January.)
I've no idea really what you're talking about, other than "that's what happens in stats", I'm guessing
Haha, I wasn't knocking your knowledge, just acknowledging my ignorance of statistics! Whatever you said, it sounded impressive. Keep it up!You're right, it wasn't the clearest of posts - in my defence I knocked up a spreadsheet in my lunch-break and was posting from a phone.
It's a factor in there being more cyclists on the road. The single biggest influence on any kind of incident on the roads is the volume of participants, so it's not surprising that in a generally good January for weather there have been more cyclist deaths than usual (but, as I've pointed out, not hugely more), because there have been more cyclists out and about than in a usual January.Is that a factor?
Its difficult to know what has causes the upturn without knowing all the facts in detail. The weather has not been bad so I cant see how that comes into it. I see London and lorries feature prominantly, as usual.
I read something interesting about Hollands cycling turn round. It said they decided that the only way they could get improvements for cyclists, was to get more cyclists on the roads. It sounds a bit like lambs to the slaughter, but it worked.