Commuting - where can I find statistics on bicycle-related deaths?

Hey there.,
I just found this forum a couple of days ago. Anyway, I have been scorchin to work for the past 3 weeks, simply because there is no car for me to drive right now. I sold my last one cause it was suckkin down too much gas., the insurance was too high, and I just couldn't afford it anymore. I have one teenage driver on the insurance this year, and its just outrageous. I have found riding to work to be pretty fun, really., except for the cars. It only takes me 20 minutes to get to work.

So heres the deal. I have heard that about 40,000 people die annually from car accidents. But are there any reliable statistics on bicycle deaths in this country? I would be curious to know how they compare., in terms of percentages.


well actually, now that I think about it, there's probably no way to know what the total number of bicycle commuters there are in this country., in order to get a percentage. Anyway, it was just a curious thought I had.

A lot less.
From: http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bc/perspective.htm and NTSB data.

"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration uses a fatality rate per million population to state that 2.51 cyclists were killed per one million population in 2000 - the same figure for pedestrians would be 17.3 people per million and for motor vehicle fatalities the figure is closer to 127 people per million."

The basic perception is that:
CAR: you're protected by a chunk of metal.
BIKE: you're protecting a chunk of metal.
That's why a lot of people think biking's a lot more dangerous than riding.

Wear something highly visible, get good front and rear lights at night, a mirror and helmet and you'll be fine. You're actually INCREASING your life span by getting some exercise instead of sitting in the car accumulating health problems due to inactivity.

The difficulty in comparing fatality rates for different activities is using an appropriate statistic. In this case, do you look at fatalities per capita, fatalities per driver/rider, fatalities per mile, or fatalities per hour?

Do you use statistics that apply only to your own demographic? For example, a high percentage of fatalities are children. Since you are an adult, you should be able to eliminate these from the data. If you wear a helmet, should you factor the statistics accordingly?

It's enough to make one give up and go for a ride!

A lot less.
From: http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bc/perspective.htm and NTSB data.

"The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration uses a fatality rate per million population to state that 2.51 cyclists were killed per one million population in 2000 - the same figure for pedestrians would be 17.3 people per million and for motor vehicle fatalities the figure is closer to 127 people per million."

The basic perception is that:
CAR: you're protected by a chunk of metal.
BIKE: you're protecting a chunk of metal.
That's why a lot of people think biking's a lot more dangerous than riding.

Wear something highly visible, get good front and rear lights at night, a mirror and helmet and you'll be fine. You're actually INCREASING your life span by getting some exercise instead of sitting in the car accumulating health problems due to inactivity.


good website.

the only thing that really bugs me is the (hopefully unlikely) chance that someone is going to fall asleep while driving, and veer off to the side far enough to hit me.

I know I am a good enough cyclist to avoid most of the other cycling situations that might kill me.

If you had a mirror, it might give you about half a second's worth of warning, which is enough to unclip and stand up high so u go over the car instead of under it. Then again, if you're gonna worry about a driver falling asleep and creaming you, you might as well worry about a driver cutting the median and reaming you at 100mph from the front, getting killed on the sidewalk, in your living room, at work, etc. Drunk drivers are infinitely more dangerous.

Just be alert and enjoy the ride :)

Actually, there are stats on bicycling commuting - there has been a question on the census form since at least 1990 that asks how you commute to work. I've seen the local results for Portland sorted and broken out by zip code (although some of the sorting may have been done by city transportation staff using the raw census data). Sorry I don't have a link to the census web site, but it shouldn't be too hard to find.

I seem to remember that not too many years ago the League of American Bicyclists LAB did an accident survey among members and later published the results. I think that there results would be more helpful for people who frequent sites like these as opposed to the statistics for the general public. Case in point: I hope that nobody here ever rides against the flow of traffic, because I understand that's a major predictor of accidents and even when it's people riding down sidewalks that cross roadways. I believe that another major factor is riding after dark without lights, especially when there are drunken drivers on the road.

What about riding drunk after dark with lights in the direction of traffic? ;)

So heres the deal. I have heard that about 40,000 people die annually from car accidents. But are there any reliable statistics on bicycle deaths in this country? I would be curious to know how they compare., in terms of percentages.

There are lots of stats that can be interpreted many different ways and always arguments for and against any particular stat and the way it was made. But, there does seem to be one common denomiator in all these accidents resulting in death (and I like death stats instead of injury stats because the injury of death is a certain state no one can argue about, where an "injury" can be any little thing), it's not what you do, but how you do it. If you were to drive your car the wrong way up a one way street and hit another car, most would say the problem would be what you did, not that you were in a car, but if you did the same thing on a bicycle, most people would say the problem was that you were on a bike. There's discrimination in thinking towards bikes because so few ride them.

