Forum menu
There are risks. They can be minimised with some thought, but not eliminated.
Lets start with people are terrible at assessing risk. We tend to base our opinions on our own experiences which is a very small sample size and so can be very different to the real risk. So looking at the statistics instead*
From https://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/pedal-cyclists/facts-figures/ and https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/ras30-reported-casualties-in-road-accidents#casualty-rates-and-risk
Casualty rate per billion vehicle miles 2018
Killed:
Car driver 2
Pedal cyclist 29
Pedestrian 34
Motorcycle rider 126
Killed or seriously injured
Car driver 27
Pedal cyclist 1139
Pedestrian 461
Motor cycle rider 2039
So your a lot more likely to be seriously injured on a bike than driving a car but a lot less than riding a motor cycle. This also doesn't take into account all the health benefits of regular exercise that cycling gives.
The first document I linked gives a good breakdown of where accidents occur i.e. 75% at or near a road junction, 80% in daylight. Interestingly ice causing a non collision incident is the second highest reason for hospital admission for cyclists after collision with cars.
So basically keep cycling, it'll probably be ok and the health benefits are great. Just maybe watch out for ice and around junctions at rush hour.
*yes I know there are lots of ways to interpret them and they can be skewed to support your own opinion
Statistically, no we are not. Anecdotally, it won't bring my clubmate back from that pothole impact (five seconds earlier it would have been me), nor will it undo the plate in my wrist from a hit and run.
I trust the statistics.
So your a lot more likely to be seriously injured on a bike than driving a car but a lot less than riding a motor cycle
The unpalatable truth for motorcycles is that, sadly, they are most often the victims of their own misfortune (corners if I recall correctly). For cyclists it's very unusual for it not to be the result of a third party.
Yes, but ride with this in mind and you'll manage a lot of the risk. There's plenty that you, as a cyclist, can do to make yourself less likely to be one of the statistics, especially when it comes to visibility and road-position.
I do most of my road miles riding (which I'm afraid is most of my riding these days) in experienced groups, mostly with an assorted selection of kids in tow, and while I may have experienced more than a few grumpy motorists, indignant about the 12 seconds that we've added to their journey, I've got a pretty good track record at getting back alive. It's pretty rare that I ever feel unsafe on a bike (except when chasing friends off Fleet Moss, when they are better descenders than me!)
I think your chance of getting hit goes up the more you cycle. I also think it goes up the faster you travel in built up areas.
...I find the latter to be the exact opposite of my experience: I feel very safe if I can keep up with the flow of urban traffic...
There's more to it than that. Yes, keeping up with the flow of traffic is safer. On the other hand, bombing down a hill in an urban area without cars around you but with loads of side streets is dangerous as hell (Victoria St, Newport)
Casualty rate per billion vehicle miles 2018
Killed:
Car driver 2
Pedal cyclist 29
Pedestrian 34
Hang on. That statistic needs unpicking a bit due to quoting likelihood in miles, and not accounting for the vast difference in the number of miles people do.
A typical driver does 15k miles a year so has a 0.003% chance of being killed per year.
A keen cyclist might do 3,000 miles per year so the chance is 0.009%. So three times more likely per year IF you are a keen roadie or regular commuter.
If you walked an hour every work day, which is a decent schlep to and from work or a train station, you might do 1,000 miles a year so your chance would be 0.003%, same as driving.
But then again, the amount of control you have over your destiny is pretty different for each of those modes...
Have to confess I’m not a big fan of riding on the road, and try to avoid it whenever I can.
Slightly bizarrely I rode motorbikes for years and never felt as unsafe as I do on a pushbike... maybe it’s an age thing...
As a motorcycle riding cyclist I’m pretty much at the pinnacle of those statistics and so far my experience bears that out with several RTCs to date. The most recent was the most serious with a car driver looking straight through me as I rode around a roundabout. She then didn’t stop and drive into me at around 20mph. Back broken in 2 places, other minor injuries.
I take the view that looking, being aware and being able to react to situations are the best possible ways of keeping going.
I cycle, motorcycle and drive about the same amount (5000 miles) equally per year.
If someone isn’t looking, they ain’t looking.
I still ride on the road, and plan to continue.
Clued up people I respect like Bez can spout facts all day long about how safe cycling on the road is compared to going to the toilet or whatever but it really isn't true.
Cycling on UK roads is incredibly dangerous.
I've done tons of stuff in my life which may be considered dangerous and<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> there is nothing, nothing that has had me closer to death or serious injury than road cycling. </span>
Maybe I'm more likely to die from choking but hey, I've eaten 3 meals a day for 50 years and have never come close to choking.
