#1
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009
It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down. Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up? Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle. It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote:
I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009 It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down. Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up? Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle. It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year. Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it he http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...r/tsgb0107.xls Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On Nov 27, 12:38*am, PhilO wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote: I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009 It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down. Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up? Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle. It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year. Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas... Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO But also note that cycling has a much higher death and serious injury rate than cars or vans. I make it that cycling is 32 times more dangerous than motoring, with 547 cycling KSI per billion passenger kilometres against 17 for cars in 2009. The overall casualty rate for push bikes is actually quite close to motorcycles 3447 to 3665. The lower KSI rate is probably only because cyclists tend to have lower speed accidents than motorcyclists. Despite public perception, the rate for aviation is pretty close to zero. Derek C |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:38:32 -0800 (PST), PhilO
wrote: snip I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it he http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...r/tsgb0107.xls Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO Of course I knew that no other poster would know where to find the figures. But bugger me - you have managed to. I suppose you had quite a clue with : "I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009" You can try and put any gloss on the figures - yes the number actually killed was three down on last year. I understand that that is because the numbers using cycle helmets has gone up again - hence fewer deaths as the accident rate goes up. But in a nutshell - of all modes of transport - the only killed or seriously injured figure which went up per billion miles traveled was cycling. KSI for all other modes went down. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 19:16:27 -0800 (PST), Derek C
wrote: On Nov 27, 12:38*am, PhilO wrote: On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote: I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009 It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down. Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up? Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle. It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year. Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas... Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO But also note that cycling has a much higher death and serious injury rate than cars or vans. I make it that cycling is 32 times more dangerous than motoring, with 547 cycling KSI per billion passenger kilometres against 17 for cars in 2009. The overall casualty rate for push bikes is actually quite close to motorcycles 3447 to 3665. The lower KSI rate is probably only because cyclists tend to have lower speed accidents than motorcyclists. Despite public perception, the rate for aviation is pretty close to zero. In assessing the most dangerous type of vehicle, it would be useful to know how many cyclists died after a collision with a motor vehicle; how many cyclists died after a collision with a bicycle; how many drivers and passengers died after a collision with a motor vehicle; and how many drivers; and passengers died after a collision with a bicycle. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On 27 nov, 01:38, PhilO wrote:
On Nov 26, 2:01*pm, JMS wrote: I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009 It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down. Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up? Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle. It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year. Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas... Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO Thanks Phil. I am seriously contemplating one of two courses of action: 1) giving up pedestrian activity or 2) donning protective clothing and headgear before venturing out upon the pavements of Great Britain. Has anyone any idea what JMS's agenda is when she posts this half- information? She refuses to be unequivocal about this. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On 27 nov, 05:14, JMS wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:38:32 -0800 (PST), PhilO wrote: snip I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it he http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas... Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO Of course I knew that no other poster would know where to find the figures. But bugger me - you have managed to. *I suppose you had quite a clue with : "I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009" You can try and put any gloss on the figures - yes the number actually killed was three down on last year. I understand that that is because *the numbers using cycle helmets has gone up again - hence fewer deaths as the accident rate goes up. But in a nutshell - of all modes of transport - the only killed or seriously injured figure *which went up per billion miles traveled was cycling. KSI for all other modes went down. travelled! Nice mistake from someone who choses to comment on others' English. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
On 27 nov, 06:21, Tom Crispin wrote:
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 19:16:27 -0800 (PST), Derek C wrote: On Nov 27, 12:38 am, PhilO wrote: On Nov 26, 2:01 pm, JMS wrote: I see the DfT have published the latest stats for 2009 It is of course of note that if you look at the stats - you will see that for cars, vans, motorcycles, pedal cycles and pedestrians all figures (except one) compared with 2008 have gone down. Which of those figures is the only one to have gone up? Yep - Killed and seriously injured on a pedal cycle. It looks like cycling gets more dangerous year on year. Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? I wondered why you didn't post a link to the data. Did you not want others to see it? I found it hehttp://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics...ions/modal/pas... Thanks for letting me know these figures were out. PhilO But also note that cycling has a much higher death and serious injury rate than cars or vans. I make it that cycling is 32 times more dangerous than motoring, with 547 cycling KSI per billion passenger kilometres against 17 for cars in 2009. The overall casualty rate for push bikes is actually quite close to motorcycles 3447 to 3665. The lower KSI rate is probably only because cyclists tend to have lower speed accidents than motorcyclists. Despite public perception, the rate for aviation is pretty close to zero. In assessing the most dangerous type of vehicle, it would be useful to know how many cyclists died after a collision with a motor vehicle; how many cyclists died after a collision with a bicycle; how many drivers and passengers died after a collision with a motor vehicle; and how many drivers; and passengers died after a collision with a bicycle. Exactly, Chris. There is a danger here that people such as JMS and her ilk will reach the following conclusion: "Cycling is dangerous. Cycling should be regulated or banned." What JMS and others resolutely avoid mentioning is that the danger to cyclists is predominantly formed by motorised traffic combined with the pathetic facilities and protection afforded to cyclists by the British Government. Cycling has become so dangerous in GB that I no longer train there when visiting: unfortunately the more that adopt my viewpoint the easier it is for the anti-cycling lobby to argue that there is little demand for the facilities to which I refer. A self- fulfilling prophecy if there ever was one. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
In article ,
PhilO wrote: Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? No - just troll. TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Do you think that the 12.5% is, either? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? Numerically, it's only 3 versus 6. Statistically, neither are significant at even the 20% level. And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. Well, I could explain why it is deceptive - as are the raw numbers. The KSI rate per trip might well show a statistically significant increase, but none of the figures are reliable and meaningful enough to draw definite conclusions from. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? No. Using population statistics (ESPECIALLY ones calculated in the way that those have been) doesn't indicate individual risk at all well. I suggest that you ignore JMS's trolling - and don't post equally bogus figures in return! Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
DfT Stats - 2009
wrote in message ...
In article , PhilO wrote: Judith, Are you deliberately trying to deceive? No - just troll. TSGB0107 shows pedal cycle Killed decreased from 24 in 2008 to 21 in 2009 - a 12.5% decrease KSI has increased from 541 to 547 - a 1% increase. Do you think the 1% change statistically significant? Do you think that the 12.5% is, either? Why did you fail to report the much larger decrease in cyclist Killed? Numerically, it's only 3 versus 6. Statistically, neither are significant at even the 20% level. And Judith, how did you miss this statistic: Killed per billion passenger km: Pedal cycle 21, Pedestrian 26. Well, I could explain why it is deceptive - as are the raw numbers. The KSI rate per trip might well show a statistically significant increase, but none of the figures are reliable and meaningful enough to draw definite conclusions from. So, Judith, doesn't that mean you are more likely to die walking a mile than cycling a mile? No. Using population statistics (ESPECIALLY ones calculated in the way that those have been) doesn't indicate individual risk at all well. I suggest that you ignore JMS's trolling - and don't post equally bogus figures in return! Regards, Nick Maclaren. ================ Path: nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk Says it all really. A server used by psycholists. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tire stats | Sandy | Techniques | 26 | February 14th 09 06:27 AM |
Stats | Doki | UK | 5 | May 2nd 08 09:45 PM |
2007 stats | BraveSirStupid | Unicycling | 2 | January 14th 08 06:54 PM |
more stats | Andre | Racing | 0 | May 23rd 06 10:59 PM |
RBR Stats | Papai Digital | Racing | 11 | November 1st 04 11:03 AM |