The best way to prevent any accident is to ride safely and look out for others using the road that don't. The vast majority of accidents in cycling are caused by basic rules of the road being ignored.

The issue posted in the link on putting crashes into perspective,


The public health community is now recognizing that lack of physical activity, and a decline in bicycling and walking in particular, is a major contributor to the more than 300,000 premature deaths caused by heart attacks and strokes - this number dwarfs the 40,000 annual deaths due to motor vehicle crashes and the relatively small 728 bicyclist deaths.
is an overlooked and, huge point.

If you ride in a safe manner, you not only run no greater risk than a pedestrian or driver does, you are preventing your health from declining.

That is the greater risk here, not accidents.

I think the chance of getting killed while driving a car in terms of hrs driving are about 3 times that for riding a bike. Considering that the average speed for cars is about 3 times that of a bicycle, the rates for distance travelled are about the same. I dont ride a bike because it is safer, but because I enjoy it more.

I personally have tried hunting around for stats a lot too: the ones I've seen include:

Ken Kifer's "Is Cycling Dangerous" Article (http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/health/risks.htm)[kenkifer.com] - However I am doubtful about the stats on bicycle riding
Ottawa's Citizens for Safe Cycling (http://www.cfsc.ottawa.on.ca/safety/RelativeSafety.html)[cfsc.ottawa.on.ca] - no explanation or clear citation of stats tho...

Hmm can't seem to find anymore. I've seen more before though... But some points to keep in mind:

1. The # of cycling deaths is reliable and accurate
2. A bunch of other stats seem very sketchy in their accuracy
-# of people who cycle (commute specifically)
-distance travelled by the people who cycle
-duration of time spent cycling
-percentage of year spent cycling (for 4 season places)

And virtually all useful stats, like #deaths per million miles, or #deaths per million hours, involve using sketchy figures above. But if one of the figures is unreliable, well then blah.

Other stats that CYCLISTS would be very interested in:

-% of deaths that was the cyclist's fault
-setting of the accident (driving on 3 lane big city highway very diff from residential streets in a smaller city)

But probably the best treatment is from Ken Kifer's page, with a breakdown of the causes of the accident resulting in death:


5.1% The bicyclist exited a driveway in front of an on-coming vehicle.
4.3% The bicyclist turned left in front of a passing vehicle.
3.9% The motorist was overtaking the bicyclist, cause of the accident unclear.
2.7% The bicyclist was struck while traveling on the wrong (left) side of the road.
1.4% The bicyclist, on the wrong side, turned right in front of a vehicle.
1.3% The motorist was overtaking the bicyclist and failed to see him.
1.2% The bicyclist lost control and swerved into the path of the vehicle.
.8% The bicyclist made a normal left turn but ignored on-coming traffic.
.6% The motorist lost control of the car and struck the bicyclist.
.5% The motorist struck a play vehicle (big wheel, bike with training wheels).


Also, from this article (http://www.bicyclinglife.com/PracticalCycling/VCIntro.htm)[bicyclinglife.com] with these interesting stats (I believe from John Forester's "Effective Cycling")


-- About 85% of all bicycle crashes requiring medical treatment didn't involve a moving car at all; the bicyclist simply slid, fell, or ran into something. That?s why helmets and gloves are important.

-- In the 15% that were car/bike crashes, over 9 out of 10 were avoidable; they happened with crossing and turning traffic at driveways, intersections, and in bikelanes.

-- Over 50% of adult cycling deaths were avoidable; they involved bicycling at night without lights.


But yeh I would love more accurate statistics on injuries/death, and to compare to driving (however, driving also suffers from inaccurate statistics too :( )

bottom line -> ride safely,
-xan-

rise above dark one.
-stats are for analysis, not cycling\ living.. "life is uncertain, death is not." (Death Angel\ Hispanic heavy metal mid 90's)

1 in a million-? 2 per thousand? how many people have aids?\ killed by airplanes falling to earth...

cyclists prob are not really into bod count.

I'd rather be cycling....than worrying.
peace.j

A quote by Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain goes "There are lies, damn lies and statistics". I agree with Jeff Williams, we have to die of something...Just do everything in your power to ride safely and then enjoy riding and it's benefits.

A quote by Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain goes "There are lies, damn lies and statistics".

You could read, “Damned Lies and Statistics - Untangling numbers from media, politicians and activists” by Joel Best to help understand spin on stats.

some other stats would be found on my Province's insurance site ICBC.com, under library, research, traffic collisions.
Stats Can shows BC has a 2% cycling commuting rate while according to ICBC (2001 traffic collision stats), cyclists are injured at 0.9% of all traffic injuries.

