On Friday, November 15, 2013 2:51:51 AM UTC-5, James wrote:

You may be correct of course, that it is a random variation. It could
also be that the toll has been unusually low over the past few years.
I'd expect the fatality to injury ratio to remain pretty constant,
wouldn't you agree?

In that case, given the chart he (don't know if you can access that
overseas?)

http://reporting.tacsafety.com.au/s/search.html?collection=tac-xml-meta&query=%21padrenull&form=template-report-graph&chart_type=line&x-axis=Date&y-axis=Age+Range+-+Serious+Injuries&meta_d3day=1&meta_d3month=Jan&me ta_d3year=2000&meta_d4day=31&meta_d4month=Dec&meta _d4year=2011&meta_F_orsand=%22Bicyclist%22&clive=t ac-injuries-xml#.UoXQSrTE2cU.mailto

You'll notice that in the age range of 26 to 59 year olds, the trend is
that injuries requiring hospitalisation have increased significantly.

That is weird. Meanwhile, it looks like the groups most notorious for risk-taking - the 0-17 and 18-25 year olds - have either level or decreasing injuries. Makes me wonder about exposure data, naturally.

Here's another interesting article by a fellow who's travelled a bit
and, like you, Frank, bicycled in various other countries.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...-to-cycle-rage

I've long thought that some intense public education programs - via TV, billboards, radio, magazines, newspapers, internet, etc. - should be the first place to start. And if hostility in Oz is as great as that guy claims, maybe some police "sting" operations would be in order.

Of course, that requires first convincing the police...

- Frank Krygowski