Page 1 of 1

Cycling accident stats 2003

Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 11:03am
by gar
This is what I have found for DOT stats 2003

Cyclists

* 114 pedal cyclists were killed in road accidents in 2003
* 2,297 were seriously injured

If MB members think they can be complacent about interaction with speeding traffic on the basis of those figures ...... then THINK AGAIN.
Serious injury probably means more than just a broken leg. That means maimed, often for life.

Still on the main road, even for racing practice?

Re:Cycling accident stats 2003

Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 11:22am
by gar
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_transstats/documents/page/dft_transstats_505587.hcsp
I don't know whether this link to DFt will work as it is ratrher long but if u can copy and paste it is quite interesting if thoroughly dated to 1997.

Its total fallacy is in being unable to tally Off road cycling in the comparison it makes with '77 ie sport cycling, bridleway, country path cycling and so on.
No such thing then loads of it now as the only way of continuing to ride without serious risk to life and limb.

Looking at the accident stats for motorbikes cf push bikes; the figures (not quoted) for main road cycling would be much nearer to those for motor bikes in terms of serious and fatal accidents. ie 40x as much risk as going by car.

Re:Cycling accident stats 2003

Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 11:28am
by gar

Re:Cycling accident stats 2003

Posted: 26 Sep 2005, 11:31am
by gar
Here is an interesting extract:
# Most casualties were caused in accidents involving cars, which accounted for 44 per cent of those killed and 73 per cent of those seriously injured.
Accidents involving heavy goods vehicles were much more likely to be fatal. Overall, 4per cent of serious casualties were killed, but 24 per cent of serious casualties involving a heavy goods vehicle were killed.
# Overall, about one in six cyclists observed in roadside surveys wore helmets. Usage was much higher than average in London, where over one in three wore helmets.