There's Estimated deaths in Canada 1996
Source: Health Canada
Cycling 70
Car accidents 2,900
Suicides 3,900
Tobacco 45,000

Cause of death 1991 fatalities per 100,000 participants
Source: health canada
Motor vehicle (4 wheel) use 10.51
Falls (all) 7.29
Homicide 2.21
Pedestrian 2.12
Swimming 1.8
Cycling 1

# of fatalities per 1,000,000 exposure hrs. by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc.
FARS is the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, a database of transportation crashes maintained by a branch of the US Federal government.

Skydiving 128.71
General Flying 15.58
On-road Motorcycling 8.80
Scuba Diving 1.98
Living (all causea of death) 1.53
Swimming 1.07
Snowmobiling .88
Passenger cars .47
Waterskiing .28
Bicycling .26

There is a 1-in-40,000 chance we will be killed as a pedestrian this year. Riding a bicycle is less risky, where we run about a 1-in-130,000 chance of being killed...Larry Laudan, The Book of Risks

From the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis
website
(http://www.hcra.harvard.edu/# )

Risk of death for:
Heart disease = 1 in 397.
Motor vehicle accident = 1 in 6745.
Bicycle acident = 1 in 376,165.

There's Estimated deaths in Canada 1996
Source: Health Canada
Cycling 70
Car accidents 2,900
Suicides 3,900
Tobacco 45,000

See these stats are not reassuring at all. Theres only 41 times as many deaths by car accidents than by cycling. And I'm fairly certain there are 41 times as many cars commuting then bikes...



Cause of death 1991 fatalities per 100,000 participants
Source: health canada
Motor vehicle (4 wheel) use 10.51
Falls (all) 7.29
Homicide 2.21
Pedestrian 2.12
Swimming 1.8
Cycling 1


See now the problem I have here, is I'm not certain that all 100,000 participants are indeed cyclists. Everyone can die from falls, pedestrian walking, homicide, and motor use (all of us have sat in a motor vehicle at one time or another). But not everyone can die as a cyclist! (because such a small percentage of people cycle). Further more, not sure how they surveyed dead people... lmao

In regards to others comments that we shouldn't believe statistics.. hmm lemme try playing devil advocate then:
1. Skydiving apparently has one of the worst deaths per million hours of exposure, in an ideal situation, shouldn't the skydiver take this into consideration before he or she continues skydiving, invests in expensive skydiving gear, buys the latest Carbon Fiber frame parachute. hehe

2. Hmm but we seem to use stats on arguing for why cycling is good. We'll say, well long term cyclists are likely to live 10 years longer than those who don't, etc stats on money saved, etc, etc. We seem to use stats for biking advocay/promotion.

3. lol don't know about you guys, but I find life fairly precious so I'd like to know if cycling related deaths are really that prevalent. I mean, if a car nudges another car, the chance of death is minimal. But if a car nudges a cyclist, hmm...

Just some thoughts,
-xan-

Ah yes, but it is easy to cheat the statistics. I am also a light plane pilot and I know that training and preparation for emergencies help me to be safer that the guy that treats flying casually. Knowing where risk lies helps to minimize it. I don't think you have to be paranoid, but certain behaviors certainly put death in your favor. For example drunk drivers are likely responsible for a large share of traffic fatalities.

Reading the above stats which included swimming got me wondering what constitutes a swimmer - i.e. a guy who just fell out of a boat without a life jacket?

Reading the above stats which included swimming got me wondering what constitutes a swimmer - i.e. a guy who just fell out of a boat without a life jacket?


Yup see some statistics are naive (by definition) in that they don't take certain factors into consideration at all.

One of the quoted ones, Harvard Center for Risk Analysis (http://www.hcra.harvard.edu/#)[harvard.edu] says the odds of dying from a bicycle accident is 1 in 376,165. If you look closely though, the fine print at the bottom says:

U.S. pop. divided by number of annual deaths for 2000... Source: CDC

So realistically, we need to estimate how many people are cycling commuters. If you think its 1 in 100, then really we should be thinking 1 in 3,165 (twice as high as motor vehicles). Unfortunately, we seem to be lacking information in how many people commute by bike daily (obviously distance and duration would be factors as well)

-xan-

I mean, if a car nudges another car, the chance of death is minimal. But if a car nudges a cyclist, hmm...


It's actually happened to me five times. I broke a spoke on one occasion. Other than that...

I find life fairly precious so I'd like to know if cycling related deaths are really that prevalent.

On the page listed on the original post, it said, "Bicycle fatalities represent just under two percent of all traffic fatalities, and yet bicycle trips account for less than one percent of all trips in the United States." yet here in BC it's the opposite, 2% of traffic with 1% of fatalities.