However I have come close to death on the road on literally hundreds of occasions. When I say this, I mean close passes, cars pulling out, actually being knocked off, oncoming cars overtaking into my carriageway and many other incidents.
Incidentally, almost all of these situations have occurred on country roads and areas with less traffic than normal. roads deemed so safe as to have stupid little blue signs designating them as 'national cycle routes' for instance.
I commuted in London for 8 years and only had one near death experience (chain snapped and caught in the wheel of my folding bike right in front of a double decker). My fault but still a brush with the reaper which wouldn't have happened if I'd been taking the tube.
People bang on about walking as dangerous but who walks 3000 km a year alongside fast moving traffic?
I think commuting by bike during the mad couple of hours from 7-9am and 5-7 pm is far more dangerous than a Sunday pootle as well. Only tonight on my way home I got shouted at by a van driver to stop blocking the road at rush hour. Thats happened several times over the last year and is a new development so I'm not sure whats going on but whatever.
Every few months after a particular bad incident I always say 'right thats it' but I always go back because nothing, literally nothing is better than getting somewhere you need to be by bike.
Yep, pretty much as above. Now find riding on the road very scary. 1/4 of my spine now being bolted together does that. I wonder why I still do it, but the fear of not doing it and having a heart attack in front of the One Show is even more unpalatable.
Just as long as nobody says, just in case those statistics really take a dump on me, "he died doing what he loved" at my funeral. As being hit by a car is definitely not on my list of "likes"
The stats tell the truth. The estimate of cycling mileage above is way too high for the average. I bet the average cyclist does 1/10th of that. so the average cyclist compared to the average car driver - the car driver has a higher chance of dying in any one year.
Its absolutely true that your chances of dying on a bike are low.
Again as above - we are in general very bad at assessing risk
No TJ,
What we are bad at is assessing statistics.
NOpe - you are saying its dangerous in your subjective opinion. The objective facts show it is not.
Objective facts trump subjective opinion every time.
For me, it doesn't matter what the stats say it's more about how I feel on some roads. Whilst on one hand I know that I might not actually get hit, I find it stressful and unenjoyable with a relentless stream of vehicles overtaking. There's some local roads I'd only ride at certain times of day or avoid altogether.
Lol - Thats poor even for you TJ
An objective fact is that I'm sitting on a chair typing this on a laptop.
A statistic is a loose collection of data collated in 10000 different ways, often used out of context and in parallel with another collection of data collated in another 10000 different ways and all fed through a group think filter and multiplied by a bias constant before being passed back through a media prism.
In other words - mainly bollox.
It's 2020. We don't need experts now, it's all about the feels.
Yes
But the sensible folk do all they can to mitigate the risks by being pro active and assesing th danger and responding accoordingly
Wearing bright coloured clothing to stand out from the background clutter
Flashing bright lights front and rear
Is the sun causing me to squint ? Ok so I will take the long way home rather than be rammed by a blinded driver
Pro viz jackets are ace , but a Red / WHite / Red strped mud guard in 3m Scotlight would be as useful, as opposed to flat black
By not riding in the gutter , and trying to stay alert to the traffic around them
Again it's how statistics are interpreted. Cyclist are generally younger and healthy so are not in a group likely to die walking on the pavement, but they do die on the roads. Pedestrian accident statistics include everyone.
To give you an example. I once went through the screening process to see if I was suitable to donate a kidney. The statistics say live kidney donors have a longer life expectancy than average. But to donate a kidney you have to be fit and healthy, a great deal of those who make up the "average" aren't.
For me a fit and healthy person per hour spent, it's going to be walking, driving then cycling in that order of safety.
The objective facts show it is not.
Well, they actually don't. You always want to see everything in black and white, when it's just not that simple. You want to be right, so you want to believe the stats back you up.
There are FAR too many questions for anyone to conclusively prove one way or the other. We have a number for cycling deaths - but who are the cyclists who die? Drunk people riding with no lights? Keen roadies? Kids shooting out into traffic without looking? How much does experience affect your accident probability? Are non-fatal accidents distributed evenly across the cycling population - in other words, are some people just safer riders or do they just live in less dangerous areas?
Just to be clear - I don't think it's that dangerous, I wouldn't do it if I did - but your arguments are shite TJ.
However I have come close to death on the road on literally hundreds of occasions.
Yup, and that's the problem with focusing solely on statistics:
For me, it doesn’t matter what the stats say it’s more about how I feel on some roads.
