Child cyclist fatalities in London

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 23:36:24 GMT, _
wrote:

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

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.

Perhaps you missed this bit of the post to which you replied:

"However, in that time there has been a doubling of cycling in the
capital."

Not by children there hasn't - the amount of cycling by children has
decreased over the last ten years.



--
I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman)
Some evidence shows that helmeted cyclists are more likely to hit
their heads. (Guy Chapman)
I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy
Chapman) - proven to be an outright lie.
He then quickly changed his web page - but "forgot" to change the date
of last amendment

_ wrote:

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

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.

Perhaps you missed this bit of the post to which you replied:

"However, in that time there has been a doubling of cycling in the
capital."

of children? it's prefectly possible and not that unlikly that increase
is adult.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 19:12:19 +0100, (Roger
Merriman) wrote:

"However, in that time there has been a doubling of cycling in the
capital."

of children? it's prefectly possible and not that unlikly that increase
is adult.

With the amount of cash that Transport for London has been plying into
child cyclist training, school travel plans and cycle storage in
London's schools I think it highly likely that the number of child
cyclists in London is rising.

TfL's annual budget for child cyclist training alone is £3,000,000.

Tom Crispin wrote:

On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 19:12:19 +0100, (Roger
Merriman) wrote:

"However, in that time there has been a doubling of cycling in the
capital."

of children? it's prefectly possible and not that unlikly that increase
is adult.

With the amount of cash that Transport for London has been plying into
child cyclist training, school travel plans and cycle storage in
London's schools I think it highly likely that the number of child
cyclists in London is rising.

TfL's annual budget for child cyclist training alone is £3,000,000.

one might think so but may not follow. money alone will not rise
numbers, i suspect (but one would have to trawl the stats) that there
would be a rise off the back of the increase in london commuters, ie
parents biking.

roger