Every stat has been logged under a specific situation that may or may not apply to your situation.

One thing that seems more sure is the benefit of the exercise you get while riding and the health problems that occur if you don't get out and exercise. We all lead lives that cannot be risk free. We trade one risk for another every day. I'd say the benefit of getting your exercise outweighs the risks of riding in traffic on a bike, provided you ride in a safe manner.



I know that training and preparation for emergencies help me to be safer that the guy that treats flying casually. Knowing where risk lies helps to minimize it. I don't think you have to be paranoid, but certain behaviors certainly put death in your favor.

Like I said, it's not what you do, but how you do it.
:)

Like I said, it's not what you do, but how you do it.
:)

Agreed, the stats apply to populations--with a lot of individual variations for a variety of reasons that may not apply you. I know of two people who have committed suicide with a car--I'll bet they just fall into the normal vehicle traffic death statistics. Do you suppose someone has committed suicide with a bike?

Hey, closetbiker is that you playing the Rickenbacker in you avitar?

Do you suppose someone has committed suicide with a bike?

I would imagine so. I see plenty of kids and teenagers attempting it everyday. While I'm on the subject, does anyone know just how many of those quoted "bicycle deaths" were actually children?

Hey, closetbiker is that you playing the Rickenbacker in you avitar?

You bet! From '72 to '83 I was a legend (in my own mind)!

I love it. A vintage Rickenbacker to go with a vintage hair style. I actually had hair between '72 and '83. Not so much of that anymore, makes me more aerodynamic!

# of fatalities per 1,000,000 exposure hrs. by Failure Analysis Associates, Inc.
FARS is the Fatality Analysis Reporting System, a database of transportation crashes maintained by a branch of the US Federal government.

Skydiving 128.71
General Flying 15.58
On-road Motorcycling 8.80
Scuba Diving 1.98
Living (all causea of death) 1.53
Swimming 1.07
Snowmobiling .88
Passenger cars .47
Waterskiing .28
Bicycling .26



About the only way to evaluate your cycling risk is to take a task oriented look at the problem. In the case that started the thread, the issue was whether to ride or drive to work. This gives us something to work on.

Since we have two alternatives for getting from point A to B, the best thing to do is assume that you are the average driver and cyclist. Using the above statistics, calculate the time required to drive back and forth to work and the time required to cycle back and forth to work. Multiply these times by the factors for driving and riding above to get a relative danger level for each method of travel from A to B.

Now, if you feel you are an above average driver, have a riskier than average route, etc, then factor the above statistics accordingly. But then you'll be getting onto thin ice.

I would say the average cyclist would take about 4 times longer to cycle to work versus drive. From the statistics above, that would make the average cyclist approximately twice a likely to die cycling to work than driving.

About the only way to evaluate your cycling risk is to take a task oriented look at the problem. In the case that started the thread, the issue was whether to ride or drive to work. This gives us something to work on.

Since we have two alternatives for getting from point A to B, the best thing to do is assume that you are the average driver and cyclist. Using the above statistics, calculate the time required to drive back and forth to work and the time required to cycle back and forth to work. Multiply these times by the factors for driving and riding above to get a relative danger level for each method of travel from A to B.

Now, if you feel you are an above average driver, have a riskier than average route, etc, then factor the above statistics accordingly. But then you'll be getting onto thin ice.

I would say the average cyclist would take about 4 times longer to cycle to work versus drive. From the statistics above, that would make the average cyclist approximately twice a likely to die cycling to work than driving.

Except that the "cyclist death" statistics include children, and people who don't know a lot about cycling effectively. I wonder how many drivers fit into those categories? I don't see too many children driving to work -- and in theory at least, they have to pass a driving test (albeit a rudimentary one these days).

What we need to remember here is that the majority of crashes do not involve another vehicle. They involve either falling off (in the case of cyclists) or smashing into things (in the case of drivers). I merely ask which is going to be more forgiving? Falling off at 20-30km/h, or smashing into something at 80km/h?

I will also add that it takes me less time to commute by bike than it takes all the car commuters in this city.

rise above dark one.
-stats are for analysis, not cycling\ living.. "life is uncertain, death is not." (Death Angel\ Hispanic heavy metal mid 90's)


Didn't Dark Angel have a song that went "death is certain, life is not...". Same genre and era, different group. Is that what you're remembering? Death Angel was one of my faves.

bkr

Yes..thanks for clearing that up. liked the song title (Track :rolleyes: )
I was trying to find the death angel song that was a 7-10 min classical\instrumental solo.
2'nd album? uggg.
Bet jeff Beck loved it.

The big instrumental was on The Ultra-Violence.

bkr