I always liken it to a variation of Russian Roulette. You're surrounded by thousands and thousands of revolvers, and only one of them has one bullet in one chamber. Statistically you're in practically no danger, but the problem is that whenever someone comes near to you they pick up one of the revolvers, point it at your head, and pull the trigger. Sometimes you're philosophical about it, but sometimes you just find it utterly harrowing, and at the end of the day you have one simple wish: that people would just leave the ****ing revolvers alone.
The answer to the original question can be reasonably objective: the chances of going out for a ride and something serious happening are actually very slim. But the chances of going out for a ride and feeling like you just had a brush with that event are huge.
In the meantime, I'm off to paint the word "Bez" on my car bonnet 😉
Molgrips - the arguement is perfectly valid. An objective fact is just that. None of those things you mention alter the fact that cycling is not dangerous.
Its nothing to do with having to prove I am right. Its about understanding the stats.
come on - you have a scientific training do you not? In what way does a subjective opinion invalidate a objective fact?
However I have come close to death on the road on literally hundreds of occasions.
A close pass doesn't mean you nearly died. It means that someone doesn't think you need as much space as you think you do.
Cyclist are generally younger and healthy so are not in a group likely to die walking on the pavement, but they do die on the roads. Pedestrian accident statistics include everyone.
Assuming we're talking transport statistics, and not lobbing in some odd datasets, they only include deaths by collision involving vehicles. Not medical deaths, or even single-party accidents such as falling down some stairs (which is arguably a little perverse, because they do include single-party casualties for vehicle users).
If someone dies on the pavement then the only way they'll end up in the DfT data is if they've died as a direct result of being hit by a vehicle of some sort, most commonly a car or lorry. Even then, they only qualify as a fatality if they die within 30 days and a post mortem doesn't decide it was natural causes (here's an example).
An objective fact is just that.
We don't have enough information for objective facts in any useful context.
Again - I don't think it's dangerous, but it's just a hunch.
I've been involved in three crashes in the 16 years and 40,000 miles I've been back riding.
None of them were on the road, none of them involved another vehicle.
Absolutely agree that you need to mitigate the risks with clothing, lights, route planning, road craft, but this whole "regular brush with death" just does not reflect my experience of riding.
Good post Bez and quite correct.
This is the problem about assessing risk.
Tomorrow it will be icy and so I'll be deciding whether it too slippery to be safe to ride in based on how cold it actually got v the weather forecast and maybe if its borderline for my road bike switching to a mtb which will cope better and be able to take a more offroad route with less slippery tarmac etc etc.
What I can't assess is whether Gaz from sales is tired from being up all night playing fortnite, is now late for his photocopier convention and is texting his colleague whilst doing twice the limit on a blind bend
I’ve done tonnes of stuff in my life that’s considered dangerous, nothing more than playing in abandoned buildings. I fell through a granary fracturing my skull. I only just survived.
Ban granaries.
Tomorrow it will be icy and so I’ll be deciding whether it too slippery to be safe to ride
Buy some studded tyres, then whenever it's icy or snowy you get super excited about being able to put them on and use them 😀
Absolutely agree that you need to mitigate the risks with clothing, lights, route planning, road craft, but this whole “regular brush with death” just does not reflect my experience of riding.
Same.
The problem with the stats is firstly the figures for walking/cycling distances are guesses.
Secondly, I suspect a large proprtion of those figuring in the pedestrian figures include kids/the elderly/phone zombies/the pissed/generally not looking before stepping into the road.. If I avoid being those I suggest my risk factors diminish greatly. There is a limit to what I can do to mitigate the risk factors when on a bike. So for me personally I suspect the stats are meaningless. I can't remember the last time I had a near miss on foot. On a bike I don't have to tax my memory.
"Ban granaries."
No, just ban idiots from playing in them.
@bez - I've decided on the fatbike which I'm also super excited about #anyexcuse
You could always go for double the tyre excitement by googling for "fat studs"…?
Its a work laptop...
If someone dies on the pavement then the only way they’ll end up in the DfT data is if they’ve died as a direct result of being hit by a vehicle of some sort,
Your probably right, but I doubt any statistics relate to pedestrians being killed on the "pavement". Most would be pedestrians stepping into the road. That'll be children, old people and those incapacitated by drink or drugs. Most of those things don't apply to cyclists in general.
When I look at statistics I try and see how they relate to myself. After 55yrs if cycling I'm still alive and have never been hit by a vehicle, but I've had loads of near misses, and on several occasions it's been my own actions that have avoided a collision.
