On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 15:04:26 -0700 (PDT), jd
wrote:

On Oct 8, 8:09*pm, Tom Crispin
wrote:
Child cyclist fatalities in London:
2001 - 4
2002 - 4
2003 - 3
2004 - 1
2005 - 0
2006 - 0
2007 - 0
2008 Jan - Mar - 0

There has never been a safer time to be a child cyclist in the
Capital.

All cyclist fatalities in London
1994 to 1998 average - 14.8
2001 - 21
2002 - 20
2003 - 19
2004 - 8
2005 - 21
2006 - 19
2007 - 15
12 months to March 2008 - 13
2003 to 2007 average - 16.4

Aren't these figures somewhat meaningless without knowing the total
number of cyclists (child or otherwise) using the roads? For example,
it's possible that in 2001 there were 1000 cyclists in London of which
21 were killed (2.1%) while in 2007 there were only 500 cyclists in
London of which 15 individuals were killed (3%). Now, obviously those
figures are entirely made up, but the point that these figures are
largely useless without knowing the total number of cyclists remains.

Exactly

National figures show that over the last 10 years, the average
distance traveled by a child has increased by about 15% with an:

increase in walking (5%)
an increase in traveling by bus (7%)
and an increase in traveling by car (16%).

BUT cycling by children has decreased by 18% - no surprise that the
numbers killed as fallen then!!!!