No, just ban idiots from playing in them.
Ban idiots riding bikes I’m sure there’s more die riding them then there is playing in abandoned buildings.
Just had my first near miss of the year on Saturday, taxi driver turned off main road right in front of me, he barely slowed down and swung left like it was a race to the corner, forcing me to go with him slightly up the side street, luckily no car was exiting so he swung wider than normal. Total knob.
I feel less relaxed about it now than I used to. Driving definitely worse now than a decade ago.
And then I see clag nuggets like the one in the 4*4 behind me this morning. Honking his horn and flashing his lights to try and force me to overtake some cyclists.
3 riders about 4-5 car lengths apart, hatchings down the middle of the road to protect oncoming traffic turning right and barely 500m until a nice two lane stretch. Honk, flash, tailgate, repeat. Get bent and wait, no one likes work on a Monday that much that it's worth chancing a nasty accident over.
Having said that I still do ride on the road a bit but it's pretty rare to have a ride in daylight where someone doesn't close pass or similar. I'll take a bit less than recommended at 30mph in the dry, 60-90cm is enough for me to be comfy at that speed (and I live in southern Hampshire so my expectations are low!). It's the 6inches at 60 ones that proper shit me up.
I won't leave less than 1.5 for anyone if I'm the driver.
You could always go for double the tyre excitement by googling for “fat studs”…?
No you go for 50% more wheels. Trike to work day tomorrow. Low down trike rather than up high trike.
I doubt any statistics relate to pedestrians being killed on the “pavement”.
You doubt wrong. Fishing out some old database queries, there are about 30 a year (and well over 2000 injured).
children, old people and those incapacitated by drink or drugs. Most of those things don’t apply to cyclists in general.
Don't think it's much different than for pedestrians, actually. I'll crunch the numbers if I can be arsed 🙂
The first fatality on a Boris bike was after approx 34 millon miles had been cycled on them. So the risk of death is pretty close to zero.
https://understandinguncertainty.org/fatality-risk-boris-bikes
From a personal point of view in 50 years of cycling from playing on bikes as a kid, 20 odd years of urban commuting and 20k miles of touring I've had no injury needing more than an elastoplast.
Many accidents are avoidable. I rarely ride in groups so I've never had another rider knock me off. I look where I;m going so I,ve never crashed because of potholes or gravel. I avoid the doorzone. I avoid some roads. I no longer ride when there is an ice risk. I watch traffic and use a mirror so I've been able to avoid a few potential crashes over the years. I once had to ride off the road in the USA to avoid being hit. With no mirror I would have been.
FWIW, age distributions:
The children thing is interesting. Obviously they feature highly, but while the obvious assumption may be that children have less road sense, I'm not sure it's that simple.
The rapid drop in child pedestrian casualties around the age of 12 coincides with (for the majority) a change in school and a step change in independence. I suspect this means that many who previously walked to primary/junior school begin cycling or taking the bus to secondary school, taking them out of the pedestrian figures and pushing some into the cycling figures, where we see a rise. The cycling curve then drops around the age of 17, when many of them will start driving.
At the other end of the curve there seems to be a drop in cycling casualties round about 50, which perhaps isn't massively surprising since it's quite plausible that people tend to cycle less above that age.
And with drink impairment overlaid… (impaired figures on the right axis)
Probably fair to hypothesise that people aged 15-30 get pissed a fair bit and that people under 18 who get pissed rarely cycle home from the pub 🙂 Other than that, not much difference from the unimpaired curves: other than those two groups, something like 1.5% of both pedestrian and cyclist casualties are marked down as being tipsy.
(NB I left out drugs because it includes medicinal drugs, but it doesn't make much of a difference to the shapes of the curves.)
It's certainly a more active way of travelling. Not only am I pedalling but head on a swivel checking where the cars are and managing them by my road positioning. Passing a young woman last week on her way and she's barely clearing the gully grates at the side of the road. She was close passed twice while I caught her up.
It's rare on that I experience close passes on my commute some of it is down to my active management of my space and some is better driving due to more cyclists being on the road. (My experience, YMMV).
just arrived at work after a very nice 10 mile commute.
I made a concerted effort to try and stay away from traffic. I rode through a country park, on pavements and through a graveyard. the last mile or so happen to be on one of the busiest roads in leeds.
The one thing that genuinely scares me and I have to just ignore is the idea that just before work the road opens out, gets quieter and ups to 40mph and is the perfect opportunity for a driver to check their phone and then drive straight into me. Hasn't happened yet though so on I go